Thanks for posting this! I think I'll enter the mobile game I've been working on (graphics not made by me, thankfully).

As far as using C2 goes if it weren't for the tell tale branding at the bottom of the screen I don't see how they would even know as it generates HTML and JavaScript. Run in a browser by default means HTML5 is okay, especially since they allow plugins.

I am in complete agreement with vidi. The only thing that matters is the end product. Lets face it, using Construct is already shameful in the eyes of the "do it yourself" people who say "you should be using C++ and DirectX/OpenGL, don't be lazy". People have expressed an interest in WebGL for Construct, well jeez don't be lazy - learn JavaScript and the WebGL API then make it yourself. Don't wait for Ashley and Tom to do it all for you.

Also as vidi said, many games already are exactly the same, Battlefield vs Call of Duty? Give me a break: they are the same game with infinitesimally small differences. There really hasn't been a new FPS since Wolfenstein 3D (1992) or a new strategy game since Command and Conquer (1995).

Hungry Moon

URL: dl.dropbox.com/u/47126253/HungryMoon/index.html

Canada

Tested only on Firefox 7.0.1.

Thanks Kyatric that was the problem. I just might finish on time for the contest.

Each level has a time limit. Once that time limit reaches 0, I want to move to the next layout. Currently the event I use to do this is:

Each tick: LevelLength = LevelLength - dt

Compare: LevelLength <= 0 go to Level2.

LevelLength is global variable that gets set with a new value at the beginning of each layout. Level 2's event sheet includes level 1's event sheet. I have the same condition in level 2:

Compare: LevelLength <= 0 go to Level3.

But for some reason Level2 just repeats endlessly.

Is it okay for multiple people to work on the same game?

To put this thread back on the proper track, my post had nothing to do with protecting my code. I'm not going to worry about something that hasn't even happened yet: my code being stolen. Even if it happens and too few users of C2 are willing to pay for anything (I have some big plans for C2) - but perfectly willing to pirate - I'll just close down shop and move on. I'm not depending on it for my livelihood. With this post I just wanted to be sure making plugins, server side apps, and exporters of any type are allowed and can be commercialized. Ashley provided good answers.

Thank you Ashley that's exactly what I wanted to hear. Does no limitations on plugins or exporters included commercialization? I'm particularly interested in writing a multiplayer plugin as I'm quite good at client and server side programming - I especially like using JavaScript. I was concerned that might be an issue as it may (but highly unlikely) compete with your multiplayer plans.

Has a license for the beta been determined? I know the editor specifically says no commercial games, but I'm wondering if that will be the rule for the entire beta (i.e. no commercial games for the next 1 - 2 years?) or will commercial use be allowed after the early adopters license is available? Also, what is the plugin license? Are there any limitations to the types of plugins that can be made? I hope I didn't miss a post explaining all of this.

Thank you.

I'm curious about how this would be done. A plugin would take care of the client side, but wouldn't a server app of some kind be necessary? How else would the information be distributed to the other clients.

My post had little to do with GM being better, it is unfortunate that is the only idea people took away from it. I was pointing out the difficulty of selling software to an open source user community, the difficult questions that will have to be answered if C2 is ever to sell beyond these forums, proposing they copy an already successful pricing model, and subtly asking how can anyone be sure C2 will reach a good stable release let alone be supported for the next 2, 3, 10 years - how else will they get �599 from businesses? Even a peak at some of their business planning and system analysis for C2 would go a long way to allaying some of those doubts. Currently, it's hard to tell if they have the next month planned let alone the next 10 years.

I'm not saying any of the above to be cruel. I've been thinking about donating for a while so I'll probably get the early adopter license (which I didn't think of during my original post) as I really do like Construct and think it has a lot of potential. However, it would nice to feel more certain C2 will not be C1 all over again, now that I'm paying (not donating to help out a struggling indie project). They say they learnt a lot last time, but that is awfully subjective.

I like Construct, I know I don't post my prototypes so no one knows. However, I also like Game Maker - a dirty word around here - more. I'm not sure how Construct credibly proves its worth against Game Maker. GM is mature, stable, actively developed, has an HTML5 exporter (among others) and costs $25USD and also has future proofing in terms of upgrades - usually just to the next version. Game Maker has already survived 12 years; Construct is going on 4 with limited success. Why not just copy the way Game Maker does its sales: free limited version, paid full version, and completely closed source. After all, you are competing for the same market. You may have to alienate the people who liked Construct because it was free - they are no longer your market and many of them may have become spoiled by C1: it was a fantastic piece of free software without equal in terms of free "game makers." If C1 is what they've come to expect for free, imagine what they expect to pay for.

All of the above is unimportant. I won't pay $61.94CAN for C2 when I can get GM for $24.32CAN (based on today's XE values) until it proves why I have to pay more.

Edit: USD it is and removed insensitive link.