Ad
Log in to vote
0

Can I still use lighting rather than ReplicatedStorage?

Asked by 1 year ago

I am currently making a game which will require me to use a lot of tools. Is storing all the tools in lighting still an idea or is it worth the investment of time to work out how to use ReplicatedStorage? It doesn't bug me storing them in lighting but it is just whether it is best to learn ReplicatedStorage for the future and now would be the best time to learn.

0
No. Invest the time in learning about ReplicatedStorage. ScriptGuider 5533 — 1y
0
Is ReplicatedStorage basically the same as lighting except it's in a service rather than lighting itself? RyanTheLion911 194 — 1y
0
you can but replicatedstorage is better in every way possible for storage LoganboyInCO 150 — 1y

1 answer

Log in to vote
3
Answered by 1 year ago

I'd say use each service provided to you for its own purpose. Lighting is meant to be where visual options are stored, such as bloom, blur, sun-rays, etcetera.

Do not use Lighting for storage. Its use is not intended for storage.

Use either ReplicatedStorage or ServerStorage as that is what they're for... storage.

ReplicatedStorage can be accessed by both the client and server. This means for example an exploiter can view all the insides of ReplicatedStorage. If you don't need the client to view these tools as they'll be cloned to their backpack on the server side, I recommend you store them in ServerStorage as it can only be accessed by the server.

2
This is a good answer. Listen to this guy. I would like to add though, to those reading this, don't read "This means for example an exploiter can view all the insides of ReplicatedStorage" and think "oh then I probably shouldn't use it." This isn't a bad thing, it's just true because that's the nature of the service. It replicates it's children to your computer, which you have access to. ScriptGuider 5533 — 1y
Ad

Answer this question