Opinions & things I would like to see in C3

Not a bad interface as far as I can tell at this stage, seems to operate quickly and looks and feels no different to the desktop version in my opinion, I would like to see however the ability to have a better collision editor so that a sprite can have multiple collision points and also not to have to rely on the collision polygon to be used for the drag and drop . This has only ever been the issue I have had with C2 the fact that the collision polygon is where the dragging is based on and that there cannot be multiple drag points.

Other than that from the glimpse of it so far I can only say why just Chrome? I use Opera and Firefox and it does not operate on either of these. Also I updated Chrome on my phone but this only goes to version 56 so I could not run it on that either

[quote:3ds896qa]Other than that from the glimpse of it so far I can only say why just Chrome? I use Opera and Firefox and it does not operate on either of these. Also I updated Chrome on my phone but this only goes to version 56 so I could not run it on that either

Thanks for the feedback! Chrome only for now as it's the only browser that supports all the advanced features we're using (nearly) out the box. If you load it in FF or Opera, it will show you what specific features the browser is missing exactly.

We don't see any reason why other browsers wont be able to support it in the future. Hopefully not too distant!

As a suggestion, for an user friendly engine as construct, it would be nice a new type of string variable on wich we can store predefined strings, kind of a 'multi-choice' text variable.

This way, when checking or setting this variable we could choose from this predefined value from a drop-down menu, improving readability and ease of use.

This would be very useful when checking events based on stuff like difficulty level ('if difficulty is hard') or any other multi choice option, or when a character has a 'state' variable ('if state is taking cover').

As a suggestion, for an user friendly engine as construct, it would be nice a new type of string variable on wich we can store predefined strings, kind of a 'multi-choice' text variable.

This way, when checking or setting this variable we could choose from this predefined value from a drop-down menu, improving readability and ease of use.

This would be very useful when checking events based on stuff like difficulty level ('if difficulty is hard') or any other multi choice option, or when a character has a 'state' variable ('if state is taking cover').

Isn't that what arrays are for?

[quote:3mzhtqcv]Other than that from the glimpse of it so far I can only say why just Chrome? I use Opera and Firefox and it does not operate on either of these. Also I updated Chrome on my phone but this only goes to version 56 so I could not run it on that either

Thanks for the feedback! Chrome only for now as it's the only browser that supports all the advanced features we're using (nearly) out the box. If you load it in FF or Opera, it will show you what specific features the browser is missing exactly.

We don't see any reason why other browsers wont be able to support it in the future. Hopefully not too distant!

Tom

I cannot open it at all in Opera and Firefox so there is no chance of testing at all there. As for my Android phone any reason why it would not open on the latest version ?

I do hope the collision point is looked at soon because this will be a BIG selling point for me to move to C3!

> As a suggestion, for an user friendly engine as construct, it would be nice a new type of string variable on wich we can store predefined strings, kind of a 'multi-choice' text variable.

>

> This way, when checking or setting this variable we could choose from this predefined value from a drop-down menu, improving readability and ease of use.

>

> This would be very useful when checking events based on stuff like difficulty level ('if difficulty is hard') or any other multi choice option, or when a character has a 'state' variable ('if state is taking cover').

>

Isn't that what arrays are for?

Kinda overkill and not really what I was talking about, with arrays you have to mess around with indexes and all that stuff, and fill them via event sheet actions, and you can't have an instance array for objects (well, you could use a single array for a type of object and tinker around with dimensions, assigning UIDs, besides my point of simplicity anyways) what Im talking about is...well, a picture is worth a thousand words, right?

Pretty much that, but custom made. Simply put, a variable with custom fixed values accesible via dropdown menu.

Think about a complex character on wich you need to check a lot of special cases, so you make a 'state' string instance variable for him and events for every value to see if he is "crouching", "jumping", "blocking", "atacking", etc.

