Hey, just an interesting question I was thinking of, that might have been answered many times, but I just wanted to see what people would say for myself.
We are all 100% aware of the many people who complain about MMF's interface, regardless to its power, & we who actually deal with it, are those who actually know that the complex interface actually know that its 20x easyer then learning complex code, I mean all your doing here is getting used to an interface & your all set.
Here is my simple question though, if TGF did NOT come first, & MMF did, would we all still think TGF is better? Regardless to the fact that its nothing but a down grade to TGF. Now remember, if MMF came first, the interface would be easyer for us, because we would NOT be compairing it to a lower level program with a better interface, no, we would actually be compairing it to nothing but the complexity of code. So seeing as how easy MMF really is compaired to code, if TGF came after MMF, would the majority of us still say that TGF itself was better regardless to the fact that its alot less powerful?
If TGF came later, Clickteam probably was taken over by a bunch if baboons. MMF has a lot more power, so you can't really make the comparison.
Although, I still think TGF has a better interface. It was much easier and faster. MMF has a like, a 50 buttons, and I only use about 10 of them frequently. Also, you can't change the properties and qualifiers of objects at the same time in MMF, while it was possible in TGF. Although MMF exceeds TGF in power, making games in TGF is faster.
the point i am trying to make is, if MMF came before TGF, & it was the first to overall the ease of power, not TGF, would people complain about its interface?
Probably. People who whine seem simply not to use MMF enough. It has a lot of advantages and it takes like twenty minutes to get used to the interface. If I had to deal with a trickier interface in exchange for being able to make better games, I don't see the fucking boggle.
They dont want to code, regardless to the fact that its extremly powerful, they dont want to use MMF, again, regardless to its power, so they stay curlled up around TGF because they like the ease, regardless if its about maybe only 40% as powerful as MMF, if that!
I had to use TGF today to debug a friend's game, and it's even more horrible than I remembered. Worse of all, it's unstable as hell, it crashed three times while I was doing simple things such as editing events.
EDIT: There's more. On trying to import a rendered animation from 3D Studio, after rendering it as the obsolete FLI format, I've hit a shit thing where if I want to have a transparent background and keep the frame size (for hotspot purposes) I have to remove the background pixels by hand from every frame. Plus I have to place the hotspot on every fram by hand rather than ALT+Clicking. Also, it doesn't seem to support simple things we take for granted, such as Select All (Alt+A) and mouse wheel scrolling in the event editor, etc, plus every time you undo, you lose your fucking place in the picture editor.
Goddamn, how do people use this program? How did I ever use this program to make full programs? No wonder I had to restart the (originally coded in TGF) Zombies Now engine from scratch in MMF.
Then why do so many people complain about it so? To be honest, I like MMF's interface 10x better then TGFs! I'm shocked no one posted that they would use TGF, I mean there are so many people saying TGF this TGF that, to heck with MMF & so on. I'd like to get some one those people in here so we can see some real debates about it going on, because its basicly the people who choose power over ease, & the people who choose ease over power.
Though I can fairly say that once you get used to MMF, the only down side is working your way around some bugs that were still in TGF anyway, hopefully they fixed them in MMF2.0.
I prefer everything about MMF except the animation editor. When I farking select a frame and hit "Copy," then go to another animation, right click, and hit "Paste," I don't want it to the be freaking lottery as to whether or not my graphic actually copied. Still, only a small annoyance, as MMF is WAY more powerful than TGF.
If wishes were fishes then we'd all smell like ladies' underwear.
MMF is definitely more powerful and TGF doesn't even compare as far as coding goes. But there's also some really stupid stuff they did design-wise, like they wanted to discourage people from making games with it. For example if you want to lay down more than one backdrop tile, why do they make you select it over and over or copy and paste it, when in TGF you just had to right click? That annoys the crap out of me. And why do they punish you for trying to change the size of your canvas in the picture editor by making you go through like five steps, when in Games Factory you could do it in the same screen?
MMF is definitely more powerful, no argument there. And Games Factory's graphics editor really does suck. But it's FAST, and when you're spriting, speed is good. An animation that took me an hour in Games Factory would take a week in MMF. Same with level design, especially if it's something complicated.
Thus my solution is to use both programs and constantly port graphics and levels and stuff over.
Last time I had lobster, it reminded me of biology class. Except in biology class the professor didn't make you eat the frog when you were finished.
The reason why people complain about MMF so much, is simply because the people who used TGF first, don't know the new shortcuts.
Like Ben Berntsen for example: " why do they make you select it over and over or copy and paste it, when in TGF you just had to right click". He doesn't know that he has to hold control and drag the objects.
Also, did anyone notice that snapping to the grid is different from TGF? In TGF the active objects is placed depending on their hot spots. But in MMF, they always go to the CORNER of the animation of the object. That SUCKS!
Can you imagine the reactions if TGF came out after MMF? "Its slower! Where are my alterable values! Why can't I use half the cool extensions out there? Why can I only open one application at a time? Why is it so unstable? Why have they taken out half the useful shortcuts? What's the point in limiting to 256 objects?"
It would be ridiculous.
Some things definitely suck about MMF, but being a coder, I haven't even had TGF installed for years and I get on great with just MMF.
Yeay, I'm the first person to (completely) stick up for TGF in this thread.
Ahem... I own both programs, but I like TGF because when I'm clicking, the whole point of it is ease. If I'm focused on "coding power" then I wouldn't use click products at all, because at this point text coding is still more powerful that click-based creation. So why upgrade to less ease with more power? It's not the click way. It's not the way of our ancestors.
