Jase00's Forum Posts

  • I see "Photon" mentioned often. I use the Multiplayer plugin when I make online games and have never really looked into Photon - Are there any notable pros/cons to using Phonton?

  • You could delete the LiteTween behaviour using C2, then load your project in to C3.

    C3 has an official Tween plugin, so you could recreate the missing events afterwards.

    It's a bit tricky doing this blind, but you could open C2 with the original project, then do a search for "LiteTween" and then have C3 open at the same time to compare and re-add events.

    I mean, the OP of this post is clear as anything - The GIF shows the issue, Sine behaviour + jumpthru on the platform, platform movement on the player.

    It's certainly to do with the Sine platform skipping beyond the player as it moves up, right? - It can't be the player moving too fast DOWN because I think the platform behaviour has stepping and such to prevent this.

    Just from the OP, no detail appears to be missing in this case.

    Thing is, I wouldn't have reported this bug if I encountered it, because I have the strongest feeling I would spend time making a repro c3p file, fill otu everything, make a screenshot, upload it all, post it on Github... then I'd wait unknown amount of days, and eventually get a reply saying "Ah it's complicated" and that's it, no workaround offered or anything.

    This happened with me posting a bug about the Drawing Canvas - an actual feature in C3 is to "Paste Effects into Drawing Canvas"...and it's broken for a bunch of effects. No fix, no timeframe like "This may be fixed in a year, or when we recreate the effects compositor", no workaround (ironically, posting to the forum afterwards, someone from the community offered a workaround).

    I respect things can be complicated, but what would make that whole experience less frustrating would be either: A) If the reporting process was much faster (e.g. reporting directly within C3), or B) If more could be offered if a bug cannot be fixed, such as a suggested workaround or something.

    mOOnpunk - You're right, and that's also an amazing idea!

    It'd rule out false reporting if someone claimed to use a specific version too, as C3 would just collect this info in the bug report.

    Anything to speed up the reporting process.

    I agree with Ormus, but I guess the main question is - When we pay for our subscription to C3, are we paying to be able to use the software, or are we paying for support? Or both?

    Even if you're not subscribed to C3, I know Scirra will still check any bug report from anyone, which is great!

    Once you sub to C3, do you get more perks in terms of support?...not really, no, because anyone, free or subbed, gets the same level of support.

    With other companies, when you pay for support, they have ticketing systems that staff and customers can both use, so you could email-in a bug a report, or pop it on the forum, and a staff/mod/volunteer would submit a ticket for you (because you're paying for this support) and they'll communicate back and forth until you feel happy it's resolved. OR you could submit a formal ticket yourself. If I could choose, I'd post bugs to the forum - I like the discussion that can come with it, and I like staying in 1 website.

    With C3, you MUST submit it to Github (Unless there was a lot of noise on the forum post with other users complaining, then that'll attract immediate action). But that's absolutely fair, if we are not paying for support, which I don't think we are.

    Time is money, especially when we are paying subscription fees. Noone wants to be bug-reporting for a subscription-based software, everyone would much rather be USING C3 to make their games and such.

  • It's alright! With functions, I don't think it'd break your project or anything major, but worst case might require reworking some of your functions to use the new c3 functions type.

    Thankfully there's an option in C3's event sheet view, where you can right-click an old function and convert it to the new c3 function type, which worked well for me when I've used it!

    I think there's something that other users have come across, I think "calling functions within expressions" becomes a bit different? You can read about "function maps" in the c3 manual if this is the case.

  • Ayy, I think it would be a generally smooth transition for you as you do not use 3rd part plugins. I think you can open capx files in C3 even if you are not subscribed, so you could check it out maybe.

    One thing you may want to do when you do load your capx in, is convert all your functions to the new C3 functions - it works a bit differently to C2 functions so I'd recommend checking out the C3 manual on functions. This might cause problems depending on how you use functions in your original capx.

    I can relate with you - I sometimes don't develop anything for months at a time - but thankfully this year, Scirra have started offering monthly subscriptions, which is great as you could just unsubsribe when you realise your time is limited. I've found I've not used C3 for some months and have saved money by unsubbing (my subscription recently ran out again as I'm working on a project in C2 that doesn't really gain much from being ported to C3, not to mention I use a lot of 3rd party plugins and it's a pain to delete 3rd party plugin events in c2 and need to cross reference from c2 to C3 to recreate events/actions).

    C3 is great! It's very comparable to C2 and the fact its in a browser doesn't ruin anything really.

    The recent scene graph feature makes it really easy to pair up objects, rather than needing to make a variable for each objects.

    Some things will randomly catch you out, like, the "Crop" scaling mode was removed in c3, even though some of my projects depend on this for dynamic screen sizes with UI positioning and such. But this can be worked around with the other options and some events.

    One hot take - I don't think there's anything you can do in C3 that you can't do in C2. C3 makes some things easier, but in the end, you could have made whatever you were trying to make in c2, though you'd have to rely on 3rd party plugins for this.

