Twinsonian's Forum Posts

  • I wanted a nice dark theme to use:

    <img src="http://i.imgur.com/tSR1i2g.png" border="0">

    If anyone is interested in trying it out:

    Download Updated Dark Theme

    Just save it as a .xml file and put it in your construct 2 themes folder to use.

    I suggest using the office 2007 dark theme built in to construct 2 as well to accompany it.

  • This might sound silly, but how do you actually test node in preview now with the new beta version?

    I learned quickly that attempting from the browser was a no no. I also downloaded node-webkit itself, but I guess I am using it just like a browser and get the same javascript error.

    So how does someone actually go about testing their game without having to export. I searched and was unable to find a tutorial as of yet either.

    Also, exporting my game as node does yield the correct results. I do get my text file in the user directory with the correct content in it. But I do not know how to actually make this happen with preview.

    Thank you

  • Whenever this topic gets brought up it is always interesting to read. I personally share the same view point as Epiplon.

    Besides the obvious issues with GM that most of us have (lets not discuss it here) the main thing going for it is the GML. GM does not help ordinary people get in to game development as well as construct, but it does help ordinary people learn the basics of game programming much better.

    Take it how you will, all opinions are different and people want different things.

    The one thing I DO know is that the next game making software that comes out that combines the functionality of both construct and GM will be huge. Having an event system for non-programmers and a scripting language of some sort for those that do enjoy programming but want more rapid development will be amazing.

    After construct 1 with the python scripting I thought for sure that C2 would end up implementing something. the JDK is .. well if you are really going to get that deep in to the JDK why not simply make the jump to libgdx or something similar?

    I understand completely where the people with a programmers background are coming from and it is simply this:

    We were hoping we had found an IDE that allowed us the freedom to program our games while promoting rapid game development by giving us the options of using pre-written or defined functions such as behaviors as an example. But having these pre-written functions presented the way construct does. Built in GUI that allows using behaviors on objects quickly and easily. Imagine being able to write your own behavior script within construct and saving it with the other behaviors.

    EDIT: I understand the opinion from others that we know what were buying when we bought it and that it is not a programming/scripting tool. To be fair, what else comes close to what so many of us actually want? It is only natural to follow something that almost makes it with hopes that it will evolve. Also while the opinions of programmers may differ from those that do not program or have no desire to with construct, many of us have financially supported the program and our opinions are just as important as those that oppose it. We are just expressing ideas, hopes, and dreams.

    The truth is scirra is a small team. They are very talented and have made wonderful software which I am proud to have supported.

  • I remember making this suggestion and getting completely owned =)

    scirra.com/forum/customizing-constructs-colors_topic56580.

    Anytime I write code for anything I always set my IDE to some soft of darker background so my eyes do not melt and drip out of my head.

    Absolutely agree with this post.

  • I'm gonna get a lot of flack for this but..

    It's not that those in this community don't have talent, skills, good ideas etc. or never made a large-scale game before. It's that C2 isn't designed for large-scale game development by any means. It's designed with the single hobby developer in mind.

    Everything about C2 is internal. The level editor, the event editor, the objects, the animations, the textures, the sounds. It's practically impossible to use C2 in a team and you know what teams offer? Large-scale games.

    We don't have massive areas and entire worlds or even (good) tile-based games because you can't use external level editors.

    We don't have heavy dialogue,inventories,world-maps,customizable characters, etc. because you can't really use external files. Project files are a temporary workaround at best.

    We don't have lots of sound effects and music because you can only import .wav PCM which must then be converted into an unorganized project-bloating super folder of sounds.

    We don't have solid, bug-free, ready-to-distribute games because all of that relies on 3rd party software seemingly shoehorned into C2 and forgotten about.

    "Oh, well just use a project folder instead!"

