>

>

> From 8 events to 4, and it was quick and simple, awesome!

>

Here is the same in just one event and one action:

Yeah. I don't think a lot of people know they can use expressions that way. It's a bit of a learning curve, but once you get used to it. You will reduce the amount of events a lot.

There should be some good tutorials on that, because you don't really stumble across it by chance unless you study the manual, and read up on expressions.

This can be done easily with expression? Expressions support "or" using the "|" sign.

You can use this kind of expression in a compare two values system condition.

(a = 1 & b = 5) | (a = 1 & b = 3)

= 1 returns true.

Here's an example:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0bq7jkr98pvig ... t.c3p?dl=1

That example is a scam, you're comparing accelerating physics calculations with collision detection to moving sprites in a linear Add 10 to Object.Y without any collision detection or acceleration, it'S smoke and mirrors and completely non functional.

Maybe not a good example but i think the point he wants to get across is to identify when and when not to use certain features such as physics. If you can do pretty much the same thing without physics and save a lot of CPU calculations then I would call that an optimization. Many people just go the lazy route and slap on behaviours such as physics when you can do similar things way more lightweight with events (depending on what you're trying to do) but sometimes there's no way around it.

I'm using a similar approach for the arrows in my game. Instead of checking collisions every tick for the arrows while in the air I'm just moving sprites.

When an arrow is fired, I make a very lightweight raycaster with events to calculate a line between player and where the arrow should land or collide. This happens in one tick. No need to check collisions every tick after this point, since I already know where the arrow will end up. After that I just move a dummy sprite from point A to point B. The arrow sprite follows this dummy sprite, and is offset in Y axis based on the distance travelled to simulate and arc.

So instead of checking collisions every tick, i just check it once in one tick, then just move objects accordingly.

One huge part of optimization is to determine when to use what, and If you can get a similar effect but simplified. Collisions can be very useful, but can also use a lot of CPU if you're not careful.

So its not a bad translation.

Actually 3d can be done without plugins. You would still need to add some custom js, but no plugins.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/osmnwshb7dl4zi5/custom_webgl2.capx?dl=1

Example made by R0j0, not me.

Updated the Original post with links to all the latest blog posts.

Construct 3, a year in review.

According to the latest post above we can expect to try it out pretty soon, and I can't wait to get my hands on it!

You can do it with events. I don't have access to C2 at the moment but here's a C3 example file that might help.

I guess it's something like this you want to do.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/s9xuhp432is67 ... p.c3p?dl=1

Seems like quite a few plugin developers have left the community, or are no longer supporting their old plugins. There's still quite a few popular ones that needs to be converted and I doubt that the Scirra team has time and manpower to do it all. And I doubt plugin developers are willing to do it for free.... soooo.... I was thinking...

I would gladly pay for someone to convert plugins I rely on so maybe an indiegogo, or gofundme campaign or something similar would be good to get some cash to pay for someone with the right skills to do the conversion?

* Is there any plugin devs on the forum, that has the skills, knowhow & time to do C3 versions, and feel they could do it if they got payed for their work?

* Is there any game devs on the forum that are willing to pay to get a C3 version?

Since it's a community after all, maybe if we all chip in, we can get the ball rolling if the only thing holding conversion back is financial. If we can get permissions from the original plugin creators to do a conversion of course, otherwize they should be built new from scratch, from available SDK's.

I don't mind paying for plugins that I feel are missing.

Maybe even a Patreon account also to be able to pay devs for maintenance of C3 plugins. If we as a Construct community could hire a full time developer to supply us with much needed plugins that would be awesome.

Any takers?

Here's some examples for inspiration that look a bit more rendered and "fun".

The gameplay is kind of fun, so people often don't even give it a chance if it doesn't look very fun.

Been playing the game for a few hours now and I thought it was pretty fun and quite addictive, but yes it's not perfect, so here's my feedback.

First of all, the theme itself about brain and depression etc is not very appealing, but maybe could be done appealing if it had some awesome graphics, but still it's a very odd concept. If you remade the game using some more traditional theme's like medieval, demons, zombies, military, that would be more appealing to many as it's part of popular culture. Gameplay is pretty solid, but graphics is and UI needs to be polished. Music and sounds effects are okay.

Gameplay wise, it takes forever to build up enough motivation to be able to pass the first 5 levels. I've been playing the whole morning, replaying the first four levels 20-30 times to get enough motivation. Motivation gain is way too low, and you get quite bored having to repeat levels over and over. I did level 1, maybe 15 times, because it was the fastest way to build up motivation to purchase upgrades. I've been playing 3 hours and still hasn't passed level 6. The game becomes more of a grind than strategic.

I still think it was quite fun though, but the things I don't like is the theme, the graphics, and UI. It just doesn't feel very appealing.

If you used the exact same gameplay levels and everything, and just changed the theme, and with some more polished graphics and UI I think a lot more people would find it interesting.

The beta versions have a different URL, e.g. editor.construct.net/r92 for the r92 beta. The stable release runs on editor.construct.net. If you bookmark/add to homescreen/otherwise load editor.construct.net, you're loading the latest stable release (currently r89). Then if you've opted in to get notifications about beta releases, you'll see a notification.

So currently it's all working as intended, but this question has come up a few times now, so I guess we ought to tweak it to make it better. Maybe stable releases should only prompt you about a new beta once?

I agree it's a bit annoying to always get the prompt, but don't know if there's any way around it.

I don't know if it's possible, but if the setting could be read before the stable loads you could be redirected directly without starting the stable first. I have no idea where this setting could be stored though, and how you go back to stable if the setting is already set to use beta. That setting would have to be read even before the stable starts so I think that would be problematic. Can a persistent cookie keep track of the setting and redirect you, depending on what the setting in the cookie is?

It’s getting a color off anywhere on the game canvas that’s not reliably possible with webgl without some changes to the runtime.

If it needs runtime changes maybe this can be added as a feature in C3 runtime Ashley ? This is a very useful feature to be able to get color and alpha values?

EDIT: It would probably work great with the new color feature, to be able to tint objects in runtime based on the value you're getting from an expression like this.

I'm not sure this is a bug. I think it's related to this issue.

When an object is created it doesn't really exist until the next top pevel event.