Cheers Ashley.

Of course if put a lot of work on performance of and engine and you compare using webgl you won't see much difference, but some of us still have to support IE users while meeting the deadlines.

I use both direct JS and Haxe, both have their specific uses, at least I we don't have to use Objective C in both cases. My favorite use of haxe is more about application structure than "implementation". Benefits are way more obvious when there is a lot of pieces in your puzzle, just think of it as an alternative to GWT. If you have to do a desert rally: using a motocross might be faster, but using a 4x4 could be a way more enjoyable experience. Not much web programmers experienced coding comfort and IDE debugging.

There more and more performing HTML5 game engines out there, but not much amazing graphical tools like construct, just feel that it should be more in focus than defending using javascript like a spartan warrior <img src="smileys/smiley2.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

Hi Ashley,

I just discovered Construct and I do understand your point about not supporting Haxe, but I was just too tempted to share some additional information about Haxe. In the first place, Haxe would never be a waste of time since you can output javascript, you don't even have to use NME library if you wish so. Conceptually speaking, I suggest you take a look at "The Pew Pew Manifesto" on Adobe blogs:

blogs.adobe.com/bparadie/2012/05/07/the-pew-pew-manifesto

Making your software compatible with more game engines would just get you more audience and a broader output, for instance just take a look at how it would fit nicely with platforms like Flambe:

github.com/aduros/flambe

Texture Packer is a good example of a successful software embracing multiple technologies too.

I think it would be far better to focus on the IDE features for your team, isn't that what your customers care the most for?

Sincerely,

Jonathan