Dress up game in anime style.

Features

• graphics in anime style
• 10 692 000 combinations of the appearance
• many unusual items
• cute cats

Game:

Play Online

Video:

Subscribe to Construct videos now

Screenshots:

Ashley

intel XDK and crosswalk 11 - it runs 40-45 fps on my mobile device.

The newest Intel XDK and the newest Crosswalk - it runs 45-46 fps on my mobile device.

Native APK - it runs 57-58 fps on my mobile device.

the problem you don't understand is that native export won't fix it.

IT WON'T FIX IT. repeat with me.. IT WON'T FIX IT. IT WON'T FIX IT. IT WON'T FIX IT.

Have you read the previous pages?

CPU bottlenecked games will work better.

Reapeat with me "CPU bottlenecked games will work better."

I have proved that CPU-bottlenecked games will work better with native exporters and even Ashlay agreed.

And now repeat with me: "I will not ever post anything until reading the previous pages". Repeat it three times.

you proved that 80% of games you and your voting friend made have problems with the cpu - that actually proves nothing

also you proved that 85% of your friends need native exporters... same as above

I don't feel like I have to prove anything. I don't like wrappers but fortunately i learned how to use them properly and I don't have currently any issues neither with gpu or cpu bottlenecking on desktops, browsers and even on mobiles. If something works perfectly fine on my crappy old mobile then it will work fine and even better on anything else

1. You have to prove that all of your games run 60 fps on every device - if at least 1% of all 177,817 registered users will say that your games run 60 fps on their devices, it will be enough.

2. You have to prove that you are not the only one, who creates such games - show me at least 1% from 177,817 registered users who create such games.

lennaert

I do not have time to post all the proves on every page.

Read the previous pages and you will find all of my proves.

I don't need to create any pools nor I care about that.

So far this post was seen by 13,874 "Second Constructors" but only a small few said they want native...

About 100 users said that they want native exporters.

Show me any topic where the number of vistors and the number of posts is the same.

And if you really don't care why are you still in this thread?

I have already proved that native exporters give much better performance than wrappers.

I have already proved that 80% games are CPU bottlenecked.

I have already proved taht 85% users need native exporters.

And there are no proves from people, who don't want native exporters.

I am really sorry, that I need to say that, but some of us begin to think, that people, who like wrappers, are just another account of Scirra's developers.

Show me any reason not to create voting about C3 features on scirra.com?

85% of 14 people that VOTED.

And how many people voted for wrapper? Zero.

How many people voted for any other improvement? Zero.

Show me any other voting about C3 that has more than 14 people that voted.

So it's like ~20 people from 177,817 registered users asks for native exporter?

85% of all developers need native exporters - I have proved it by creating voting on c2community.ru

If you want to prove, that on scirra.com the results will be different you have to create the voting on scirra.com.

If you will not do it - your words does not mean anything.

I have created thread about native exporters on c2community.com

The results of voting:

"Do you want native exporters?

1. Yes - 85%

2. No - 0%

3. I don't care - 15%"

My translation of russian developer's posts:

Construct 2 must have native exporters to make export more simple and independent from third party companies. Also it should greatly encrease the performance and compatibility with the platforms.

Native export is very important for me - independence and fast export.

Native export - and we caught Unity. And Ashley do not want to make native export because of laziness.

It is more easy just to change the interface of C3 than to write the complicated code of native exporters.

I think the problem is technical. All conditions and actions are translated into HTML5. Creation of native export means translation into many other languages, tests of it, many changes.

I can understand him, it's a plenty of work

nighttrolley, there was a very cool suggestion to cooperate with gameclosure, add export. Besides gameclosure switched the Space Blaster to their engine and described all the steps in their blog.

I think they are greedy. I don't understand their actions. I want to just forget)

As a developer, I think, I have to be friendly to users and to do what they want

paradine really speaks from all our community, because not all of us can express our opinion in English.

A agree that sometimes problems with export and performance are developer's mistakes.

It's another question. But it alsways takes many extra actions to export when we test our games.

It's not hard, but it takes much time and it's boring.

Also there is a dependence from third-party developers and restrictions of such exporters.

There is not enough performance sometimes.

Native export will make developer's lifes more comfortable. Construct was created for people who want to think only about gameplay. And, people who like extra problems, use accembler for your games - it will make you a true developer.

P - performance

I think, that non-native export is the first and the main problem of C2

There is a strange situation. You have a very nice editor and you can create games, but there is no opportunity to create the end-product. The only opportunity is to use third party products.

It's bad to depend from third party developers who don't care that you use C2

The third party developer can change his platform every moment and C2 games will loose the opportunity to be compiled.

Also there is a variety of problems with optimisations - also exporters work bad with physics.

The only remotely practical way to write a set of cross-platform native exporters would be to rely on some kind of existing framework or library, which... relies on third parties. I struggle to see why this is an argument for native exporters.

We understand it, but it is not the same. Now we depend on libraries, depend on Crosswalk, depend on Intel XDK, depend on relationships between Intel XDK and Crosswalk and so on.

With native exporters we will depend on libraries and Scirra only. And it's normal to depend on Scirra, because we pay money to Scirra, that is why Scirra is much more interested to make the exporters work well than Intel XDK and Crosswalk.

Also if Scirra's native exporter will show us bad result, Scirra should try to solve the problem.

And now, if I have problems with the export, the anwser is "exporters is not our problem, wait a few years and may be Intel XDK will try to make it better".

This contradicts what I've seen, and I've done profiling for some of the largest C2 games like Airscape. As ever, I am absolutely keen for anyone with poorly performing .capx files to send them to me (preferably in minimal form like a bug report) so I can optimise anything that needs to be. I repeat this with every thread that ever crops up like this, so I've said it a lot, and I am either sent nothing, sent games which are incredibly inefficiently designed, or games which are GPU-bottlenecked. So even if what you say is true, I'd be very interested to see any examples of that, because I almost never see them myself.

I have ALREADY posted such examples and you just ignored my posts.

You solved over 200 developer problems, for construct ? where ? With just 55 posts on this here forum with half of them being about extra features to make it more 'comfortable' for you .... I find this hard to believe.

For construct on

I have 1270 posts and 235 reputation points there.

When I help somebody, he can click plus-button and give me +1 to reputation.

May I ask how you came to those figures regarding the 20% being GPU bottlenecked ?

I have solved more than 200 problems of other developers. Many of them were about the performance.

Also I have created 4 my own games and 3 games are in development.

When I tried to make my games run 60 dps on PC and Android I had to reduce the number of particles, reduce some physics options, reduce some pathfinding options.

But I had no problems with GPU.

Also 80% of people who asked me to help them with the performance had CPU bottlenecked games.

If the Russian developers consider this hard, I can definitely say that the Russian developers are far from any professional level of programming and are unaware of the workloads involved with the finer aspects of their request.

In Russia we like comfort. It's not hard to spend time reading manuals and making hundreds of extra clicks, it's just boring.

I fill I understand why Steve Jobs sometimes became angry talking to his employees - do you really hate comfort?