ah yes first time running check would be a nice thing to capture with that. good point. thanks, that's super helpful! :)

Interesting. That's definitely where reading about these objects lacks specifics in the documentation for Construct 3.. yes they explain what the fields are but i feel like they don't really explain the inner workings and some simple examples. this documentation would be well served to give some capx examples because reading about something and applying it are not one in the same.

Sometime its easier to read if things are broken out more for me. i can see how grouping things would be more efficient but when my dictionary keys were not storing my values it proved to just be a layer of abstraction that was more trouble than it was worth to troubleshoot because i couldn't "see" where things were not working.. i would just have to run and test.. and keep getting nowhere. Now that i see this working with just local storage finally (all i really wanted) I may give dictionaries another pass and see.

The examples in this thread seemed to deal with strings and that raised a question that I need to save values that are numbers, not strings.. maybe the dictionary string / json stuff was not casting the values in a way to be usable by a numbers variable. just lots of little issues like that.. ultimately i couldn't get dictionaries to work in my situation which was unlike the examples given.

I'm definitely glad to know there are some things i can do without and just removed them.

It just isn't clear to me in the documentation. we have to check if an item exists. and we have a if it's missing condition.. so does just checking if it exist then "instantiate" the item? or perhaps "set item" is what creates an item if it doesn't exist?

So really "Is Missing" isn't needed at all for actual storage.

I did see that video recently and it looks interesting, but for now it's more than i need in my situation.

I cleaned up my capx and removed the audio stuff i was using for testing (i like to use sounds to identify if the thing "exists" or not when i was testing that.

Thanks for that input! I just figured that it made sense that if something doesn't exist, i need to do something to make it become real, but i guess just setting a value and giving it a name creates it in that exact moment..

it seems to have gone away now. i was signed in (i saw my icon in upper right corner).

I could click "Launch Construct 3" and it would open it up and i could load a cloud project like normal.

Just weird

i see a buy now tab and my account is good till June of 2020..

how you explain it makes sense to me mikal, but i'm not seeing how you would create the local storage object. i'm confused because here is an example that doesn't show any "create item". i'm just not seeing it.

when the "is missing" is used it just gets used to set some text fields and blank.. no call to create anything.. and this example works. this example would be helpful but it doesn't work with a "on start of layout.." it's click driven.. i need a system that's automatic and done without user involvement.

dropbox.com/s/rok73tjrrtezk8r/local%20storage%20working.JPG

ok one specific question that i don't think i saw a direct answer too:

- when you check if item exists and it doesn't exist, does it at that moment create it?

I ask because the "on item exists" is a one time trigger event which makes me think it might get missed if the first time you run it and it checks if it exists, what if it's not done creating the new item, just seems sketchy compared to an action that's constantly looking to see if an item exists.

- you don't ever have to use item missing condition?

I can see why it would be nice to have as an option but making sure this isn't a required condition. I could see both sides of it. I think it's not from examples I've seen but part of me thinks it would make sense that a "doesn't exist" condition would be needed to identify it doesn't exist so you could then tell it to create the item.

i think it's obsolete now? there is a built in tween plugin now with C3 and it appears to do everything the old one did.

gotcha, yea that might be worth looking into. maybe i'll make a casual game where saving data isn't that important.. i found this site called whale cash. seems like it might be viable. Still for me I want account / saving data ideally so this isn't great for an RPG but I do see how it could be cool for a casual game.

So to Sotano, that makes perfect sense to be locked in with Kongregate and to require them to approve a game to use their system. This is more than fair for developers who do not want to get into engineering their own monetization solution. It's only reasonable to have some trade-off and i would be more than happy to go that route. There are plenty of games on Kong that are doing very well. As I see it, starting out this is great. If a game were to grow bigger and at some point prove to be advantageous to move to a less limited platform (Kong is big, mind you) then enough revenue is at stake to justify the cost / challenge of growing beyond Kong, but until then I would rather be free to make a game that could be monetized on web with minimal development outside of Construct itself.

to WackyToaster, that does sound interesting, but it would seem like this kind of service would require lots of eyeballs to make it worthwhile.. In addition while that's great, that would only cover the money side. i'm thinking of a service that would allow me to have an account to store game data as well so (example) an RPG could recall what stuff they have / progress / items.. as well as tracking premium currency and a means to award that for money paid. However for a casual game, one that doesn't require saving data, I could see the affiliate approach being possible. Does anyone know of any casual games that might do this well? A game like slither.io or other more casual / non persistent games could be good perhaps?

that's great to know! I'm going to see what i can do with this information this afternoon. thank you so much for the added information and insight. i remember using and struggling a little with webstorage back when that was a thing, but i did get through it.. this seemed similar enough, but the weird thing i was experiencing was this, at it's best:

i would save text on off to on and sound off.. reload the app and both would be 0.. then i could do things like save text to off and sound on.. and reload the app and both would be 1.. however if both were off.. both would be off.. and if both were on it would be both on.. just weird behavior.. even though each had it's own value name.

cool yea i see your point about saving certain things like general progress at various times and locations in a game. In games i've done in the past i've never really needed that, but i can see now how that would be helpful.

Yea i noticed that wait for previous action is new soon after i posted that. definitely a much needed thing. i've always wondered about that because "wait till any action is complete" to fire off another action would be super helpful. like imagine being able to loop any action by name to say when THIS is done.. do that.. this doesn't

As for the the wait 0.1.. i didn't know things don't always fire off that quick. so yea this is even better waiting until the action is complete. exciting (and great timing) to have this.

as for the sequential thing I thought I'd heard that it didn't somewhere, but glad it's not. I'm pretty sure it was more of a general statement about javascript itself, not construct specifically so yea a myth i'm glad to learn can be dispelled.