If for some reason you want to change the wording of some of those states ("crouching" for "ducking" for example) or correct a typo, you would need to change every event wich checks the prior wording in order to match the current one, and in every case remember whatever you called a specific state.

Now, with what Im talking about, you could define this fixed values in-editor when creating the variable and simply pick them out of a dropdown later, or change the 'name' of this predefined values anytime with the events automatically updating it. It's pretty much a regular string under the hood but with the editor working with you to make things a little bit easier (less typing and not having to remember specific values).

It doesn't even need to be a new type of variable now that I think of it, it could be just some "Add predefined values" option to numerical and string current variables, while they still could function normally and take non-predefined values too.

I hope this explains it better.

It doesn't even need to be a new type of variable now that I think of it, it could be just some "Add predefined values" option to numerical and string current variables, while they still could function normally and take non-predefined values too.

I hope this explains it better.

Now I see your point. It can indeed be useful to simplify the coding process in some cases.

Another suggestion: Why not implement all the Touch plugin coordinate translation functions ( X("layer"), Y("layer"), XAt(layer index) and YAt(layer index) ) to every plugin wich uses coordinates? It's pretty handy, and specially so SIMPLE!

Right now, Im using an action on a Construct 2 project that obtains the equivalent coordinates of a sprite on another layer (with different parallax, scaling and all that, so I need to translate coordinates) and it goes like this:

CanvasToLayerX("Layer1",LayerToCanvasX("Layer2", sprite.x, sprite.y) ,LayerToCanvasY("Layer2", sprite.x, sprite.y))

(Same thing for Y)

While it could be so much more elegant and ABSURDLY EASIER with:

sprite.X("Layer1")

I bet anybody who ever had the need to set up something like that did struggle with it at least a little (I sure did!)

I'd like to see the original 'comma' separator allowed for dimensions. The new format is 'x', but all tutorials and current users are used to using a comma. Seems like an easy addition. Even if it is substituted to the new format, allow it for data entry.

Another suggestion: Why not implement all the Touch plugin coordinate translation functions ( X("layer"), Y("layer"), XAt(layer index) and YAt(layer index) ) to every plugin wich uses coordinates? It's pretty handy, and specially so SIMPLE!

Right now, Im using an action on a Construct 2 project that obtains the equivalent coordinates of a sprite on another layer (with different parallax, scaling and all that, so I need to translate coordinates) and it goes like this:

CanvasToLayerX("Layer1",LayerToCanvasX("Layer2", sprite.x, sprite.y) ,LayerToCanvasY("Layer2", sprite.x, sprite.y))

(Same thing for Y)

While it could be so much more elegant and ABSURDLY EASIER with:

sprite.X("Layer1")

I bet anybody who ever had the need to set up something like that did struggle with it at least a little (I sure did!)

that would be awesome to have

Object.Physics.Gravity_Angle

> [quote:ys2lnk11]Other than that from the glimpse of it so far I can only say why just Chrome? I use Opera and Firefox and it does not operate on either of these. Also I updated Chrome on my phone but this only goes to version 56 so I could not run it on that either

>

Thanks for the feedback! Chrome only for now as it's the only browser that supports all the advanced features we're using (nearly) out the box. If you load it in FF or Opera, it will show you what specific features the browser is missing exactly.

We don't see any reason why other browsers wont be able to support it in the future. Hopefully not too distant!

Tom

I cannot open it at all in Opera and Firefox so there is no chance of testing at all there. As for my Android phone any reason why it would not open on the latest version ?

I do hope the collision point is looked at soon because this will be a BIG selling point for me to move to C3!

Tom

Got the mobile device to work by using the Chrome Beta version now. Still would like to see Construct 3 to have the multiple collisions on a sprite as at the moment I am having to split the sprite up and with help from 99Instances2Go I have got to put the separate parts back together using another sprite to be able to drag them about and add the set to bounds as well as one collision set to a part of the sprite for the interaction of it.