Hey,
I have plenty of discounted Music bundles to choose from: https://www.scirra.com/store/sellers/mikomusic-19
Enjoy shopping!
Miko x
Simply, for mobile it might be an issue, but for desktop no.
This is unclear to me thought:
You just make objects and you should reuse them as often as possible.
Do I need to make the sprite pixel size same as the screen size to be able to show the sprite covering the whole screen clearly?
Just make image size of the screen, and cut then in to smaller power of two size sprites ( 64x64px or 128x128px, 256x256px etc ).
Ashley Any official input on these bugs? Are they something you guys can fix on your end or do we have to wait for the next iteration of Chromium and therefore, the next NW.Js built on that new Chromium?
Ashley
Any official input on these bugs? Are they something you guys can fix on your end or do we have to wait for the next iteration of Chromium and therefore, the next NW.Js built on that new Chromium?
Do we know if it's Chromium or NW bug?
Info about performance is good news in did.
I agree per pixel collision would be welcome. Ability to draw collision masks on layout would be also welcome. Ashley I absolutely understand why you are not convinced to do those things, but those are modern days standards in game development. In c2 we do can make walk-arounds for simple things, but in more complex situations everything tends to get super complicated and fall apart. And I personally would expect engine to take care of those things, as I was mentioning multi-level collisions, push out of solids etc. Those all would be extremely welcome for everyone. Our gamedev would become much shorter and more good games could come out.
I'm repeating myself, but whenever I turn on CC, when I'm in doubt if i want to continue on c2, i see it performing so smoothly. However C2 looks sharper, and doesn't crash almost ever. I still would like to see that same kind of smoothness in C2 and in its follow up thought.
Keep 'em as small as possibile.
> BUMP* > Why the bump?
> BUMP*
>
Why the bump?
To give a chance to those who didn't read it earlier. See what they might think.
BUMP*
The option to write to an external file in NW.js has always existed — I was ignorant to the simple method of using the already available features, and I guessed from the discussion that not many others here had tried it. We see storage plugin so assume that it's the only way to store data - when it's not, in this case. Browsers can't access the files but NW.js can... The plus side is it's already supported by scirra; the down side is it's arguably less secure because it's easy for an average user to find the files and then edit them (I think it would be wise to check that your data has not been tampered with when using this or local storage because neither are secure).
I also want for everything to work tip top, but sometimes we all need t improvise, and unfortunately in the digital realm improvisation is contained to a narrow framework.
megatronx - I agree - and I fear it's the beginning of a new 6 month cycle of "they're fixing it".
If writing to external file is working in this release, then it could be a possibility for workaround, and could or even then should be implemented by scirra, if only temporarily.
That's rather disheartening, —! I would much prefer we all had the same bad experience than each a different version of incompatibility :/.
Yeah, that's predicts some possible future issues.
I'd love native exporters too, but as everyone said, it is outside of the possibilities.
Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.
What about textures skewing, distortion etc...
Any form of expanded texture transformations are welcome as they are so incredibly nedded!