newt's Forum Posts

  • When you create an object it is picked, so you can go on in and meander making things, and talking about them without having to pick them.

    It works well when you need to create a lot of new objects at one time, like in tile games, or bullet hells, or even particle like fx.

    Yes I agree that we could use something more to deal with objects that aren't picked by conditions. We do have indexing, but its still limited, as it can only work on certain aspects.

    Perhaps something similar to containers with an index, but without the disadvantages of only existing with the other objects.

    Like the family trick with indexing maybe. In that primis I think that it would be better served if such a thing had no conditions like a family, just references in actions.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • One method you could try is something like the opposite of an object pool.

    You use the features of object creation with its implicit picking.

    Obviously it wouldn't work for everything, as you would need to destroy objects to make it viable, but you can manipulate as many objects as you need, one at a time.

  • You're warning other devs, but that's probably where the new one came from.

    These platforms do little if any vetting, and the game is not that complex.

    I would give the theft by an individual a much higher probability than an established company purposely breaking the law.

    Best advice, make a DMCA notice, and get a lawyer if it stays up.

    https://www.whoishostingthis.com/resources/dmca/

  • Ok.

    Im saying please prove what you are saying.

  • Ok, then sue em.

    Then tell us about it.

    Forum rants with no proof are completely useless.

  • You mean they cloned it when you declined to license it.

    It's a pretty standard practice for something that can't be patented, or given copywrite.

    The fact that they asked to license it is what is extra ordinary.

  • Nice way to play with qarp, or cubic.

  • I noticed that 257.3 did export normally if I exported an empty project.

  • It's just snakes.

  • I've noticed the grayed out "Add Frame" happening at other times as well.

  • Appears to be fixed in 258.

  • https://www.dropbox.com/s/86m58jt96x9vu ... 9.png?dl=0

    Its doing this on two seperate systems, and I can replicate it by simply adding a sprite to an empty project.

    One system has a recently updated Java 8, the other was still on 7, but continued to get the error after uninstalling it, and updating to 8.

    There are no errors when using 256.

  • Problem Description

    The export is failing to minifi

    Attach a Capx

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/bpcy3i2lrx55s ... .capx?dl=0

    Description of Capx

    Empty project with Browser object

    Steps to Reproduce Bug

    • Export to html5
    • Make sure its set to minifi
    • Note popup of failure notice

    Observed Result

    No minification

    Expected Result

    Minification

    Affected Browsers

    • Chrome: (YES/NO)
    • FireFox: (YES/NO)
    • Internet Explorer: (YES/NO)

    Operating System and Service Pack

    ____ Your operating system and service pack ____

    Construct 2 Version ID

    257.3

  • Chowdren only implements a subset of the Construct 2 runtime, and has the luxury of not having to support ALL of the games made for Construct 2. Doing this for the entire Construct 2 runtime and maintaining compatibility with existing games would take a long time for Scirra, and wouldn't be a good investment.

    The current Construct 2 runtime is great, fulfills the needs of a typical user, and is simple to extend because of Javascript. Chowdren is a great solution for advanced users, but is probably not well-suited for your typical user.

    Phacanu

    I'm not trying to split hairs, I'm just going from the information given.

  • > Ok, so basically it's like Cocoon in that it drops support for some things.

    > I can live with that.

    >

    > It does piss me off a bit that you can optimise some standard features, and I can't even ask such upgrades to C2, even if they could make them.

    >

    > Anyways, again, good luck.

    >

    That's...not really what it is. Like at all.

    Sure, from your limited perspective.