Machrider... I know you said you don't want to make a full 3D game, but there's nothing stopping you from making a 2.5D game with a 3D game engine. All you have to do is restrict movement to the x/y axis and have your camera fixed along z. It would be cool to do this stuff in Construct some day, but if you really have a good idea for a game right now and you want to get working on it, that wouldn't be a bad way to go.

He want THIS!

Subscribe to Construct videos now

So do I! That game looks so friggin sweet.

That's pretty slick, good job.

I've never modelled so much as a polygon, so I don't think Construct's going in a Blender type direction. If you want a full on 3D first person shooter with world editors and 3D collisions and the works, Construct isn't going to be a good choice for some years to come, I guess. Part of the problem is you won't get very far - in fact I don't think you can get anything drawn at all - without some pretty heavy math involving matrices, vectors, euclidean angles, vertices, and possibly quaternions (I say possibly, because I'm not sure what they're for or how much they're used in 3D gaming). I'm of the opinion that a completely flexible 3D game maker that is easy for a beginner to use is not possible like it is in 2D, except with limitation. As far as I know, programs like FPS maker work by hiding this work from the user, which makes it less flexible. I don't think you could go and make Crysis in any of those programs without dealing with the nuts and bolts yourself.

Oh, I wasn't suggesting that Construct do like Blender does. I was just making conversation. If you want to do what Blender does, use Blender. In general though, I think you're right... the more work you take away from the user, the more limitations you create.

As a hypothetical though... Could a 3D game maker be made with the same sorts of features as Construct, using the same sort of event structure? I think it's not only possible, but likely to happen eventually. (There's already a very simple 3D program called Alice that uses event-type coding, and while it is possible to make games with it, it's so limited in scope that you probably shouldn't even bother.)

The biggest drawback for noobs would be creating the actual content. Creating content for 2D is already the major drawback of any game maker. By comparison though, making sprites is easy... making textured, rigged, and animated models, and 3D maps and such is not so easy. For beginners, anyway.

Procedural modeling and animation could take some of the pain out of creating content (think building your creatures in Spore) but that's something for the not-so-near future. I think it'll come around eventually though. Just like game makers took the tech out of coding games, in effect making game creation more accessible to people, procedural modelers will take the tech out of modeling, making 3D more accessible to people.

If you really want to do 3D in a game engine that has an event-like system for creating game logic, then I suggest you check out Blender. It's a full 3D modeling and animation program that offers the same features as high-end stuff like Maya or 3DSMax, but there's also a game engine incorporated right into the program that uses "logic bricks" to snap together game programs. The basic system can make somewhat complex games, but you can also expand it with Python scripting (just like Construct) to make more complex stuff.

Plus, it's all in one. You can model, texture, rig, and animate characters and model your game levels all in the same program without having to export them and import them into a separate engine. It's the closest thing I can think of to a 3D Construct... but if Construct also had a high-end graphics program and video editor tacked on as well.

Oh, and it's open-source and free.

The down side of course is you will have to spend a lot of time learning to use Blender. Like Maya and 3DSMax it's quite a complex program that needs a lot of practice in order to use it well. The saving grace on that is there is a HUGE Blender community, and a HUGE amount of tutorials and documentation.

[quote:kp5cbi51]

""on object collisions detected""

lets assume it returns 'true' and the execution is now passing to the condition ..

but where is the info to feed the condition with ? Especially when its about instances created on run time. They can be anywhere and be anything.

If you can't keep track of your objects at runtime then you need to learn how. That's all. There's nothing keeping you from it. There is no "make an unknown thing and put it in a random place so I can't do anything with it" action in Construct. So what is your point?

If you're unhappy about certain things not working (like the Else condition) then you just have to realize that CONSTRUCT IS IN BETA. It's actively being created as we speak. The Else bug was a known issue before you made this thread, and if you actually read the forums you would know that.

As for Ashley making pixel shaders and other cosmetic features... that's his prerogative. He's in charge. He works on Construct in his spare time as he sees fit. You have no control over how Construct is made. As an end-user (or rather a tester... remember it's BETA) the most you can do is politely make suggestions. Just because Construct doesn't work exactly the way you want it to doesn't mean you get to be director of the board. It's not called "j0h's Construct."

So yes, I agree with SB. You are being a jerk. You come breezing in like a cocky know-it-all and throw around criticisms when you:

a) Don't seem to really understand how to use Construct

b) Haven't tried making anything in Construct (from what I can see)

c) Haven't put any time or energy into incorporating yourself in the Construct community

d) All of the above

If you really want to see Construct do well, my advice is this:

1. Admit you need help with the stuff you don't understand

2. Help out with bugfixes and make polite suggestions for new features

3. Relax, and quit acting like a jerk

Best of luck, Ash. I'm sure you'll breeze through them.

Doh! That is way simple. I guess that's what I get for reading Help/Tech before I've even had my morning coffee.

Ok it's working but... how do I get it to loop?

You could do it manually, with an "Every # milliseconds" or something, but there really needs to be some new features added to the DirectSound object for music, like an "Is music playing" condition and a "loop" option for the play command and such.

The Channels have those kinds of features, but Channels only work for things like .wav because they're meant for sound effects.

Edit:

Oof, beaten by Ashley yet again

Oops, just ignore what I said earlier. Now that I've played around with it a bit it's not as easy as all that. I tried doing it with math but I really suck at math. It seems the easiest way would be to make completely separate rotating events for each side. Sorry

Try giving each of your sticks a "myLimit" variable, then build your rotation limiting event calling on each stick's variable rather than a fixed value.

Edit:

Or rather, "myLowLimit" and "myHighLimit"

Or whatever.

Whoa

Surely we live in the end times. Gotta go repent, brb

It does look like a nice engine. And the source code is there, but it's C#. Isn't C# and C++ like, way different? How easy would it be for someone to make a plugin based off this source?