yes exactly, being able to have multiple entities share the same animation clip - in a sense instancing the animation clip between entities.

Character maps are very neat, but they force you to have one entity represent many different characters if you want to share the animation. Is It possible to replace a piece of a character with another piece during runtime, without having to create an entire character map?

hi lucid Thank you for your reply.

Would it be possible to have a workflow where one does not have to duplicate animation across instances and can instead have different instances use the same animation clip during runtime. This is what can be done already with 3d models, for as long as your character rigs have the same naming convention

is it possible to apply the same animation to two different entities without the need to create a new copy of it?

I found a bug:

using the grey guy template, after some playing around in spriter.

Here is the scml and scon files:

http://we.tl/X8VmljGVHh

awesome progress on the exporter!

Are skin type deformations supported in the addon?

I think that Ashley and co should develop such a tool as part of construct3. It will help boost sales and also would be nice to have an official repository for these things!

Keep the free addons/effects free please. As to the ones by rex and the other popular ones, i think that we can all agree some of them should be an official part of construct to begin with. Its just that someone will have to maintain them

I hope that this gets stabilized by the next stable release of construct2!

The 20-25% faster performance is a huge huge improvement!

do you guys think that construct2 should ship with nw.js as part of the installer? I dont understand why it is separate at the moment

Only Ashley knows

If the editor itself can run in localhost and allow for collaborative workflow (similar to superpowers game engine), that would make construct3 a great choice for game jam events!

That is another advantage of html5.

The trouble with that is that people would often mistake the proposal of such feature with locked monthly payment browser based game engine services. The proposal is for you to own the engine and to run it entirely from your hard drive, however be also able to locally host the editor itself (the way you can host a html5 game on localhost) and have other people contribute code and graphics to your game without the need of using dropbox,github and other third party services.

This sort of thing could be made without them needing to install anything, or it could be made in a way where they indeed need to have construct3 editor installed and licensed as well. In any case- it would elevate the editor to a new level that promotes collaboration on a project and makes it easy to set it up for team work. I see that as a huge advantage over many other game engines

The wrapper that scirra uses is open source. If Ashley or the other devs found a problem in it, a bug that affects the export, they could indeed propose a patch. Since of it's open source nature, nw.js also gets bug fixes and development from other projects that rely on it.

The only case where a fork would be needed is when scirra's wrapper needs code that makes it compatible only with construct2 and breaks for the other communities.

You go solo on the wrapper and then what? Suddenly you have only scirra developers working on the wrapper and all that open source community gone - your wrapper is actually being developed slower than nw.js since much less people are working on it, only C2 community using it.

So I dont understand why so many folks want scirra to make another wrapper instead of using and contributing to an open source one.

To give up on that in exchange for what? What would be the advantage of having another wrapper project developed solely for construct2, that is close source?

Ashley has answered to this before. It seems to be a common request.

There are other wrappers than nw.js that serve as native wrappers. Some html5 games engines have switched to electron:

http://tangiblejs.com/posts/nw-js-electron-compared

The field is very dynamic and at some point a technology might become outdated. I think that the current strategy is good- to keep construct compatible with a wrapper, however not make it depend on it in order to work.

What I would love to see is some sort of a script that automatically downloads and installs the wrapper for the user when it has been selected for an export option for the first time.

I wish native previewing wasnt dependent on a localhost server too.

yeah absolutely. I agree with you! I dont like "renting" the software and I dont want to have it be forced on me to be connected to some server. For that reason i dont like or use Stencyl.

But the case with superpowers is quite different. You own the software, it is on your computer- not somebody's server.

But since it is html5, you can also share your project on a localhost with others. It is in no way tied to some subscription model that some company is monetizing.

As far as I am aware the only way they are interested in monetizing it is the asset store, where developers get a cut from all sales they make.

But the files are on your hard drive, the software is on your hard drive, you dont need to be connected or signed in anything in order to use it. You just have the option to be the server. Your home computer can be the server for the developer team you have and its easy to get them to join you- they dont have to install anything.. Just open their web browser, connect to your localhost and type a password if need be. Presto, they are in the editor, its running in their web browser.

There are currently plenty of html5 editors coming out that try to keep hold on the server side and make the user pay for subscription. I think they will all fail because they are greedy and stupid. Their biggest selling point being flushed down the toilet. Developers dont like keeping their stuff on somebody's server they are forced to pay rent for.

cool stuff!!