Lost my Keys's Recent Forum Activity

  • LostMyKeys a really new user at first was a little stubborn but after playing with construct for a little over half a month has steadily improved to be quite the respectful and understands constructs nuances like the "ancients" around here. i think we just need to give this suddent influx some time to play with construct and enforce a little better posting guidelines about what exactly should be asked, mostly shunning the creation of "can Construct do this threads" and replacing them with "How can i do this in Construct threads".

    and what i just said was inspired by a post by our good friend, LostMyKeys

    EDIT: hah seems he posted as i was writing this

    Hehehe

    Well in my case I found construct along with lots of claims that -anything- was possible. Naturally I'm going to be skeptical about claims like that. Played with it, looked through the wiki, forum posts. Seeing how easy it was to do a lot of things, but expecting the other shoe to fall, for there being something ready to bite me on the ass and ruin my good mood of thinking I finally found what I was looking for. So figured I'd ask, and use past games as examples. But was met with "yeah you can do that" or "it's easy", which to someone in my position, isn't really that helpful. Looking back, I should have explained I'm not some programmer. But the event system doesn't come across as requiring complex mathematics to use for a lot of things until you start to get down to it. Therefore I was initially given the impression I'd found a place with like-minded individuals, mostly made up of Artists, where programmers were in the minority.

    So yeah, first impressions of construct does make you think that it can do everything in a very simple way. It's not until later that you realize to do anything worthwhile, it gets a bit more complicated (unlike a straight scripting language which is daunting from the second you first come face to face with it).

    For what it's worth though, I do apologize for my behavior when I first got here, though considering recent events, I was positively polite back then! haha.

    So I don't believe the other new users intend to be frustrating or annoying (well with the odd exception or two - construct is not going to turn into Kodu dammit! lol). I think they're given the same impression I was, then are surprised when it's not quite that simple after all (but still not complicated, once you've got used to it, it's really easy.. except the math thing, but that's my problem lol).

    As for the veteran users. I think some may forget that they were new once too, and perhaps they've grown with construct (some users are registered 2007 for example), and like anything, to grow with something, makes it almost second nature to you, as you both develop and change together. Could compare it to the analogy of growing up with your real dad, only for your mom to leave him when you turn 17 and marry a new guy. No matter what the new guy does, he's gonna screw up, and he wont automatically know you're allergic to peanuts either, hehe.

    As for the nameless thread. For what it's worth, he took it too far and pushed people's buttons. But I think he did it simply to big himself up and feel like part of what he saw as an experienced talented crowd (because lets face it, being the "new kid" always sucks and nobody likes being in that position). Pretending he worked for EA and so on. So I don't think he was being an ass on purpose, just greatly misinformed.

  • isn't it though?

    if you think this is about you, it probably is, (not just one person)

    stop it. if you have over a hundred posts, you a reflection on the tone of the entire community.

    the rest of us are not interested in being lumped in with the image you're projecting.

    these forums have maintained a reputation of being welcoming, and helpful.

    not meanspirited, cliquelike, and elitist.

    if you're in a bad mood, or a post makes you angry, or makes you feel superior to someone who doesn't understand construct yet. find another outlet.

    people who haven't been here using the software don't owe us some kind of awe-inspired respect. they're free to be skeptical and cynical and wrong about construct. and chances are you don't know enough about construct or software development in general to talk down to even a total noob.

    it's the very fact that construct contradicts everything we've come to assume about software development that makes it so noteworthy. people don't need to be attacked for their incorrect assumptions. it should be the expected initial reaction. you should be helping usher them into understanding the differences, helping adapt their way of thinking toward the event/picking driven construct way, pointing them in the right direction for help, or providing encouragement. if that doesn't sound like something worth your time or effort, than perhaps you should save the reply button for when you have something more constructive to add.

    Well I've been saying the same thing (when I joined I wasn't treated all that great myself and it's put me on the defensive since), and I've also been trying to come up with some kind of middleground that everyone can be happy with. Check out my recent thread in the feature request section.

  • >

    > > i'd love to use python if there was some documentation for it...since i'm new to python it's difficult to start without any help and using construct without it is something i really won't like because without it construct would be just a point and click game creation kit, i know it is aimed towards beginners as they don't know coding but it's not that they shouldn't start coding anytime their life.... at some point of time they will have to......i think it's the part where game maker or other software win but apart from it construct is a great tool, but until construct has some ability of programming( i know its there but sort of directionless without any help and docs) i'll just wait and watch

    > >

    >

    > If you actually used construct (by your own admittance you said you haven't), you'd realize it's more than some point and click game creation kit, and the events IS scripting, it just lets you create it differently. Don't judge things before you even use them, or put them down as too simple for you when you can't (by your own admittance) even use things slightly more complex.

