Ashley? Anyone? I'd really appreciate to know if this is a bug on my side or Arcade's. Has anyone uploaded a game since 151.2?

As in the title, despite it isn't. I'm getting this:

All arcade submissions must be made with the latest release of Construct 2. The current latest release can be downloaded from here:

Download Construct 2 r151.2

Please download the latest release and re-export your project and try again!

But I have reexported it with 151.2, twice now. Am I doing something wrong?

I so much love the idea of using bitcoins for that. That's so future and geeky. :)

Anyway, it would be interesting to see what others think about it: so do you think there ARE benefits to writing text code for a simple game instead of using Construct 2, if we leave out performance issues?

I have doubts about it. I majored in ENGLISH, and many years ago there was a rancorous debate at my university about whether paper dictionaries (vs. software ones) were still good for anything. There was a collective of conservatists who advocated them as being 'more reliable', 'having more soul' or 'useful during power outages' but in the end their point was just impossible to defend.

Software dictionaries are just much quicker and convenient, end of story. Similarly, I somehow feel that in terms of developing (simple?) games, tools like Construct 2 may have the potential of becoming what Visual Studio is to coding in Notepad or even what Windows is to DOS. Would you agree?

Wow, replies. So, well, I definitely wasn't narcisstic nor comparing my skills to others. And where did that come from? I wrote that you don't have to be anything special to learn to code. I was generally addressing those who say they C2 saved them because they couldn't (or wouldn't) learn to code, and just wanted to point out that it's not that hard as some people make it to be.

Then, at no point did I say that you should learn to code. Actually I was driving at the fact that developing games in C2 does constitute programming and I still stand by this.

Some programmers like to think that what they do is based on extremely advanced technical know-how and dislike the idea of letting "ordinary people" develop games/apps/software. That is why you hear a lot of 'yeah, but you should learn a real programming language.' But times change. Just as in photography, where you no longer need a great set of skills, expensive equpiment, a lightroom etc. to snap a picture, the future of coding may lay in easy-to-use tools. Surely enough, the revolution in photography resulted in an unbelievable amount of crap produced by random wannabes, kids, and those who don't care, but that's part of the package. A photographer saying that no one ever made a good photograph with Instagram does sound a bit self-assertive, doesn't s/he?

Overall, accessibility is a good thing.

Scirra does a bit of hedging by stating that C2 lets the 'advanced' guys sketch out ideas quickly. I would say that in many cases it's a fully self-sufficient solution. And frankly, when the performance improves and making mobile games becomes viable I see no reason to code anything 'the old fashioned way.'

[Edit: 'anything' meaning 'anything that can be made in C2 instead]

Reading the thread about one game engine vs another it is hard not to notice how important it is for people that you don't have to code in C2. Hanging around this forum you surely see a lot of variations of this: "C2 is great because it allows artists to create games". The word 'artist' is apparently used as a synonym for 'a creative person who sucks at coding.'

I would just like to point out two things for those who begin their adventure with software development here.

First, C2 really is remarkably more accessible than any code based tool. That said, most people think of coding as some kind of an arcane art available to master for the chosen and the talented. That's completely not the case. If you jump right into the middle of a C handbook and try to wrap your head around memory management, pointers and the like then sure, you can get discouraged pretty easily. But to write a 2d game in Basic or Python is really not that big a deal. Actually it is pretty similar to working in C2 once you get the hang of it. Which leads to the second thing...

You are already coding in C2. You may be using menus and icons to interact with the engine but you do the same things any programmer does 90% of the time. If you know how to use variables, loops and functions in C2 then you know how to program. If you are smart enough to master advanced graphics software and C2 then you are also smart enough to program. Just get a good online course/book for a high level programming language and you're good to go.

Look, there are at least hundreds of thousands of programmers in the world, and only a handful are math geniuses. Most are normal people who just learned it at some point and carried on exploring. It's way easier than learning to play the piano, for example. So if you feel that you 'are an artist but can't code' then this is a self imposed limit.

Being unable to code is not like an intrinsic quality you can't do anything about. It is probably easier than you think. It may not be that necessary when modern tools like C2 are around but if you want... you can do that!

Ps. I can code. But I still love C2.

I really dig the idea of being able to copy an object along with its individual actions to another project. That's awesome, you could code a whole sort of a game engine and reuse it.

On the other hand I don't think it could make the code even harder to follow. While I liked coding in Flash it sometimes almost drove me crazy when I forgot where did I put a piece of code that was doing something and had to go around opening various MovieClips and frames muttering 'here? no. maybe here? nope. HERE? no. sh***tttt".

So I don't know about this.

ps.

Darklinki 10 000 events??? wow.

An interesting take on Arkanoid, but I think you need to add a lot of stuff to it to make it stand out.

Also I agree that the paddle is somehow "too heavy" and steers like an oil ship. Should be lighter and responsive, but that's just an opinion.

I like the retro feel :)

arh Yup I love the art too. Especially the top-down images. I'd really like to play that :)

Genius! I would never have thought of that. Still, I thought function parameters are passed immediately no matter what and stay there, as in normal programming.

I'll use variables to get around this, thanks!

Hi. I'm at a loss here. I have used functions in a similar way before so I'm not sure if I'm missing something here or doing something completely wrong or is this a bug.

Maybe it just needs some fresh eyes.

So, version 1 works, the sprite is spawned as expected.

Version 2 doesn't work, the object is spawned somewhere outside the canvas (0,0 perhaps).

<img src="http://s13.postimg.org/d21tpt7tz/functionerror.png" border="0" />

Any ideas?

I love this! You got the retro atmosphere perfectly. Also, very clean graphics.

My suggestion is to add an upwards shot so that it is possible to blow the little bastards from below. :)