    Nope. You still have to add everything to your game inside the C2 editor else it's not recognized. So if you're in a team of 5, all building levels - each member will need a C2 license - all of the project's plugins - and the latest build, just to put his or her levels into the game. That applies to *everything*. There's SVN but that sounds like even more of a nightmare and I still don't see how C2 will pick up anything if it is added outside of the editor.

    That's not to say it isn't currently possible to make a large-scale game in C2 - I'm working on 2 right now - but it's a dreadful process and I'm not sure we're going to get much farther without a number of changes and additions to C2. I've already had to cancel two others.

    I agree.

    I have followed construct from nearly the beginning. I loved construct when it first came out, and to be honest I really enjoy construct 2. I have discussed using C2 for some projects with the team I am working with and what it really comes down to is that it is not possible for us.

    I still make heavy use of C2 for prototyping ideas and throwing together examples to help explain my thinking on our projects. After we knew that XNA is essentially dead we decided to move on to a technology that we knew would be supported for quite some time.

    We even checked out the game making software including C2 and game maker. C2 in our opinion shines for hobby games, and pretty much rapid game creation. Game maker... heh, why in the world would we pay 500+ for a terrible GUI that gave us a sub-par scripting language. We ended up setting on libGDX, and have not looked back. However, C2 is still a very valuable tool for prototyping and even far more fantastic for creating interactive multimedia advertisements and videos.

  • Both IDEs are capable of accomplishing pretty much the same thing. GameMaker still resembles what it looked like when Mark Overmars was maintaining it, except for some color cosmetic changes.

    The real difference between both products is the people behind them. Sandy Duncan and YoYo operate through a purely profit/business model. If a user gets sucked in to buying the professional edition which:

    ameMaker: Studio? Professional unlocks the full power of GameMaker: Studio?

    Then users find out the truth, in order to really deploy your game anywhere that matters:

    Android Export Module      $199.99      

    HTML5 Export Module      $99.99      

    iOS Export Module      $199.99      

    Ubuntu Export Module      $99.99      

    Windows Phone 8      $199.99

    Construct 2 offers all of its export options without extra costs to us, and more export options are consistently added.

    Furthermore, the developers of scirra are amazingly involved with the community. Not only that they are involved in other places throughout the web (example):

    stackoverflow.com/questions/9553415/how-did-scirra-get-html5-audio-so-perfect-in-construct-2

    Finally, your statements on functionality is a slippery slope. Thankfully you did state that this was your impression (opinion). Those types of statements encourage discussion as users are going to wonder why you came to that opinion, and based on what.

  • You do not have permission to view this post

  • delphitools.info/2012/12/13/desktop-html5-apps-game-changer-node-webkit

    This is very exciting! One question though..

    ode.js brings high-performance access to the local machine resources, so that HTML5 apps can break out of the browser and get access to the file system, databases, server sockets, etc. Just like any other regular application. Check the wiki for more details.

    Does this mean there may be a way to read and write save file/text files etc??

  • You do not have permission to view this post

  • I think we both were in foul moods =) I feel like I helped instigate a negative conversation. Sorry about that.

    With the javascript SDK construct offers great opportunities for digging in to and learning javascript game development for those that are new to the area and I think that is more than enough for those of us that want some scripting to go with what we are doing. Not only that, being able to learn javascript along with rapid game prototyping makes this an incredible tool. (Not saying that it is unable to create great games outright as well).

    Anyhow I look forward to diving further in to the javascript SDK

  • I don't understand why creating behaviors and plugins with the JavaScript SDK is not considered on par with (or superior to, in my opinion), scripting systems in other drag and drop game making apps. Once you get the hang of it, creating behaviors and plugins which add, modify, or even create new functionality, is rather easy. You're just moving the scripting down one level, from scripting directly in an object to an external bit of code.

    I've had experience with various DnD systems with built-in scripting, and by far I think the JavaScript SDK gives me more power and control than a built-in system ever did.

    I agree with this point very much.