    I'd say check C3 out for a month, it's a great bit of kit.

  • I think I know the answer:

    Once you use a "wait" action, even if you used "wait 1 second", the function parameters will not be stored, so you will end up with "0" if you put "function.param(0)" after the wait action.

    This is fixed in C3 I believe, where "wait" actions will still remember the parameters.

    But yes, storing the value elsewhere like you said, is a fair workaround.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • I think they've chosen to go with the unofficial launcher now.

    I don't know the guy/gal but I'm confident that Scirra will not get any redundant bug reports from gustavoChico being on r218 when they're using the unofficial launcher. Judging by their posts, they sound competent and aware of what they are doing and understand the risks of remaining on the older version. They just wanted a way to actually stay on the version of their choice, which sounds like there are 2 (unofficial) ways to do now.

    dop2000 that's excellent, this gives people more choice in how they arrange their workflow! Not an "official" solution but the logic stacks up - just changing 1 URL in the official launcher sounds like it shouldn't go wrong (but then again, still not "officially" supported).

  • I somewhat agree, but the main thing being: Considering the "Forced update" can be avoided by using other official means (web version) but the web version doesn't work with Github, then it does make it a bit weird that there's pushback for the official desktop version behaving the same way as the web version. Inherently not everyone is keeping up-to-date.

    To be honest I'm out of the loop because I work alone and use the unofficial launcher and I keep up with latest betas, I was mainly unhappy seeing the false accusation of "It's not fair you come here to tell us to *blah*" when it was never said nor implied. But hey, miscommunications happen.

    Infact, I'm so out of the loop - You mention the package.json, you can simply edit this in the official launcher to pop the /r218 link directly in? That sounds like a fine solution if so - Still using the official launcher but having a fixed URL to the version of choice! I must have missed that.

  • Oh no, no anger towards anyone! I direct things towards "Scirra" as a business.

    I do agree with what you're saying, passion can be lacking in the industry, and Ashley and the team at Scirra do show their passion in their craft.

    I just can't fathom why there was so much pushback for a seemingly simple thing to add.

  • This was a painful read.

    I really don't understand the reluctance to provide a paying customer something that their TEAM would benefit from ("team" suggests this would benefit multiple paying customers). Not only is it likely an easy addition to add, but it would make your customers happier, and people obersving this thread such as myself would see a nice interaction between Scirra and a customer, rather than blatant misunderstanding and accusations against a customer (seriously, they never "told you" guys to "stop making routine updates").

    If the worry was about "bug reports from older versions that are already fixed" then this would occur anyway with folks that stumble upon the older versions on the Web version, or folks that use the unofficial desktop launcher (not like you'd know what launcher they used from the bug report alone, they'd only include the version number, which would indicate that it's an old bug anyway).

    I dunno, it's not exactly hopeful reading this stuff as a lurker. I got burned out from reporting bugs too.

  • gustavoChico I think you've explained very clearly, I don't know where Ashley got the idea that you are "telling scirra to stop making routine improvements" after reading these posts, if anything you've expressed your happiness about Construct 3 and your happiness about the updates, you just simply want to opt-out of updates for your current project, nothing more.

  • Ahh that sucks bad, data loss is the worst.

    I'd suggest maybe trying software such as TestDisk or Recuva, perhaps you may get lucky in restoring something off of your main HDD or your external HDD.

  • To limit the minimum fps in C3, I think it's only a "System" event right now, not a project property (unless I'm missing this). You can read about it here too: construct.net/en/make-games/manuals/construct-3/system-reference/system-actions

    Personally I don't use any behaviours at all and do everything in events - I do this because I want ALL the control lol. You can specify your collisions exactly the way you want by doing it this way, although this can get extremely fiddly and complicated and likely has a performance overhead, but to me it's worth the hassle to get the game feeling perfect. I aim to use LOS as I know there's a major performance gain compared to the event-only way of raycasting where you "Make a sprite, increase it's width by 1 until it hits a wall". It gets tricky though as a ray is only 1px wide.

    Perhaps LOS could be used in conjunction with the platform behaviour, but the more I think about this, I'm not sure this would work too well for your case, as it's a ray; a 1px wide line, so it's not going to account for the whole width or height of the player. Perhaps you could make a system where if the fps is lower than 30fps, then a make-shift sprite-based ray that is the same width/height as the player, that increases it's width/height by 1px in a loop (this is taxing for performance so this may be terrible advice) or maybe utilising the "On overlap at offset" for the player... OR MAYBE the system "Set minimum FPS" would suffice in this case to avoid over-complicating things!

    Yeah the whole 144hz monitor stuff (they have 240hz monitors now, would you believe? Must be butter smooth), I try to wrap my mind around this as I like the idea of making precision platformers, but I'm aware that when your fps is changing a lot, it can make your jump heights change just a little, but enough to ruin a precision jump and either miss it or overshoot it.