    >

    sorry if that offends you, i didn't mean it to be offensive but i just meant that people are more attracted to tools that have BOTH point-click options and programming as well....and you were right about that i can't handle things that are complex...i was confused when i tried to make a breakout game in construct ..... honestly saying i'm not a skilled programmer i'm just a novice and the programming language i know that is action script 2 is one of the easiest programming languages out there and is no match for python

    i just wanted to say that the lack of help about scripting in construct was a downside of it

    again sorry if that has offended you

    Thing is though you can do a heck of a lot with constructs events, to the point where you probably wouldn't even need to use python. They (events) might look simple on the surface, but all it is, is just a different way to view regular scripting. You should give them a try, you'll be pleasantly surprised at just what can be done with events.

  • i'd love to use python if there was some documentation for it...since i'm new to python it's difficult to start without any help and using construct without it is something i really won't like because without it construct would be just a point and click game creation kit, i know it is aimed towards beginners as they don't know coding but it's not that they shouldn't start coding anytime their life.... at some point of time they will have to......i think it's the part where game maker or other software win but apart from it construct is a great tool, but until construct has some ability of programming( i know its there but sort of directionless without any help and docs) i'll just wait and watch

    If you actually used construct (by your own admittance you said you haven't), you'd realize it's more than some point and click game creation kit, and the events IS scripting, it just lets you create it differently. Don't judge things before you even use them, or put them down as too simple for you when you can't (by your own admittance) even use things slightly more complex.

  • > I disagree. There is no disadvantages of being able to export source code only advantages. I understand it may not be human readable, but even so saying the code as an export would not be useful or have any advantage is a bit extreme and over the top. Code at its very core is better then events, yes I understand events work really really REALLY well in construct, but if the program has a bug or they wish to expand on it with extreme custom code and actions that they could not do within the editor then it would be best to be able to see that code.

    >

    > I know it will never happen because of how advanced and great the event system is but saying exporting code would not have any advantage is not true in any part of the context. Not trying to call you on anything but facts are facts.

    >

    > I know the event system can do 99% of what anyone would possibly want with python possibly picking up the slack, but exporting code would be the ultimate in debugging and advanced mechanics.

    >

    So what are these advantages? From what I can gather from your post, you state code is better than events even when not human readable. Why is that? Isn't it better to write custom code in plugins which Construct already supports? I'm not saying events are always superior to code - they're not - but the options are put your code in a plugin, or ponder what to do with tens of thousands of lines of unreadable code. This isn't about code vs. events, it's about Construct generating tonnes of useless source vs. giving you the finished thing. That's not a feature, it's a waste of time to develop, from my point of view!

    Don't think this is a personal attack or anything, it's just that this idea about Construct generating source code comes up from time to time. I can't really see any point to it at all, so I'm trying to establish what people think it will enable. Such as:

    > he wants to create the source code itself ... so he can take it over to another program, like you would a jpeg or a text file.

    >

    Remember this is a big ball of mud code which doesn't make sense. What are you actually going to then do in another program with this unintuitive source code? I'm yet to hear any convincing real-world scenarios yet.

    How the heck should I know? LOL I'm just telling you what it LOOKS like he wants to do with it, taking this and his other posts into account, ask him not me. I think the whole bloody thing is stupid, why even go near code if you don't have to. Please don't lump me in with these two users, thanks. I am in no way affiliated with either of them.

  • Just my 2 cents/penneth worth.

    How about a workshop type idea.

    Say first working with loops - If people have the time they create a small examples of how loops can be used, nothing major, just real world examples of how loops could intergrate and slimline an event sheet. Same with INI files how you can read & write to them to store & retrieve values & strings. Hash Tables would be good, I know they are in the Adventure Game tutorial but something using them that is small scale, and don't have to delve to deep into the inner workings of something big-ish.

    You know sort small examples that are quickish to make but can be easily inserted into a project. Maybe have them run for a week or 2 then a thread created with all the examples that where made as downloadable links.

    I'm babbling know but thats what I'd like to seee and participate in.

    Nono, that's a good idea and along the lines of what others might be up for (and like those 1 hour threads).

    And there's an adventure game tutorial? Got a link? I wouldn't mind checking that out.

  • > "export" the source code back out

    >

    What do you mean by importing source code to XNA then exporting it out again? That doesn't make any sense. Source code is source code.

    I know, hence the quotations and the chuckles

    [quote:2wgolwcx]As for exporting to source code, I really don't see the point. You would never be able to modify the source code to make changes. The insides of the event engine are very complex, and because there are no languages that support event style picking as language features, the generated sourcecode would not be human readable, it'd just be a massive mess, like a really complicated function copied and pasted a thousand times. And what kind of changes would you make? What would the advantages be? There are no advantages to exporting source code. Only disadvantages.