    > This anti coding/scripting mentality on the forums is disheartening. Providing users with as many options as possible should be the goal, not limiting it to a click only interface. Certain individuals do not like coding or simply are unable to do it, and thats why the event system is so great for them. Others love it and enjoy it and are desperately trying to work with the event system in a way that flows like the way they code and script.

    >

    > I spent good money on the software and so have many others that like coding/scripting. Our opinions are just as relevant as those that do not like coding.

    You spent your good money on a codeless developer tool. Whoops.

    Nearly limitless options already exist through programming. C2 seeks to port as much of that functionality over to a codeless environment as they can. That's my understanding of it, anyways. If you want a coding environment with WYSIWYG, you have plenty of options elsewhere. And with C2, you have the SDK which is developed hand-in-hand with the primary software. And nobody I've seen is against its use. So if you want to code, use it.

    And why do you feel that providing as many options as possible is not a goal here? It's just trying to make those options available without coding. That's the whole point, as it has been since day one so far as I can tell.

    If you bought this software to code in a way that isn't accessible in C2, then you made a mistake.

    Why whoops? I made a whoops because I see validity in the opinions others have for scripting and coding with game development? Whoops because you assume I made a purchase without knowing exactly what I was buying? I knew exactly what I was spending my money on when I bought construct. I have followed it for quite some time. I was agreeing with others who make points about scripting and understand their point of view.

    Instead of having a constructive conversation you simply point to the door to seek alternative solutions.

    Also I remember "day one" including python scripting.

  • ^ Only that this software never promised any scripting at all, it just simply was not C2's goal. It is not a "mentality", there are many reasons beyond "not liking" or not "being able" to do it. Also, many of us make art of several forms, making music and spriting being two things that are very time consuming, why would I want to consume even more time on scripting when I just simply do not have it? I have scripted before, and as a personal opinion I don't see the point of it in a software like C2 and I will never go back to scripting if I don't have to.

    No one is stating that you need to go back to scripting. Again, for those that are unable to script/code efficiently the event system is wonderful and very well may save you time. For others we feel it slows the process down.

    This software provides the means to expand on it with javascript to make plugins and addons thankfully. These provide users that want custom or more in depth features in their games the ability to code for it, so while construct does not offer a direct ui to script, it does work with the javascript.

    I understand your position on not seeing the point of it in software like C2. What is interesting is that others DO see the point of having it in software like C2. Again, providing more options for game developers is a good thing, limiting features one way or the other because other users are not comfortable or do not have a preference for them is silly.

    We all need to be a little more open minded and understanding of others views and opinions. Whether or not construct ever allows for any scripting doesnt mean the ideas that the users have for it do not hold value.

  • on the main page, click arcade

  • A user on these forums already posted that they were trying to create a dialog box (message box). Having the ability to script (javascript) was able to create a plugin for that use.

    There are things that construct just cannot do. Either we try to encompass every possibility through event clicking for the user or we have to hope that plugins are written to accomplish the things that they cannot.

    My advice to the OP would be to see if javascript can accomplish what you are hoping for with LUA?

    This anti coding/scripting mentality on the forums is disheartening. Providing users with as many options as possible should be the goal, not limiting it to a click only interface. Certain individuals do not like coding or simply are unable to do it, and thats why the event system is so great for them. Others love it and enjoy it and are desperately trying to work with the event system in a way that flows like the way they code and script.

    I spent good money on the software and so have many others that like coding/scripting. Our opinions are just as relevant as those that do not like coding.

  • One option would be to maybe make use of the function plugin for repetitious code.

    scirra.com/forum/plugin-function_topic46104_post288742.html

    I do understand what your saying. The way the editor works it likes to baby the user and when events are copied and cut it can act funky.

    The event system is a dream for those that are unfamiliar with game events and those that do not know programming. It allows them to express themselves in a wonderful way.

    For others that do have a coding background it feels slow and clunky and in all honesty it actually hinders and slows the process. I will continue to use it because I love it, but I do understand fully what the OP is saying.