You can use a 3rd party image site (for example http://imgur.com ) to upload your image and then post the link that it spits out into here.

If it's just your own icon you need.. use "Reshacker" (a tool that is, unlike its name suggests, not exactly hacky - it's the regular way to alter .exe header resources)

Pretty sure this is not a bug but just a poopy Chromium build, but nevertheless:

Does anyone happen to be on Linux, using Chromium 62.0.3202.94?

The editor loads, then runs for a few seconds, and produces a hard "Aw, snap" and the process of the tab spits out a stack trace.

I can see on the js console that the editor is spawning his lot of service workers while it happens.

I checked on an iphone, that's what led to my impression earlier that it was still unsupported

The latest news regarding this was that Safari will be supported at some point in the future. The posting said "possibly later this year".

If you are willing to put up with the overall caveats of a HTML5 engine, the online version might be the better bet for the simple reason that NW.js (that thing that's going to make the offline version run) is typically a bit behind the chrome browser build. So the online version will benefit from browser bug fixes earlier.

This is tough because automatically updating the images involves reverse-engineering ancient icon formats (literally dating back to Windows 3.1)

There are libs for this, as well as command line tools, that could be incorporated into your build workflow. Electron's rcedit comes to mind. With your new pricing scheme shortcuts like that don't look too good, honestly.

This does not meaningfully improve the security of your game, if that's what you want. I'm not sure what anyone can do with your game even if they can open dev tools anyway, the code is all minified and already has reverse-engineering protections. If you just want to turn off the option you can already apply the command-line argument from within C3.

An argument could be made that you want your game as clean and professional looking as possible. If a youtube reviewer like John Bain or Indiegamerchick or someone of that caliber comes across "leftover debug tools in a release build" by accident, they will rip you a new butthole.

NW.js games don't actually need an installer, so this seems like a benefit? If you really want to make an installer that just copies files to an install directory, there's plenty of free software projects out there that can handle it.

While I basically agree the competition offers it, for less $$$. So not having it is a wound left untended.

Have you made the switch to Construct 3?

Why / why not? (Price, features etc)

No, and I won't. Played a while with the beta, but I don't need any of the new features (cloud save etc). It's interesting, technology wise, to have it run in a browser, but I find it impractical. And the stuff that I really do need (native) isn't coming, so I moved on.

The user accounts have not been synchronized. (At least until some time ago, I guess this is still the same).

So you have to create a new account for construct.net.

To claim the discount for an existing license see the license holder section of this posting for an explanation on how to do it using your new account: https://www.scirra.com/blog/209/constru ... r-purchase

I don't think it's clear how we could feasibly cover all the possible cases.

Start with FTP, SFTP (the ssh thing, not ftps) and SCP and you've covered 90% of all use cases

I have (probably always) been one of those nasty, strong advocats of native stuff, I was unhappy with NW.js, especially its mere zipping of assets (in particular since "the incident"), I have been very sceptical about the browser thing, even more about the cloud thing...

.. that said, against all odds, find myself dabbling with the beta on my linux workstation* at the office quite often. There is some benefit to this concept, this "one account and one software for everywhere". Unlike at the very beginning of the beta or the blog posts that preceded it, I'm starting to "feel it" now. And contrary to my initial brush-off reaction I'm going to do at least the first year.

* interestingly the website identifies this a "a mac" for whatever reason (it's chromium on Arch linux)

UnseenHand

Check this blog posting:

https://www.scirra.com/blog/187/buildin ... onstruct-3

One click mobile wrapping using their own mechanism is a thing, no more XDK etc.