Has anyone here tried out the android app creator? How similar is it to construct and...you can't still program in javascript (thats what android uses right?) can you?

Android uses Java, not Javascript.

I'm currently testing App Inventor.

Although it has a long, long way to go, it has great potential.

It all depends on how far Google push it.

I'm not convinced that they want it to be as professional or versatile as Construct is, but they might yet surprise me with a major update.

It's safe to say that development is slow at the moment.

I'm continuing my Android project in Java, as App Inventor isn't anywhere near capable of doing it as it stands, and probably won't ever be (which is why I'd like to see Construct export to Android, because they'd beat them hands down).

Krush.

It 's just that you used the words "take a peek at them"

Yeah, not the best choice of words on my part.

If the .ogg files are the only ones I can't disguise like this, then no worries as it's not really going to break the game if people changed them (it'll just sound rubbish), so at least the important ones are pretending to be something else.

It's just that all external files with the same, strange extension would be daunting to the casual user.

I'm not trying to hide Top Secret files here.

We'll see what Ash has to say, should he decide to bother.

Krush.

You've completely missed the point.

It's not about stopping people from hearing or seeing content from the game.

Why would I want to do that?

The reason .ogg is mentioned is because it appears to be the only type of file (so far) that can't be renamed and still recognised.

There are various files that hold different information for the game, and if all files were able to be renamed to the same extension, but still recognised from the game, then it might deter people from messing with any of them.

I'll give you a couple of examples of why this is important.

#1:

Several years ago I wrote a scenario for the trainsim Trainz.

This was written in the built-in TrainzScript language (java-like), and although the scenario itself could be encrypted, the associated files could not be.

When I released it, from the thousands that enjoyed it, I got requests for help from dozens of people who had big problems with it.

This took up a lot of my time, which I was ok with until I found a common thread to these complaints.

One by one I found out that those having problems had been "exploring" the files in the scenario folder, and had decided to replace one thing with another, thinking they knew what it was for, etc.

So much of my time wasted on people who should have just played the bloody thing, and stopped digging around in the source files.

#2:

A similar situation again, where a program I wrote for the Driving Sim community (which allowed replay camera positions to be determined by you) was released as a beta to the community, with all the warnings that go with a beta.

After some people started prodding around in the source files, they found that my program would delete all the camera positions from their track.

They were completely oblivious to the fact that it was their "messing with files they shouldn't go near" that caused all the trouble.

Even when I took the beta private with a dozen or so testers, one of them continued to mess with the files (I guess he was trying to be clever) and kept getting problems.

Of course, I didn't find out about that until I'd wasted many hours trying to track down the problems he was having.

How would the Devs here like it if half the bugs on the tracker for Construct were the cause of someone using unreleased versions of code that no-one else was using?

So, to clarify again, it has nothing to do with not wanting people to see graphics or hear music from the game.

If people want to do this, then that's fine.

It's the same as watching how to complete a game on YouTube or buying a strategy guide for a game before you've even tried playing it!

I don't understand why anyone would do that, but they do, which is fine.

This request is so that I can rename the extension to ALL my exterior files, so that it looks like I'm using some sort of proprietary filetype to hold my game's data, and so deter the casual gamer from bothering to dig through them.

Krush.

This won't be useful to most people, but here's my request nonetheless.

I tend to rename the file extensions of exterior files, so that it's not so easy to determine which file is for what if users take a peek at them.

This is just to deter casual gamers from poking about in them, and doesn't make a game any more secure.

Any game can be hacked.

While I have no problem with other renamed exterior files, my current problem lies with .ogg files.

They are not loaded or recognised with a new extension, which I presume is because the loading routines are dismissing them when the .ogg extension isn't seen, rather than checking the header of the actual file for filetype.

Can this be changed Ash?

Or is there another way to do what I want.

Cheers,

Krush.

From The It Crowd

LOL, love the IT Crowd.

The latest series went by very quickly.

That video pretty much says it all.

How come embedding YouTube videos isn't enabled on these forums?

I think I've asked this in the past without a response from Ashley & co.

Krush.

Don't get me wrong.

There are people who use it to keep in touch genuinely, and in commerce it's used almost as a viral way of getting products out there (increasingly unfortunately).

I just hate the way that the whole world and his brother feel they MUST be a part of it in case they are missing out on something, when they really aren't.

Facebook (which some of my Sisters keep nagging me to join) is the lesser of the evils IMO, because it does tend to be used by families and friends, but I'll never join.

They can contact me via text, video text, skype, Email, phone me or even come and see me,

That's more than enough.

But it's Twitter that really gets up my back.

