Thanks for these -- haven't been able to be as active on the forums lately as I'd like, but it's nice to have a breakdown of some of the good stuff that's been passing me by :)

This looks great. Will definitely follow the devlog.

Pyxel Edit has some great features. I've been meaning to spend some time and experiment with this and DAME to see if there's anything that will help me out.

Won't take me past loading screen on FF or Chrome :(

Probably better served in the 'introduce yourself' thread.

srealist, I've had Processing on my to-do list for a while now. Your recommendation may be just what I need to kick me into gear and actually start exploring it a bit further.

MrMiller - interesting you say that about MMF. I've never used it properly, but I've seen some reasonably complex stuff done with it. More power to the people working with it, I guess :)

Damn, that's exactly what I was doing, but I'm getting a 404 page now.

Mike -- Liking your illustration skills! Maybe do a devlog and update as development progresses. I didn't get the run animation in the above test, just the idle animation sliding from siding to side.

This looks fantastic. I like the attention to detail, like the way he glances down as he falls from his jump. Subtle, but effective. Small criticism, but I think Zero6 is right about the colours.

To be honest, I don't have that much of an issue with the tiles themselves. I think the biggest problem is the vibrancy of the sky. That faded-denim blue pervades everything and makes all the colours seem a little muddier.

Like I said, this looks great, but my personal feedback is that some small chromatic adjustments would make a huge difference and kick it to the next level.

I'll be following you devlog keenly!

Fact is 2900 is WAY over the top. You might as well do yourself a favor and get Unity, a top commercial product with native export to a massive number of platforms and something that is used even by major devs instead

If you compare 2900 to licenses for C2 competitors like Stencyl or GS it's extremely expensive and it's not whining to complain about that

That's all well and good, but still a false comparison.

Sure, you COULD go and use something like Unity. Nobody's stopping you. However, the barrier for entry when using something like Unity is a lot greater than something like Construct. They're very different products -- Construct compensates for a lack of certain skill sets in a way that Unity and other similar tools don't. You could go and use the Unreal Engine for free if you wanted to, and the commercial licence is relatively cheap ($99 if you make less than $50,000) for the tools on offer.

Similarly, lumping the Awesomium licence into comparisons with GM or Stencyl makes no sense, because the vast majority of Construct users will never have to pay that fee.

People never want to pay the piper.

because the crisis we are paying MORE taxes...the last year i paid 55% and this year i have pay again 55%...

As already advised, your net income would need to be over $155,000 for the Awesomium licence to be applicable to you in the scenario you're describing. In fact, even if they specify turnover BEFORE taxes, I'm not going to be too concerned with these charges. They are more than reasonable.

Also, $2900 is not so much, despite your aggrieved tone, and neither is the Scirra licence. These values are pitched against scale. I also think of them as relative to what they're allowing you to do.

The Construct licence is providing you with a toolset and an engine. The convenience and utility provided in instances where a game draws in a large revenue stream is most certainly worth the minuscule amounts (relatively) that are required in these circumstances.

The same again applies to Awesomium. It's opening up a whole distribution channel that would have been unavailable to you otherwise.

If you don't think this is worth the money, learn to code the underlying technology yourself and it won't be something you have to worry about. Your concerns about relative value are a little bit shocking to me, draconian taxes notwithstanding. Makes me think of a certain apocryphal Picasso anecdote .

EDIT: Haha, ignore my faulty math up top. You'd have to make even more than that if it's calculated after taxes (i.e. if it's based on net income).