You can store your data in a C3 JSON object. When you want to save to server, save the string version of the JSON object to a value. When you want to read it back, get the string and use C3 JSON object parse ACE to reload your object.
Check out the manual or tutorials regarding C3 JSON object.
yes, it only supports webgl/webgl2
Sorry not compatible and I don't know of an easy way to port it to C2 then doing it manually.
I see, while you are still in the early stage of this, how about making the 407 stable the LTS. I think allowing imports in future SDK V2 addons is important for addon creators doing addons, from development standpoint and using external libraries and it is good for the first LTS to support this good SDK V2 foundation.
Can we request some backporting of specific features to the LTS?
For example, my request is to add the SDK V2 functions for this._info.AddC3RuntimeScript("c3runtime/mymodule.js");
Which makes creating SDK V2 addons cleaner and simpler, by adding support for importing modules.
If this LTS is around for years, it would be good for it to be compatible with well made SDK V2 addons.
I can add a feature request, if that's where you want this type of request.
The best source is now the itch.io page, which has the most updates and is still free.
kindeyegames.itch.io/c3-3dobject-alpha
There is only a webgl version, you need to change project setting to not use webgpu. They should actually have a pop for the user.
There are more modern alternatives to try out, look for other skend effects in the addon depot.
I don't plan on porting it, but there may be other skend effects that have been ported.
switch to using webgl2 and it will show up again
I understand this. I am going to step back and review my approach to this discussion and Scirra's request for SDK V2 collaboration between Scirra and C3 devs.
I want to work to a mutually beneficial goal that can advance 3rd party FOSS addon development and take some of the C3 community requests pressure off Scirra for work that these addons could instead cover. For example with 3D, if we can handle these requests in community addons, Scirra would no longer need to consider or discuss them as much. I/the community will transition the addons to be V2 SDK, so they will be long lived and can be relied on.
You want to apply it to a tilemap and look at the C3 forum thread for the most up to date version and examples.
Thank you for the drawMesh() addition! It will prove helpful for Spine integration with SDK V2 overtime, in particular if it gets improved mesh render performance and per quad color (in a later update.)
Example C3 3D games, already commercial or looking very promising (they use the 3D constraints as a design pillar, e.g. retro 3D or casual 3D game.)
store.steampowered.com/app/2176450/Mr_Hopps_Playhouse_3
store.steampowered.com/agecheck/app/2189860
codecanyon.net/user/zupga (many 3D games)
preview.codecanyon.net/item/pocket-drift-html5-game-construct-3/full_screen_preview/42902732
play.google.com/store/apps/details
cheva360.itch.io/pookies
Agree with some of the above. My experience is that devs want 3D well integrated into C3 and they have _already_ been able to make interesting games with C3 current level of 3D and 3rd party addons (full disclosure I have made one - 3DObject which is now free and open source.) Some of those types of projects could be nicely improved with some C3 SDK changes.
It is also so much more useful to be able to place 3D objects in the editor in a fully integrated solution (whether 3D Shape or 3D Object or any other C3 object.)
As a counterpoint in the three.js example, you cannot place three.js objects in the editor or create a 3D environment with the editor. C3 objects and the three.js canvas cannot interact in a meaningful way besides entire three.js canvas in front or back. Most importantly the C3 layout editor cannot be used to place three.js 3D models in the layout to create a level, environment, etc.
Member since 22 Apr, 2016