Arima which quote?

Yeah the second is a bit calloused, I admit that, but I stand by the first.

You should be out there trying other products, finding what works for you.

Or at least finding things you would like to see in C2.

mrnannings

That's not a very good argument as most of the mobiles that can play the game have browsers that play the game, and offer even more features.

Great, I already own gamemaker but I will go ahead and purchase the game maker exporter to android to try it out. You cover the $100+ I spent on C2, and I'll cover the other $100. Let me know your preferred method of payment so that I can implement your extremely useful suggestion.

The browsers over WIFI don't work the same as exporters. My game right now doesn't work at all on Crosswalk, runs ok but slow in Chrome mobile. Look if you're not having problems that's great, but telling people who are having problems that they are in fact not having problems, and that they should throw money which they gather from local trees to try other engines' exporters is just not productive.

My previously working game also has this issue. I wonder if anything was changed to cause this or if some change to my game has caused this (works good in desktop chrome and node-webkit still)

>

> E.g. quoting from that same page

>

> [quote:1k292pak]With extensive platform support you can rest assured that players will have access to your game no matter where they are*.

>

*but probably will have sound, performance, and ad issues in an overwhelmingly large number of cases and games so even though they can access your game they may not be able to actually play it.

What can scirra do about that? Exported games from C2 are perfectly ready to be used with third-party wrappers. If one of this wrappers is not working correctly then it's up to developers of that wrappers to deal with issues. Ashley can only send them email explaining what's wrong, but he can't tell them what to do.

I'm not sure what they can do, I can't run their company for them since I don't have their operational details. From my perspective as a customer, I would be far less disappointed if the addition I put there with the asterisk to their marketing was present when I bought the product. That way I would know that these issues come up all the time, would set my sights lower, and probably still decide I want to buy C2 (it's cheap enough to be worth it for its ability to make JUST simple games). But obviously if they did that they would lose a lot of customers. If this were my company I would portray my product's capabilities more accurately if I could not improve them, and take the hit on customers. I would not lead anyone to believe that they can actually reliably make mobile games of any complexity given the state of wrappers and in fact would make it clear that they can't. I said it before but mobile export is very much a beta or even alpha product right now. I would label it as such.

I actually find that Ashely does oversell a lot of stuff. I jsut recently read his article on how C2 solves the 'view source' issue with obfuscation. It doesn't. That's barely a measure for anyone who would bother to steal the source, especially getting information to manipulate gameplay rather than just trying to reproduce your game. Yet, Ashley confidently says some (correct) things about how the obfuscation helps, then follows it up with the definitive and misleading statement of "View-Source Issue is solved!" I guess he's better at marketing products than I

"Export your game to desktop PC, Mac and Linux apps by using the Node-Webkit wrapper... You can also reach the popular iOS and Android app stores using wrappers like CocoonJS, appMobi and PhoneGap — all three with built-in support."

This is pasted from https://www.scirra.com/construct2

Every information needed about C2 is provided. You only need to spend few minutes to read what exactly you are buying.

The part that's missing is that Scirra is helpless against CocoonJS and Crosswalk bugs, that these products don't actually produce satisfactory results for many users, and that these products don't have C2 exports as a main priority so fixes may come slow or never. Don't kid yourself, if this was not a problem you would not be seeing threads about this stuff 'every week'.

E.g. quoting from that same page

[quote:25a60fin]With extensive platform support you can rest assured that players will have access to your game no matter where they are*.

*but probably will have sound, performance, and ad issues in an overwhelmingly large number of cases and games so even though they can access your game they may not be able to actually play it.

Why should they refund it? Its not like you can't try it out before you buy it.

Just saying he should compare the other options, which coincidentally usually must be purchased before use.

You can't. Not the mobile stuff. He may not be able to try other options because he used his engine budget on C2. And the other options are not relevant anyway. What's relevant is whether or not Scirra delivered what they promised when he paid. He clearly feels they haven't.

Well, nobody is making you use C2, perhaps you should try some other software.

This reply is completely unnecessary considering that the OP owns a license and Scirra doesn't refund them. This isn't the old days of free CC. Actually I find his post very relevant and much more accurate state of C2 than what Scirra puts out. Many people in the forum seem to complain about these same things, but I don't see these complaints at this frequency on any of the other game making engines I own.

I mean, often software licenses do allow for transfer so while atypical it's not absurd. But in this case the license itself (open the license file and see) says that it can only be used by the person named in the license.

Problem Description

____ A concise description of your problem here ____

When using toon shader and possibly others, you get an error that highp is not supported for fragment shader on some mobile devices. See here: http://updates.html5rocks.com/2011/12/U ... n-possible. This will cause mobile chrome to give an error and not load the game, though other browsers like firefox seem to load it but perhaps ignore the shader.

The point is, you can just query the sine behavior to find out when you are behind the sprite, then change the sine behavior to not come out the other side.

For example, let's say both sprites start at the same spot. Start the sine behavior, sprite peaks out, comes back, but before it has a chance to peak out the other side, you alter the parameters of the sine behavior to prevent that.

More specifically, you can use the CyclePosition expression to know when you are mid-way through the cycle (this is the point after you've peaked out and come back), and when that happens do things like enable and disable the sine behavior (this may re-start it I'm not sure), change the magnitude to 0, or manually re-set the sprite position to the correct place every frame until CyclePosition is again on the 'peaking' side of the sine wave.

You could use the sprite's current position to calculate when it's at the peak or trough of the sine wave, and change the sine behavior's amplitude at that time.

Right, I meant that although C2 outputs things that will work with implementations of HTML5, it doesn't have its own implementation of the HTML5 spec like a browser might. It depends on the implementations of others to be correct. This is definitely the way to go since entities with more resources are working on HTML5 implementations, but I often find that the complaints of others and my own complaints come from the fact that C2 bills itself as supporting standalone apps. If my game doesn't work in a Chrome window I will direct my complaint to both Chrome and Scirra, since either one could be responsible, and if Scirra says "Hey, we're doing it correct on our end, but Chrome is not" I will be satisfied with Scirra. On the other hand, if my game doesn't work as a standalone app, then clearly Scirra is responsible because their page told me they support those things, unless Scirra makes it exceedingly clear that they don't actually support those platforms themselves and, more importantly, that they themselves often will not be able to fix bugs or issues and will have to depend on someone else's HTML5 implementation..

And the specific example I gave was just to show how game developers and therefore Scirra have different goals in important features than browser developers. In standalone apps, game dvelopers expect the priorities to be the needs of games, and may clash with priorities of browser developers.

The problem is that Scirra doesn't actually support Android or iOS even though they claim to. Crosswalk supports Android and tries to fix Android issues, Scirra does not. C2 just allows to output to a format Crosswalk can compile into an apk. That's not really mobile support. Support implies that if I have a problem or bug Scirra will try to fix it, whereas instead what will happen is that we'll have to wait for the Crosswalk team to respond to support requests. I'm not saying this is a bad thing because the Crosswalk team does a good job, but the problem is that C2 is not the Crosswalk's team main priority. As it stands really C2 doesn't even really support HTML5 since they aren't implementing it themselves, just using others' implementations like Chrome and Firefox over which Scirra has no control, and in the case of changes (e.g. recent Chrome change to drop XP support) users may in some cases be out of luck. The fact that the Chrome team, which makes decisions best for browsers and not necessarily best for gaming, can affect how my game plays on a 'standalone' desktop application is not what I expected based on the C2 product description.