Another thing that I've read in their forum is that one of Scirra's founders was once a user of ClickTeam's products but got fed up with the bad eventsystem and set out to create something better. This might just be a rumor though.

It's true. Ashley used to be "Tigerworks" in the clickteam-universe.

It's the classic tale. Become so fed up with something that you set out on a crusade to do it right (has worked out good so far, imho).

We demand a roadmap!

I too would love to see one, but they would be stupid to publish one

Best way to piss people off, when you can't stick to it and have to delay milestones.

Well, if I ever saw good and bad news rolled into one, this is it.

Good that your project is fine after all and boo to NW.js.

1. You always have to take care of event (and especially sub-event) order.

2. Right now there's no factory-native follow path behaviour. You either have to resort to 3rd party plugins or roll your own.

4. You can use all variations.

• one level per layout and everything in one event sheet
• one level per layout and one event sheet per layout
• import/nest multiple event sheets into one, like includes in regular programming languages
• roll your own level editor/player and run it from textfiles within one layout

Tinimations

Can you maybe strip some layouts out before export, to test with chrome?

Would be really interesting to see if this is indeed a NW-problem or more like.. project rot.

Only you can answer, if C2 will fit your needs. I'm afraid there's no way around that, no one knows why something works better or worse for your particular workflow and customs.

That said - among all the "clickers" C2 has the best-performing HTML5 output.

Have I not? Fifth post from bottom on page five:

[quote:18e5uq5v]

If this does not convince owners of Scirra to add a notation or add a very strict and limited NW.js export to the free version (while a notation is totally fine - and so little work to add that somewhere in small font and an asterix), then nothing will.

I actually do support the asterisk* suggestion (for several reasons).

But I have nothing more to add. My case is there with all my arguments.

You still haven't said what you want, after posting like 20 pages full of text.

Do you want Scirra to change their product description? Make a suggestion.

Do you want your money back? Write to .

Solomon

How would you like to see it advertised? Maybe something like a * on the desktop bullet point on the front page and then a foot note or fine print that says "* adds 150mb of runtime to your product"?

I might end up with approximately 250~300 mb in game size from my calculations (as I have not yet decided to stay with retro or go with more complex design). Maybe. Add to that ~130 handicap.

No problems there. There are games (a lot) larger than that made with C2 available on Steam.

[quote:2oobxp7m]If your gf/wife bought a dress with a hole in the back especially to go to a play at the theathre, would you tell her that its doesnt matter as mostly she will be sitting through the play? What if there is standing ovation? And what about the journey to and from the theathre?

Maybe a better comparison would be if she had bought clothes that had extra 50 kg weight, and you were about to go hiking.

OK.

How can I be sure that the file size will not impact my performance down the road in C2? Thas is my point in this thread. I have read around that games bigger in size cause problems in C2. That is my main worry.

The games in question had problems only on specific platforms (iirc the mac NW.js was the culprit, which has been notoriously broken) and with a way larger size, several hundred of mb. Your main worry should be: performance. And by performance I mean: framerate. Everything else is quite far down the list.

Also, if you make a larger game, you should have a rough idea already about the amount of assets, so you should be able to estimate the final size by now, at least ballpark-wise. How much is it?

[quote:j9f8zwa7]If I make a game that weights 5mb, why should I have it weigh 135 mb? How does that make sense?

Well, you did buy a HTML5 engine There has to be a way to run it, and at the moment, you have to distribute it with the game.

There are a few people who are notoriously sensitive about file sizes.

But, luckily, almost none of the relevant reviewers and curators are. They will roast you for all kinds of things, but download size is a non-issue.

I'd be more wary about solid performance and well functioning input.