I have a lot of favourite bands, TV shows that I like, love the Chris Moyles Show team (who are always on about Twitter), but I don't want to know what they've had for dinner or when they last wiped their arse.

I'm probably the biggest Manics fan there is, but I've probably only visited their website 2 or 3 times in a decade.

As someone said recently, there is such a thing as "Too much technology".

I fear we're making a world of Zombies!

Anyone see the Bruce Willis film Surrogates?

EDIT: I notice you also mention YouTube.

Apart from the increasing number of kids posting nonsense in the comments area (see one of my posts in another thread on this, and then check out that particular link to see exactly what I mean), I just can't fault YouTube for what it offers.

When you've got 5 minutes to spare, it's a great way to waste an hour.

Krush.

Too many social networks.

Agreed.

Social networking sites like facebook, twitter, etc, are a waste of time.

I think of them as a place for people who can't use forums.

Or a place for the socially inept.

Seriously, it's amazing how "sheep-like" people have become in the last decade.

I'm proud to say that I'm not a member of a single one of them.

Maybe it's because I can still pick up the phone or walk out the door and meet people. lol

Krush.

That's OK then, so the OPs graphics will be padded to 2048x1024, and not 2048x2048 as suggested.

That's correct.

Padded out to the nearest power of 2 makes most sense, and I don't believe Ashley and David would have padded to the nearest power of 2 square for a second.

Unity "scales" to the nearest power of 2, so that 1024x1200 would be scaled to 1024x1024, which could be a useful feature for Construct.

To be honest though, if you plan your textures well enough, neither becomes important.

Krush.

Just on a side note... Does this mean that Construct has to use square textures? So a 512x256 image will be internally padded to 512x512? Seems as if Construct is doing the wasting as video cards have had support non-square textures for years.

Edit to clarify: Yes, textures should be in a power of two for efficiency, but do they need to be square?

No, I'm pretty sure that Construct only pads out to the power of 2 size, not the square size.

Otherwise it would indeed seem to be a waste.

Krush.

Hmm.

So, as it stands, the top 3 look like this:

Web Browser

Mac/Linux

Console

Apart from the Console option, there's not a lot there for commercial use.

I suppose it comes down to what the Dev's ambitions for Construct 2 are.

If it's similar to what MMF2 seem to aim for, then maybe the Web browser option will do.

If, however, they want to cater to both casual game makers and Indie devs on a more professional level, then I think it's important that they future-proof Construct 2 as much as possible.

The Mac will always be there, XNA technology will no doubt be utilised in the next version of the XBox, and both Android and iPhone are very important.

Although it might be more work than they envisaged, if the Devs want Construct to be taken seriously, I really think they should consider including the following out of the box:

Web Browser or Flash

Mac

Android

iPhone

Xna/Xbox

Unfortunately, if the poll is anything to go by, this isn't going to happen, and looks less likely that Construct 2 will be for me.

Which is a shame, because Construct is by far my favourite R.A.D tool.

While tools like Stencyl and App Inventor will no doubt get better, currently, Construct has a huge lead over them (Qualifier: I beta test both) and should take that on-board when planning Construct 2.

Krush.

Very true.

People won't be able to sell their work if it's exported as Flash.

True, most people won't want to sell their work, but we're talking about a Commercial version of Construct here, so it should be taken into consideration.

The Mac market is obviously a lot smaller than the PC market, but it's a market none-the-less, and some might like to sell to it.

The Android platform already has a good following, and from various articles I've read over the past couple of months, it's current momentum has exceeded even Google's expectations (and who wouldn't put a few quid on Google to make it a success).

So I'm sure it's going to be just as big a player as the iPhone.

No need to say anything about the iPhone's share of the market, but as with anything Apple, you'll need to make sure you don't sell your soul when you decide to publish on the App Store.

So, for me, they are the important ones, and in the following order:

:: Android

:: iPhone/iPod/iPad

:: Mac

For me, Flash wouldn't be an incentive to buy Construct 2 (but then, I'm currently beta testing Stencyl )

Krush.

Ah, I see what you mean by "Event-written behaviors/plugins/modules" now.

Thanks guys.

I've now used my 3rd vote for that feature, as it sounds very powerful.

Having looked at the results again now that more people have voted, I'm a bit concerned that gamepad support has dropped down the list.

For me, this is THE most important aspect of playing a game, and we shouldn't expect users of our games to have to install 3rd party utilities like joy2key just to play them with a gamepad.

I think that gamepad support should be in there 100%, regardless of other features, especially if Construct 2 is going to be a commercial product.

Krush.