oosyrag's Forum Posts

    For me it would be a complicated yes, no, and then yes again possibly.

    Yes - Definitely taking the 50% off for the first year. I'd actually consider this paying back for the 5+ years I've enjoyed C2 and its updates as a hobbyist. Any other software would have gone through multiple full price iterations in the same time period *coughphotoshopcough* with similar progress in terms of functionality. Also a significant factor is how Scirra has handled community and communication - I would be inclined to pay to support their continued operation even as a donation. The overall responsiveness is #1 by far compared to any other developer, and I've worked with a LOT of under development (and developed) software. Besides which $100/year is honestly cheap compared to other expenses (for someone with a job anyways). It is still cheap compared to other productivity software. Would I have preferred a one off payment? Of course, more value for me. But I wouldn't go anywhere near saying the subscription pricing isn't fair.

    No - There is nothing I am doing now that would require anything beyond what I have in C2 or C3 free. I'm not actively working on any big projects or publishing regularly, nor do I rely on any income from my projects. Currently I'm getting most of my use of Construct just lurking on the How Do I forums and making small examples, which should be adequately facilitated by C3 free/C2. I also test out specific mechanics I want to experiment with or small utility projects, but again everything can be done by what I have without subscribing.

    Yes again possibly - When C3 gets a new runtime, I'd definitely be interested in checking it out. On the other hand, I imagine the new runtime would be available to C3 free as well, so the same as above applies for my situation anyway. At least it would be a definitive reason to upgrade from C2 to C3 for lot of other general users I think. The last situation would be where I have a income generating project I can devote myself to that could justify a subscription, but at that point C3 would be paying for itself.

    I find it a bit confusing why people are so miffed regarding the subscription and perceived lack of significant capability changes from C2 to C3. Scirra isn't taking your C2 license away - you can keep using it. They aren't forcing you to subscribe to C3 if you can't afford it. Also regarding lack of change... did the mobile app build service just fly under the radar? Isn't that what tons of people have been clamoring for? All the complaining just makes me feel like this community is basically spoiled by the value gotten from C2 rather than appreciative.

    Edit: Aaand he's gone. A little sad because he did make contributions to the forums, but then again not at all because he was totally asking for a ban. I guess he can still read the replies?

  • Recommend using an instance variable to store the value of the object to do calculations with, and seeing the text to display that instance variable after.

    Use pick nth instance condition to get the first (0th) or second (1) instance in a collision event to destroy. You can also use object(0).Value+object(1).Value to access each instance's values.

  • If you add more points at a time, maybe set up a "points until next coin" value, and if you overshoot that you can award coins accordingly, then set it to 5-points÷5.

  • System compare two values - points%5=0

    Trigger once

    Add coin

    (Only works if you add one point at a time)

  • You're right! Now I'm curious to see what I can pull off with sprites only. Do your 9-patches dynamically resize much during runtime? Or just need a function to place them and allow them to change animation frames?

  • Separate them with a token ("," generally works well) when composing the message and use tokenat() on the host side to parse out the pieces.

    https://www.scirra.com/manual/126/system-expressions

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • In that case, where you have a more involved feature, it would probably be worth building your own 9-patch like container out of sprites. It shouldn't be too difficult (one set of events to pin to imagepoints basically).

    The functionality can be recreated with events, just like most behaviors and features in Construct. Particles is another object that comes to mind where I regularly just use sprites and events.

    EDIT: Note that I'm all for updating the 9-patch object. Rotations please! =)

  • Stack two 9patches on top of each other in a container. Toggle visibility.

  • It should be fine. I'll see if I can throw together a quick test later.

    Posts like that are how threads get locked... =[

  • The ground looks like a Mode7 implementation.

    The character is mostly just static with animations.

    The obstacles spawn in the middle, and move to the sides and grow at the same time to give the illusion of perspective.

    Use a flag to see if the obstacles can collide, probably based on after they reach a certain size.

  • Simple solution off the top of my head - if you're keeping track of the user accounts, have their spawn location coordinates multiplied by their chronological order number.

    I know, right? I've optimized the hell out of Sombrero (which developers are also encouraged against in Scirra blog posts, while those developers then receive the blame for poor game performance) and I'm 99% sure there is absolutely nothing I can do to improve performance farther, and the performance is nowhere near far more complex games, including other 2D games, because of some limitations that seem endemic to C2 more than general HTML5/JS/WebGL performance limitations.

    To be fair, advising against premature optimization or overzealous refactoring is pretty common practice even outside of construct, and generally good advice in most situations. The Scirra blogs also do clearly state the exceptions to this as well, and also give clear information about what to look out for for you to make your own basis for deciding about when and how to optimize.

    The biggest thing missing is probably fine control of memory management, which is handled mostly through smart use of layouts.

  • Not sure what your question is...

    Create a debug text object. Set text to renderer.

    Now your user can see if they are using webgl or not.

    Maybe off-topic? But since Ashley brought up the poor multiplayer plugin... it is actually pretty feature complete, I think people just have trouble wrapping their head around multiplayer concepts. They have some preexisting assumptions about how it should work, and walk away discouraged before realizing the multiplayer plugin is pretty adaptable.

    Someone mentioned missing directly connecting instead of via signalling server, but utilizing a signalling server is pretty much superior any way you look at it (users ARE directly connecting to each other, the signalling server just takes the work out of making that connection). For example if you want to connect to someone by IP, use that as your room name instead.

    The second big thing is understanding lag and latency and the fact that no two users will ever see the same thing at the same time. The tutorial spends a lot of effort explaining this and the implications AND the solutions, but I think it turns off a lot of people. This isn't something you can just wish away or ignore when developing multiplayer games, but people go in to it not realizing how important it is. This is no shortcoming of the plugin itself, rather the users. The plugin actually has tons of built in behaviors to make things like interpolation and lag compensation easier to handle for the developer.

    I think the last thing is that many people envision server-client architecture for their game, which isn't exactly how the plugin was positioned but it is perfectly capable of doing so. Probably could use a specific tutorial to set up such a system (kind of like how there are two basic tutorials for top down shooter and side platformer - one can be foor peer-peer and another could be for client-server). Doesn't mean it is superior to a fully featured backend service, but those are out there already with working plugins.

    Back on topic - while the multiplayer plugin might be under utilized, I think it is still a huge selling point, especially for "serious" developers down the line if some of the other issues get addressed. Even as a feature checkbox, I think not having it would be a fair reason for a prospective customer to turn to another engine.

    TLDR: Basically wanted to say voting on features is important regardless of utilization, it usually is a fair metric of what people are looking for, regardless of weather or not they are capable of utilizing it.

    Since I haven't weighed in on this thread yet, just going to mention in my opinion the two biggest priorities for "serious" developers down the line would be exporting (already/soon to be addressed) and monetization (ad service support/tutorials).

    Also I think an official perlin noise plugin/function/support is something a lot of people are looking for and trending recently, but I suppose a voting system would show if it is or not.