Yeah, sorry about that, Dropbox killed their public folder and I forgot about these.

Zebbi thanks for the mirror, can I use these links in the original post?

Unless I misunderstood, you can use "Is overlapping at offset" for this.

For instance, if you want to check what's under your player object, it would look like this:

This checks if there's a ladder 35 pixels below the origin point of the player.

Just heard about, this is amazing news. I've been sitting with a devkit for almost a year now waiting. I'm glad everything turned out ok and that Scirra didn't decide to make this a C3-only plugin or something.

Great! Can you tell us more about what it can do already? Ashley

So if we can finally publish games to Xbox without idxmv@xbox it should be possible to upload apps for Xbox, too? Or did someone already successfully upload a c2 app?

In the website it says:

[quote:3nibhj39]The program works with retail Xbox One consoles, so you won’t need a dev kit to get started. For developers who want access to more Xbox Live capabilities and to gain additional development and marketing support for their game, they can enroll in the IDxmv@Xbox program – even after their game ships.

I don't know what they mean by "even after their game ships" but I think you need a idxmv@xbox account to get your game on Xbox One because of the Live capabilities.

Seems to me like "the little guy" takes the hardest blow.. as usual.

Why is everyone saying this? On Greenlight the "little guy" had to pay $100 so he could enter a voting system and MAYBE get his game on Steam. Right now, even though they say the price is going to be between $100 and $5000, it's very likely the little guy will still pay $100, but this time he gets his game on Steam ASAP.

So why is it that everyone is saying that?

I don't think it's a case of 'listening', I doubt the features were made overnight because of views expressed in the forums. This is why it is better to wait to see what is revealed instead of getting worked up about what hasn't been revealed and what might not be there. I saw a petition to include an exporter, which was unnecessary as it always existed. Scirra are just keen to use this slow reveal method and it has only ever been good news for C3.

Scirra stated in the past that they were making no exporters whatsoever. The backlash was because of that, since not only we thought there would be no exporters but you'd have to pay $99 a year for an in-browser engine.

This is great news though, but still I'm waiting around to see how good it is. I feel like Scirra makes everything "thinking in the future" so I'm afraid their iOS/Android exporters won't work properly (or make the games slow on phones) for the first couple years.

it was arcade game (with a character running on the ground, not universe)

what

Well, it seems that now it's going to be possible (finally!)

https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-a ... ne-in-2017

use int(Dictionary.Get("jump"))

Or add a number, not a string, to the dictionary.

Doh, that works. Thanks!

Problem Description

Trying to use a "on key pressed" trigger with a dictionary key won't work.

Attach a Capx

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1t2vnfnzu54fb ... .capx?dl=0

Description of Capx

Adds a new key to the dictionary with the keycode string "88" (for "X"), then waits for it to be pressed to the player can jump.

Steps to Reproduce Bug

• Try to trigger player input from a dictionary key

Observed Result

Nothing happens

Expected Result

The player should jump if the user pressed the X key

Notes

It works just fine if you use "if key code is down", but not if you use "if key code is pressed".

Operating System and Service Pack

Windows 10

Construct 2 Version ID

beta r242

I'm going to have to agree with this. Construct 2 is great but exporting to mobile can be a huge pain.

Speaking of which, I am planning on making a small Android game again... is the Intel XDK broken at the moment or will it interact fine with C2 to make Android games?

I don't export to mobile, but I've heard that the cranberry plugins are broken on IntelXDK and some of the official plugins (like iAP and such) only work on some platforms, so yeah, it's a huge mess..

Hi everyone,

I've been a C2 user since 2011 with the first alpha. I started with Construct Classic in 2009 and I was in love with the tool. So much promise and to make PC games so easily was my dream, and it came through when I finished my first big game and released it on Steam.

C3 was just announced and I was baffled by the path Scirra chose to take.

While I don't think paying $99 annually for web-based software is that bad (I'll explain why later), I do think it's a bad deal when you still rely on 3rd party tools to get most of your job done and being an in-browser engine this basically confirms it..

It would be like Adobe asking users to pay to use Photoshop online, but if you want to save your project as a JPEG file "OOPS you need to go to a random website that does it for free".

What baffles me the most is that C2/C3 are GAME ENGINES. And in my opinion the next big step for any game engine is being able to deliver a game to multiple platforms. You decide to instead focus on usability. What good is it if the editor is great if I still can't have my game working on a Windows desktop without needing 3rd party tools?

I clearly remember someone saying on the forums that "C3 would just be an editor overhaul" and Scirra coming over and saying "We never said that. C3 WON'T be just an editor overhaul".

What is it then? Because nothing you've said differ C3 from C2 so far. No matter how good or what stunts the C3 editor could pull off, or how easy it is to make a game on it, it doesn't matter, at the end of the day you'll still have to depend on so much to get your game on mobile/PCs/consoles it would never be worth it (especially not paying $99 for it).

Now, if I could pay $99 a year and get my game on consoles, or mobile, or desktop without any trouble, I would gladly do so. I don't even think it's a very bad price, and I don't think subscription based payments are completely bad, but I need to know that I'm not going to make my game and have to wait 6 months because something broke on NW.js or IntelXDK.

I've seen people on the forums saying it's also not worth it for hobbists, too. This made me think a little as to who is C3 for anyway. Console devs won't be able to get their games on consoles, mobile devs will still rely on either IntelXDK or CocoonJs (and break their game every now and then), desktop devs rely on NW.js (and Scirra's broken Steam plugin) and HTML5 devs will get their game running great until they have to add plugins for an specific site (like Newgrounds or Gamejolt). Hobbists would have to pay $99 for it, and if they made a good game and tried to release it, would still have the problems mentioned above.

Anyway, this is my rant. I'll probably be changing to another engine focused on getting games across all platforms (probably GMS2 or Unreal) since both allow for console development.

Yeah, I'm wondering about the exact time.. I'm thrilled!