    I think that's what he's wanting to do with it, yes. There's no other reason I can think of to have the source code (really what would be the point anyway, you can edit your own game in construct, and compile it and have the exe too, I wouldn't see the point in the source code for it as well). So yeah, that's what I think he wants to do. Create something inside construct, then rather than create an executable, he wants to create the source code itself (that when compiled would become the executable) so he can take it over to another program, like you would a jpeg or a text file. You know that can't be done (not in this case anyway), and I know that can't be done.

  • What advantage does exporting source code rather than built EXEs have? What does that have to do with this thread?

    I see what he's after doing.

    He wants a very simple method where all the hard bits are done (behaviors) of creating a complex game (requested in another thread) using minimal effort and to use construct to do it, then to "export" the result as l33t source code, with translated versions for the win, to "import" *chuckles* into XNA or something (he mentions XNA a lot) make some more changes, then "export" the source code back out, and call it his own, then to sell on the internets for profit.

    And then Uwe Boll will make a movie of it, but completely different.

    I don't actually know, but it's entertaining none the less!

  • Well why dont we start off a bit smaller. TOTD( Tip Of The Day) would be fairly easy to come up with if everyone contributes.

    Sounds good to me!

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • Please don't call me ignorant, that's not civil or accurate, especially considering that you completely misunderstood my entire post...

    This has nothing to do with my experience in Construct and if you read what I talked about more carefully without assuming,

    > as for sports games needing to have many roudabouts to be made, thats not true. anything you try to make is gonna prove to have some difficulties. try setting up a boss in a platform game for instance. to give it seperate attack patterns that activate as time goes on and at random, your gonna have to do a lot of stuff that isnt simple. but if you think about how you could do it, its seems pretty clear after a while what exactly you have to do, and how you can build it with the hammer, wood, and nails construct gives you. this goes for anything your trying to make.

    >

    Yes, but all of that is completely beside the point and really has very little to do with this.

    I think you need to stop, take a few steps back, and rethink how you're approaching your game idea. Nothing about this game so far is impossible, or even all that complicated, but it is perhaps above your skill level at this time and you'd be better off experimenting with smaller projects, learning the software and going from there. As for dismissing other's comments. They're actually a lot closer to the answers you need (but perhaps not the ones you want), than you're giving them credit for, and you shouldn't outright dismiss them like that.

    I'm considering that, but I'm not sure how far it can go. Once my Phase 1 and Phase 2 prototype is done, I don't have any plans to complete the entire project this way. It was never my intent to do the full game this way, only a prototype. I'm fairly certain just because of the controller issue alone that a good retail football game is not totally possible in the current state that programs like MMF and Construct are.

    I have another plan for the final project in place, but failing that using Construct might be a consideration.

    Nothing wrong with the controller system, but I think you're thinking too far ahead talking about retail games.

    [quote:21ebaqbi]I don't know if "requirement" is the only qualifier. I could probably make the same statement about a number of things already in Construct like the AVI object for example. But it should be there and it should be supported because if the idea is to be able to make any type of game, then in that regard it becomes a requirement in and of itself.

    As I've explained and continue to explain. You can make the game you're talking about, you're just going to have to use events to do it. Though as I say, it's probably above your current skill level at this time. But it's certainly possible. And if you've read any of my past posts, you'll know that I wouldn't say that unless I believed it.

    [quote:21ebaqbi]If you only consider the people here or most of the people using the product right now, yes, but that's not looking at the big picture. When more of these things are available you'll start to see more creators in this genre. I see requests for this same sort of stuff in XNA forums all the time, but it's not available so the sports gamers dream dies before even getting a chance. They have templates for every other type, but not sports.

    Look at RPG Maker and others of its type. There are large communities of non-C programmers using those, and there are just as many non-C programmers dying for a chance to do the same thing with sports games... but it's just not available yet.

    Erm yeah, you're comparing two very different demographics, which unfortunately makes that a mute point. RPG gamers are very different to Sport fans. And out of the almost 2000 users on this forum, you're the only one I've seen who's asking for something like this. Regardless of your claim that there are large communities out there dying to make football games. It's 1% asking for it right now. Course, if they were all to come and request such a thing to be including in construct, and there was enough call for it. The devs may come up with some kind of alternative or feature which could help. But I wouldn't count on it, as I say, it's too specific and wouldn't do anything you can't already do quite easily if you broke things down into their component parts.

    As I and others have said, what you're wanting would simply cause a great many obvious clones. There would be little originality, and would end up ignored just like any that are using the ghost shooter template.

    [quote:21ebaqbi]

    Hmmm... Annoying how exactly? I don't quite understand. When there is a group of operations specific to a template, if you don't desire to make that type of game you'd never even see them since you'd never open the template...

    I don't think you've checked out how the templates work. They're still really just regular caps, examples as it were.

