Caspis Sinclair's Forum Posts

  • How do you guys even come up with these ideas?

    I was messing around with the 3d box in one of the previous versions and after making the depth a negative number I thought; "Hey, that almost looks like a diorama."

    Version .99 just jogged my memory.

  • <img src="http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1122/madeinqueens.jpg">

  • lol my thoughts exactly. That was a TOUGH game!

    Grrrrr. I hate it when games make you fight EVERY mini boss one after another before you can fight the final boss.

    I've still never beaten the game...

    (sorry for being offtopic)

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • It definitely looks better without motion blur. It runs at a decent speed on my computer with blur on but the effect is extremely overdone. Plus, you can barely see the particles in the background when you're standing still. As soon as you begin to move they disappear completely, and you also miss a lot of the nice detail in your background.

    The artwork looks very nice, though. The only gameplay-related problem I had is that the double-jump's "cool down" period is a little too long. If you do a double jump and attempt another one right after you land (even if you take several steps after landing) it won't work.

    Anyway, it sort of reminds me of Actraiser 2. I guess it would be stealing ideas if you gave the knight the ability to glide if you hold the jump button after a double jump...

  • Not sure if it's worth bumping this for such a simple solution, but...

    The problems is just that when you are holding left/right and then press up or down your sprite's angle doesn't change to match the new direction, so just add "if key left arrow is down" and "if key down arrow is down", set sprite's angle to 90 (do the same with the right arrow). And then "if key left arrow is down" and "if key up arrow is down" set sprite's angle to 270 (again, the same for the right arrow).

    Quick and embarassingly easy. Sorry for bugging you about it, Ashley.

  • Thank you!

    It seems to work if you put a condition that when the player sprite's Y position is within a certain range it should be placed behind the house.

    It's kind of annoying to place barriers around objects, though... since it doesn't work right by simply making an object solid.

  • http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1105553/2.5d.cap

    I made this last night after I saw the new version .99 download, so you will need to use the latest version of Construct to open it.

    It's very simple and (admittably) rather poorly done, but hopefully someone will see this and think; "Hey, that might work for an idea that I have. Just, you know... if it were done better."

    It doesn't look terrible with a flat texture for the ground, but if you use anything complex you'll see that the ground texture scrolls faster than the objects placed above it. Even with a flat texture the rocks and coop still kind of look like they're floating in the air.

  • Welcome, and good luck!

    I'll comment more just as soon as I learn the Cyrillic alphabet...

  • So many improvements/additions...

    Z elevation is really cool. I made a quick and dirty .cap just to see how it looks and its perfect for skies and making your character move away/towards the camera.

    (waits patiently for someone to demonstrate how to keep ground objects from looking like they're floating in midair when you move left/right... )

    Awesome work, guys.

  • I guess the point that they're trying to make is not to take game creation too seriously...

    I'm not big on requiring you to install their program to run any demos/games. That is going to severely limit the possible audience for any games created with it (mainly just to other people who use "Love").

    (ed. Okay, you actually can set up an executable so that people without the program can play your games/demos... it just looks like nobody has done it with any of their examples)

    It doesn't seem BAD by any means, just... I dunno. I'm trying to look past the "Wheeeee! Rainbows!!!! This is teh uber sweet game creator, LOL! " garbage.

    Cross-platform support IS a nice thing, though.

  • <img src="http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/7784/theanswer.png">

    I would have been deeply disappointed with any other answer.

    Pretty cool site. I can see this being useful for a lot of things.

    (bookmarked)

  • First to comment!

  • Here is one, some might be PS2.0:

    http://www.si-gamer.net/gulikoza/dosbox.html

    Awww... I looked at the HQ2x file and apparently it requires vertex shaders.

    Damn.

  • I really like how both of you emulated the look of paint/watercolors so well. Did you use a blur/smudge tool to achieve it? (I'm just assuming that you used Photoshop...)

  • It could just be the UI.

    That's something that I've been wondering for a while. It's one thing not knowing what games will look like under Stencyl, but to not even see the interface? It's probably more important to everyone to know how the program is laid out than any demo screenshots.

    I know I've made fun of Stencyl's "stealth mode" but it's a potential new game developing program and they ARE promising something unique to most others (java-based engine -- cross-platform support). Even if they didn't have anything special I still want them to succeed just so that people have one more option to choose from.

    I guess most of all I just don't understand their decision to become a fully-fledged company. It's a free program and they've stated repeatedly that they will not charge for it at any time in the future (just going to have to trust them on that, I guess...), so what would becoming a company do for them?

    Who would invest in a program that is going up against many other programs in the same field that are already professional, established solutions... when the only source of income from that product is donations and ad money?

    Anyway this semi-recent quote from Jon is sort of interesting;

    [quote:15r98mww]On the contrary, we're close to completion on the actual software, and it's down to the point where I've personally listed out everything that remains, so it's just a matter of time before I reach the end of that.

    Of course, as I said in the post, the software is only one component of beta - the other parts also need to be done, and they aren't as far along as the software is at this point in time.

    Soooo... yeah. It's going to be a while still before they even start their "closed-beta" (invitation only).