(Note: In case anyone's dumb enough not to notice Joe's sarcasm, they're actually giving a TBC price of £45 for Lite and £99 for Pro)
Ben: I think the way they've managed to implement so much stuff so quickly is thanks to DX9. MMF is software rendered, and I believe it's Clickteam's own engine. Construct just uses a premade graphics engine, so it's a huge lump of the work gone.
Peblo: As for movements, it's important to remember that you don't *have* to use the built-ins. However, if you choose to, then they will actually work. With the event logic like For Each, and While, Construct will be superior to MMF2 in building Custom Movements (i personally don't intend to use their platform movement unless it's AMAZING). Although I think some of that functionality may also be in the next major release of MMF.
Yes,quite interesting.And looking forward to give it a try.
Wondering how long it has taken to program so far ?
A little sureprised it is written by Tigerworks and Co
I'm looking forward to any changes they can pull of with the UI, and I've already suggested a few. Simply things like tabbing, ways to control Construct using keystrokes in preference to the mouse (I hate using the mouse for the coding aspect, since I'm less accurate with a mouse than I am with a keyboard).
Thankfully, I believe their expression editor has a more intuitive system than the 'retrieve data from an object' dialog. I think you can do javascript-like stuff, like type "My_Sprite." and have all properties and functions just drop down for you to select - so you can choose "My_Sprite.x" or "My_Sprite.Angle" and stuff like that. So it's more keyboard-based, but still prompts you for options.
191 / 9999 * 7 + 191 * 7
DaVince This fool just HAD to have a custom rating
Registered 04/09/2004
Points 7998
2nd July, 2007 at 06:05:10 -
So, internally it's more object-oriented, then? Coolness.
I do suggest using JS naming conventions for that though: sprite.angle rather than sprite.Angle.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