    [quote:21ebaqbi]When I mention accessibility being an issue, this probably makes you furl your brow because a lot of the people here are so familiar with the program or have had a lot of experience in more complex programs or C, it all seems like no big deal. But there is another faction of very talented concept designers that will never figure out how to make these types of games work in Construct or MMF or similar programs, because on the surface it doesn't "speak" the language they understand to even do the simplest operation of the sport they're trying to recreate.

    As I say, if you read any of my posts, you'd know I'm not a programmer. But I still think there would be no real difficulties (not what I would consider difficult) in doing what you're wanting to do with construct at this time. It just seems complicated to you, that's all. I've seen far more complex things done with it though.

    [quote:21ebaqbi]Difficulty depends on how realistic you want it to be. To make 10-yard Fight, probably not so much. To make Tecmo Super Bowl, much more difficult, though not impossible. To make anything above that, virtually impossible unless you're a genius with this program and have incredible attention to detail that can stand the community scrutiny which even Madden in all it's complex programming glory has not been able to do.

    I just had a look at those. There's nothing there that couldn't be done in Construct, with varying degrees of knowledge (but even then, it still just all boils down to the basics when you strip everything else away).

    [quote:21ebaqbi]There are so many nuances to making an American Football game work properly it's just not done by single programmers, and even large teams have routinely failed. Programs like Construct eliminate a lot of the hassle, but you're still unlikely to turn out a final product better than Tecmo Super Bowl. That's why I know that prototype is more than likely my limit for now and to go further I'm going to have to hire a team of C programmers to work with me.

    The thing is. If all these companies, with their millions of dollars investment, amazing talent pools, far more advanced tools than you're going to find on the shelf, and ability to code things from scratch in C++ or whatever, with access to costly software the common user hasn't. It's illogical to think construct, or the average Joe off the street could do it better by including a few behaviors or making things easier to setup.

    Though you have proven a point I've been trying to make for some time. New users hear "easy" and think exactly that, and their requests and questions are based on "can it do" and not "how's it done" or is it possible for them to do. So can construct do what you're wanting? Yes it can. Could you, yourself, do it at this time? No, I don't think you could, and you should practice with the software more, learn how the various area's work, test things and gradually go from there.

    Everything you're wanting can be broken down into component parts and tackled separately and simply. If you've really worked in commercial game development like you said you have, you should already know that. Football, like everything, is based on rules. From a game point of view, you've got further rules, such as how the ball will behave (well there's physics to handle that). The player AI, again, can break that down so they behave and obey the rules of the game easily enough. Yes you're going to have to get your hands dirty and use events, no it wont be a case of clicking some options and pressing a few buttons. But it's still much easier than you can imagine.

    There just isn't, and never will be a "make game X now" button. Yes construct and it's ilk make things easier. But if pro's can't get something right with all their resources and money available. Then something like construct in the hands of a new user has little chance of shaking the foundations either.

    [quote:21ebaqbi]I have some experience with HTML, I built sites and templates for a few years, but I'm more of an editor than a coder. That said, would the average person know how to do that? Nope, that's where templates come in.

    Well then they have to learn don't they. You can't expect to walk in off the street and be able to do anything you want without any practice or knowledge.

  • Sure, yeah... a better wiki page for tutorials sorted by difficulty would probably be a good idea.

    I still don't know how you'd go about getting people to make a huge list of examples though. People around here pretty much make tutorials on a whim. It's not like we have assignments or anything

    Well the actual tutorials would be added as and when anyone felt like making them. As you say, on a whim "oh hey deadeye just made an example cap that could be useful for X kind of game, I'll add a link on the wiki" kind of thing. The important part would be the list. For example

    Game genre: Point and Click

    Example games: Monkey Island, Operation Stealth, Leisure Suit Larry, Day of the Tentacle (all links to mobygames or wikipedia etc.)

    Difficulty: Medium (a link to medium difficulty, which would include information you'd likely need for that level of knowledge, links to useful pages and so on and so forth. The minimum amount of knowledge required to do it without struggling too much or something)

    Tutorials/Examples: List of any tutorials or examples, if any are available. These could eventually range from complex in depth tutorials, to simple caps which just happen to show a technique which may be useful for that type of game.

    And being on the wiki, everyone could edit it, improve upon it and so on. Like I say, it's just an idea, a standard place new users asking if they can do this or that can be pointed to. Then it's up to them if they think they can achieve what they want to do, or if it's currently beyond their abilities.

  • Interesting idea, but who's going to make this "big list of examples?"

    And anyway, isn't this pretty much what the tutorials forum is for? Just mark tutorials from Beginner to Expert or something.

    It could link to said tutorials here, like some of the others do. As for the list, I don't mind starting it, filling in all that I can. Once I've got it all signed up.

Lost my Keys's avatar

Lost my Keys

Member since 29 Nov, 2009

None one is following Lost my Keys yet!

Trophy Case

  • 15-Year Club

Progress

15/44
How to earn trophies