Note: I still like MMF a lot, perhaps I just need to get used to the interface. Perhaps.
n/a
DaVince This fool just HAD to have a custom rating
Registered 04/09/2004
Points 7998
28th December, 2004 at 06:30:42 -
I think that if TGF came later, it would have all the extra options the MMF of now has, but with the easier interface.
Also, did anyone ever get groups to work in TGF? i never could.. in fact they only seem to work when they want to in MMF, but thats better than not working at all
If MMF would have come before TGF a lot more people would have actually gotten to learn the MMF interface. Obviously there would have been some who would whine about it. Then when TGF would come people would probably be complaining about the simplicity of TGF's interface instead, because most would be kinda used to MMF.
At first I couldn't do shit with MMF, because of the different interface. But when I learned it I also learned that it is a beter interface than TGF's interface(imo). MMF's interface feels more like an actual game creation tool. Of course, the picture editor isn't much to shout for but since I'm using an external editor instead of the internal editor (always has, always will) it doesn't matter much.
The TGF interface could easily be updated with the functions of the MMF one. The essence would be the same. MMF seems like they tried making stuff easier but failed.
I've used MMF for more than a year and i know the shortcuts i need to and i still prefer the -interface- of TGF.
Another thing is this: For making global events you could just right click a group and in the options select it to be global. Now you have to switch event editors by going through a stupid project explorer or whatever.
Also, I've never had complaints about TGF being unstable. It never did anything like MMF's animation editor where you copy/paste and get nothing.
It's simple enough to explain why TGF users hate MMF's interface.
It's different. TGF was minimalist, MMF is the total opposite. TGF pretty much stayed in one viewport at a time, MMF can have lots of viewports, and does by default. It's not immediately obvious how to make it look more like TGF (although it is possible), so many people just give up and stick with what they know.
What's more, MMF does have a horridly buggy interface. We get used to avoiding the bugs because we use it often, just like if you get to know someone with some kind of deformity you tend to forget that they're different. When people come from TGF to MMF, they don't know how to avoid the bugs, so they keep bumping into them.
I remember this from when I first got MMF. I was at the forefront of MMF-bashing when it was in version 1.2, but when 1.5 came out I forced myself to use it for 2 weeks without opening TGF... and voila! I never went back to TGF again.
They just need to give MMF a chance to prove itself. By its nature, the bugs are more immediately noticable than its virtues.
You could say MMF is like one of those ugly people that once you get to know them is really sweet. Or is that too deep a comparison to use on the DC?
when 1.5 came out I forced myself to use it for 2 weeks without opening TGF... and voila! I never went back to TGF again.
Every TGF user who has done that, has said that.
However MMF's animation editor is one of the worst things Clickteam ever did. Trying to use it is like trying to open a baked beans tin by throwing crowbars at it. I do hope they improve it in MMF2. In fact, if I'm in the MMF2 beta, I will make it my personal mission to make the animation editor usable, and good.
Hmm... I wonder if some kind of customisable layout engine is possible? Like Firefox themes, you could download a new interface for MMF... I don't think that's been done in an app before.
3D Studio MAX has custom interfaces, which is good because each release the default interface seems to get worse, so someone releases a classic one.
I never really even had a problem with MMF's interface or animation editor when I finally got used to it. I recently had to go back to TGF, and it seemed a lot worse to me. Sure MMF has bugs, but they aren't stability issues like the ones that run rampant through TGF, random crashing being a main culprit.
To be honest, I think Dines explained it great, once you get used to dodging the bugs, you eventually forget that they're there because your basicly so used to being able to dodge them, how-ever people who are new to MMF are always bumping there head into them because they dont know where bugs are. Basicly its like a maze, once you find out where the traps are, you eventually find out that the maze is really easy, & once you find something easy, its hard to understand how hard it really was. Though to be honest, I dont ever remember having a hard time with MMF. I think its because I was so focused on the new features, that I never paid attention to the complex interface & now that I actually look back, its hard to think as a newbie to MMF, because the entire time you dont ever remember having a hard time, so you wonder why other people are.
Then there is the other example, just like Dines said, MMF can be compaired to as an ugly person, that once you get to know, you find them nice, but until you give them time to get to know them, you instently turn them down because of how they look, or in MMF's case, because of the interface.
Then there is the viewport issue, & in that case, I find MMF better then TGF because the viewports make it so easy to customize the interface exactly how you like it.
http://www.sitesled.com/members/diamond3d/mymmfwindow.jpg
/\Not the best example, but you get the idea/\
Not to mention the easyly customizable menus is something I could never get used to when I tried to use TGF again.
Basicly, what I hope for MMF2 is the same interface, only with a much less bugged interface, an improved image & animation editor & thats basicly it. Other then that, I dont think I could go back to the simple TGF interface again.
i think i remember that Clickteam can't just change MMF like they want due to IMSI owning shares or something along those lines. If MMF2 is made purely by them, they can probably make it more bug free. I mean, they got it right in KnP, and TGF (dunno about CnC) .. and those didn't have anything to do with IMSI..
Yes, Clickteam had to use the interface tools provided by IMSI (including all the crappy import filters and stuff you see in the Corel software). In MMF2 they're using their own stuff partly taken from Jamagic so the interface will be smoother and easier to use.
So basicly its not Clickteams fault MMF's interface is buggy, its the fact that IMSI wanted thinks there way, regardless to the fact that it was buggy. From the sound of it, because MMF2 apperently isnt using those, MMF2 should be ALOT better interface wise.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
