gustavoChico's Forum Posts

  • Here's what I wanted to post, gets blocked every time:

  • It seems like I'm blocked from posting a message here.

  • Does anyone that tried this before know a workaround? It'd be super helpful Ashley

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • Holy qarp when did they start this?

    Ashley any thoughts on adding something for a HTML5 export? Like an export that adds the script, and publisher id that can't be cut out after export? Possibly an action for adBreak().

    This has the potential to be another game changer.

    It will need to be tested, but this seems to suggest that you don't have to worry about where its being shown, as in being stolen.

    It's been out for a few years now, with iframe support and everything afaik. If nobody has really brought this up yet I'm guessing I'm out of luck then? Haha

  • I want ads in a html5 exported game. A hosted game you play on your browser (so no, MobileAds plugin isn't helpful).

    Following these steps leads to a game that has ads showing. Doing the same with an exported html5 construct game leads to no result. My theory is that it's working, but not rendering.

    1. Add the script to the <head> in index.html, same as in the example

    2. Add a Javascript action in Construct to run the ad function

    Nothing happens!

    Again, the game example in the link works, but it's probably not being rendered properly on c3.

    There are no posts about this, and the only tutorial follows very similar steps with different code and is five years old. Tried many combinations to no avail.

    Here is my modified exported project, in case one of you want to debug and see if the ads really are being created but not showing properly.

    Any ideas?

    Tagged:

  • newt That's genius! I'll try all of these new approaches, thanks everyone!

  • Could be anything, just imagine being in his boots for a month. A whole codebase on your head, and a million idiots asking for random stuff. I’d definitely become an asshole. And Ashley behaved in a civil enough manner, even after so many years.

  • No need to get mad at Ashley. I share many of the things you said, and I’m as frustrated as you are (most of all, because I was just asking for a feature that isn’t available on the desktop app, but is on the web version, so this is literally a case of missing features and a legitimately c3 issue) but look at it this way:

    I think he did an outstanding job defending himself, if I’m being completely honest! How often have you seen a developer reply ten times to a post as innocent as mine? How can someone just repeat the same points and ignore all my claims and proofs, without even being rude? I find his determination incredible, and he’s been making software for decades. He could have just ignored me or have given a complete bogus response, but instead he fought for his vision trying his best. I think not many people have this kind of passion for software development anymore. Even if he completely missed my point, refused for no reason, and ignored a paying customer begging to get a legitimate issue fixed, I still respect that he cares for every detail, and at the end of the day, the software is incredible. I lost this battle, but someday devs might change.

    Maybe I’m being naive, but I like to see things from the positive side :)

  • I completely understand adding this would be too much work, you guys are very busy. Thanks for taking the time to reply so much, even if it was for nothing! I really appreciate it, truly, you guys are very dedicated and I love every feature :)

    I’ll now start using the unofficial launcher against my wish, as it’s my only option. Thank you very much, anyway, and have a nice day!

    This was the first time I’ve ever reported an issue, and it’s probably going to be my last. I’ll just find a way around stuff.

  • I'll try and put this in the simplest way I can, I really don't want to waste your time!

    Hi!

    Today we got our first enforced update since we started using Github, and that has caused some problems. Enforced updates are great in general, but for those using the official desktop client (required for Github) we can't go to a specific version, unlike in the browser. Would adding a "don't enforce updates" setting be too much to ask? Or any equivalent of going to a specific version url, like in the web version. I've made two mockups of possible solutions, I hope they're useful in any way.

    Thank you very much, I've been a loyal customer since Construct Classic and can't believe I'm using it professionally now, you guys do such an amazing job :)

  • Exactly! And how can I make sure that every member of the team is on the same version and no other enforced update will bring up corruptions again? With an advanced setting!

    That's all I'm asking for :)

    It's just like going to an specific version url, but in desktop! In which you currently can't do, and just gets autoupdated to a specific version even if you reinstall (something that isn't consistent across my team)

  • That's right! I feel you have finally recognised the problem to some extent :)

    If you enforce updates onto a whole team, then I'll have to manually make sure every change is from the correct version! And everything will break constantly.

    So do we agree that Construct 3 desktop needs some way so everyone can always stay on one version, just like going to editor .construct .net /r218 in the web version?

  • Updating Construct does affect source control.

    I thought asking for a simple checkbox for a very good reason (and evidence of it being a legitimate need due to a problem that happened today, no less, just after the enforced update happened) was enough. But here's an example...

    I've pinpointed the issue that arose today on our project (I repeat, no issues have ever happened since the beginning of the project whatsoever, until yesterday's first enforced update); a team member got updated to 225 and toyed around with new mesh distortion (awesome feature btw! thank you very much for it), then pushed the build along a big list of important changes to his branch.

    I then merged his branch with master, the version numbers were correctly set, and there were no conflicts as we follow strict guidelines.

    Then merged my own changes I had stashed on my branch from last weekend to master, and opened it to check that everything works using 218 (all my custom stuff that affects my branch is made to work up to this version) on the unofficial launcher (it's the only way of using this version right now, as using the official one autoaupdates every time).

    Corrupted.

    Turns out my changes altered the version number again, and my version of construct didn't recognise any of the new features. I then had to manually revert all the merges, find all of the other branch's changes that do not use new features and add them back individually, then update the whole project and fix any custom thing that's broken.

    I have another branch to merge that I suspect has changes made in an older version, so I have to check on that specific field inside the project json file before I even think of merging that one as well.

    Imagine this, but with 3 or 4 different versions at the same time. It's hell. And this is just day one, when the custom stuff goes outside my branch it's going to be even worse. I'm losing time and sanity, and I only want an advanced way to stop the enforced updates.

    Again, this is a desktop only issue, in web I could just tell everyone to use the 218 url, all I'm asking is for a replacement of that for the desktop version. I think that makes sense, right?

  • And what is the problem exactly?

    I say exactly what the problem is later in that exact paragraph:

    "I have to use the desktop c3 [in order to use github], and I can't use it if it keeps changing my team's c3 versions."

    FYI there were also stable releases in late April, June, August, September, and now November.

    This is the first time an update has been enforced to everyone since you made that post regarding, and encouraging the use of Github. So this is the first time this particular issue has arisen.

    I need to use a particular version of the desktop app in order to use github properly, and I can't just change the url like in the web version.

    All this happened yesterday, and since then I've got my first corruption ever since I started the project. It's not a coincidence, it's what happens when you use Construct with Github and different versions get in the way. It's what happened in my last project and it's the reason I'm now using the same version for everyone. When I keep it safe, I get literally no issues. The update enforcement is not letting me keep it safe.

    I just want an advanced option to stop the enforced updates, because it has destroyed my workflow.

    Edit: correction

  • routine stable release exactly as we've been doing for years and years

    I was first aware of your recommended way of using Github with c3 desktop back less than half a year ago (see image below), and this is the first obligatory update that has occured since then, so this is a brand new issue.

    In your original post you stated there was "a huge issue" in "c3 Desktop"

    Correct, there is an issue for those that are using C3 Desktop. And it's a big one. If I could use web c3 for github I would be delighted to do so (I could just use the version url), but that's not the case. I have to use the desktop c3, and I can't use it if it keeps changing my team's c3 versions.

    Please address this. I'm not asking you to fix all the bugs that come up from using Github, or add proper version control integration, I'm just asking for a hidden checkbox or a windows argument, please understand.

    Edit: I've added an image