I am wanting the server to send a house model to only one client who is using the model to ‘place’ their house in a location.
Once placed, the server can insert the house, and the client can delete their individual copy.
This may not be the best way to do this, and I am considering several approaches, but that is not the focus of this post.
Because I have already done this in the past, using a method, similar to this post’s solution…
I started to wonder if there were a better or newer way to go about this.
With the new way things are destroyed, and with streaming and such, would this still be a good way to send a model or instance to only one client, via the playergui? Or would this cause issues?
I don’t think so. Roblox still hasn’t introduced a way to control replication on a level that allows us to specify which client we want to replicate to.
Why not just use a remote event or a signal from the server? There’s nothing wrong with using them, I really don’t get the bad stigma of using remotes to replicate to the client. Roblox’s replication basically just sends remotes but hundreds of times a second, as every game does. The client can’t just copy the server, they need packets or remotes telling them to change this to that.
You can use getattributechanged also
TDS games that have A LOT of towers placed a second do this
The issue with the remote events is the model has to be somewhere in workspace for it to be replicated. I suppose I could place it somewhere really far away from the play area, then send it.
The only problem would be that if I place it outside the play area, with streaming, it might not exist on the client and I would think that would return nil.
I will experiment with sending it by remote event.
In replicated storage, every client would get it in its replicated storage, I was wanting it to be just for a single client.
I suppose the correct answer is that there is no ‘official’ way to do this, so the old ways of placing into PlayerGui, or just under Player still work.