sqiddster's Forum Posts

  • *bump*

  • Perhaps these image will make it a bit clearer:

    <img src="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/41931267/resExample.png" border="0" />

    The one on the left is the only simple available option ATM, and I'm looking for a way to implement the option on the right.

    <img src="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/41931267/resExample2.png" border="0" />

    Does this make it clearer?

  • C2 was always a HTML5 game maker with a variety of export options. It makes perfect sense for Scirra to want to cover as many bases as possible, and this means supporting canvas2d to the best of their abilities.

    That said, I agree that more webGL-exclusive features would be nice to see. Not everyone needs to support every platform and canvas2D is very limited as-is.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • I think the physics behavior works in such a way that you can't really have a perfectly strong connection between 2 or more objects. Even a pin joint (something unimplemented in C2) is slightly elastic.

    It just comes down to the way the engine works, I think.

  • Node-Webkit is Chrome, so they should both be the same.

    Maybe it's a graphics driver issue?

  • keepee not exactly, however I guess it has a similar effect.

    And yes, it's for a non-browser (node-webkit) game.

  • I just saw this really cool initiative put together by some indie developers over on Twitter:

    Google Docs Spreadsheet

    Basically, it's a list of indie developers who are happy for a newbie to get in touch and ask questions, advice, etc. Obviously it won't be that helpful C2-wise, but in all the other aspects of game dev, I think this could be really helpful.

  • Ashley the difference comes in how many pixels are actually rendered by the GPU. I want the ability to compromise number of pixels (resolution) for game speed.

    For instance, I was trying the game out on a 1080p laptop with integrated graphics and the game ran slowly because apparently the graphics card simply couldn't push that many pixels. In such cases, the player should be able to select a lower resolution, keeping the fullscreen experience but with a slightly lower image quality.

    'Letterbox scale mode' I guess would be called 'auto' resolution because it adjusts to the resolution of the screen.

    appchogie haha, no worries mate. We're all learning and we can all learn things from each other ;)

    However yes, you may have missed that my problem is GPU capability, not screen geometry.

  • *bump*

  • Hey all,

    Recently Scirra added a new feature where the game can render to a smaller canvas, then scale up to fit the screen. This is helpful in instances where a computer has a big screen but a weaker graphics card - some of them have trouble drawing the whole window.

    However, just by itself this feature is limited as you are basically stuck between two resolutions: native screen resolution, or the game's native resolution (i.e. the window size). I'd love to support a range of resolutions, and I'm fine if they are all using the same aspect ratio. How can I go about this? I assumed that something like using 'set canvas size' along with 'set layout scale' to scale out a certain amount, but that doesn't seem to work for me.

    Any tips?

  • This seems like a really weird request, and I've never seen any game that works like this. I don't know if the windows architecture even supports dual focus...

  • The way I did it was not having circles at all - I just used lots of rectangles to make big circles, and small circles were made with a few 'pizza slices' arranged in a circle. Does that make sense?

  • That's a great idea. I'll think about pulling some of my examples from the forums and sticking them there.

  • I won't talk about the collaboration issue as I haven't been in a situation where I have needed to collaborate with anyone in C2, so I really don't have much experience with such matters.

    However, I disagree with you on some counts regarding the proposed handling of the asset store.

    Firstly, 2D art is much different to 3D art. I'm sure many serious 3D games use purchased stock models, however I've never heard of a serious 2D game that uses stock art. I suppose this is mainly because 2D art styles are extremely differentiated and recognizeable, and while 3D art can share these qualities in many cases, it's often more homogenous.

    The other main asset store component is plugins, scripts and code snippets. I agree that these are important to many C2 games, however the community here has an extremely generous spirit and ATM gives all this stuff away for free. It would be difficult to start charging for code snippets when there's already such a rich base of code available for free.

    You also mention that there are very few high profle games being made with C2. Ignoring the fact that C2 is primarily intended for beginners, I think this is more a factor of the tool's age than it's quality. Unity is so ething like 7 years old now so a comparison in that respect is hardly fair.

    Just my 2c ;)

  • You do not have permission to view this post