Okay, so it looks like this is maybe something that needs a little bit more discussion.
I am aware that this place is generally Pro-Clickteam, and I'm aware I've said things against Clickteam in the past. Maybe they have a good reason for being that way, I don't know. Personally I don't like the Clickteam guys that hang around on the forum that much at all, nor a lot of their fans. Maybe Yves & Co. who actually write the software are decent guys who genuinely get confused when trying to add new features. But either way, I don't think we should write off a games creation kit entirely just for those reasons.
But the fact still remains that MMF as it stands is awkward to use. The main thing is the lack of Global Qualifiers.
Now, I'm not saying that people should leave MMF altogether. However, until more features are added that make large scale projects easier, what alternatives should people like me who can't function without these features use?
Construct, all ethical issues aside, seems like a good alternative. I know you have issues with those guys, many of which are likely imagined, so let's try not to bring them up. But how feasible is it as an MMF alternative? I want to give it a go, but what I like about MMF, currently, is that it can run easily under WINE and also has a Java version.
What's Game Maker like? Blitzbasic?
What other game makers are out there, and what game making communities? It would be nice if there was a large, friendly, MATURE helpful non-method specific homebrewn gaming community. Does anyone know of such a thing? They would likely take a less biased, more objective view and give good recommendations.
My main issue along with other people is that in programming languages, I can't wrap my head around the level editor. I get loading and saving to arrays in Python, C etc. and having each point correspond to a tile which is loaded at runtime, but I can't understand how to actually show it WHILE you're placing the tiles. This limits my option considerably. The thing is that I often do "Messy" level design even for games with retro graphics. I find it hard to get what I want from a tile based approach. This makes the MMF frame editor ieal.
I want to make a seemingly simple Megaman-style game right now that will have some gimmicks that may end up with a lot of complex events that could include a lot of awkward qualifiers. Ideally for me, it would be best if they simply added some decent work around for global qualifiers and fixed up some of the other issues(I really wish they'd add the ability to detect collisions on certain areas for example, like Mugen). But as some people have "Ethical" problems with Construct, I have similar issues with Clickteam. But like I said, this doesn't make me discount the software entirely.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
At the moment Construct is as buggy as sin, but also as far as I'm aware it's been released as an open source public beta. It does offer some new ideas though. Bear in mind that I think it's also being created by a group of students who seem to know exactly what they want, but also are open to new ideas. They have no commercial obligation anymore since they are not allowed to sell Construct, so they can probably implement just about any feature suggested to them at their own time and expense if they so wish.
Morally I feel obliged to side with Clickteam and have to wonder exactly what your personal issue is with the Clickteam guys besides them not incorporating the feature you ask for (they probably will include Global Qualifiers in a later build at some point I should think) but they are also busy people and will simply not be able to please everyone. I've got my own ideas for improvements but I'm not in a position to bother Clickteam about them - if people know whats on the software then it's their choice as to whether or not they want to buy it.
I have to say I'm not sure exactly what the other products are like as I've never used them and generally most people here probably won't have a problem with you using them. I think there are other game making communities such as the Xbox Live Arcade Developer Group (can't remember the URL off hand), you can download software free to make games but if you wanted to make Xbox Live games you would be charged. I also remember www.gamingworld.net being a community, not sure if its there anymore.
Well, I think I had good experience with him in the past. I just don't like Jeff's way of arguing, which is making a series of unbacked statements that are generally quite authoritarian or conservative in nature. While I am aggressive people who simply do not listen to reason are a much bigger problem. It drives me mad and makes me want to not use MMF, even though I know that's kind of immature. But at the same time I can't help feel it's a lack of grasping things like this that's led to them not bothering with global qualifiers. They really need to listen to their fans more.
I still really like MMF and would rather not switch yet. I just wish it was more usuable.
OOI are there any extension developers on this forum? I came up with an idea to have global qualifiers through an extension.
Edited by the Author.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Didn't read all that-- but why does everyone hate click products and clickteam so much? Always asking for alternatives and complaining about features... I still use tgf and it's powerful enough for a ton of stuff! (And don't you dare accuse me of making simple games) As most internet communities go, the click one is very friendly and mature. Now TDC's community is a bit wack, but they're alot nicer than most and they'll help ya. I just don't understand the hate for clickteam. I love 'em!
It's not just an issue of "simple" games but what level of complexity you're using in what area. For instance TGF at least the older versions cannot do any kind of parallax scrolling. I was one of the first people to insist on using the background system object. I love Layers but they've been 10 years coming.
Because TGF is sufficient for your needs does not mean the slightly more advanced MMF is good enough for everyone.
I loved TGF to bits when I had it. It was a great piece of software for it's time, I just feel they developed the technology far too slowly and poorly. I was fine with no parallaxing because I believe they'd add a workaround in a future version. I remember Multimedia Fusion being announced and was SURE they would. Apart from Layers there hasn't been many huge overhauls.
I just still feel let down. I've stuck with Clickteam for 12 years and I don't see given that amount of time and the amount of money I've given them, that it's okay for them just to ignore the need for basic functionality like global qualifiers and some kind of collision mask extension so we don't have to mess around with extra active obejcts.
If we could get some extension developers on it, it'd be great.
Edited by the Author.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
I think that Clickteam's very own Jeff Vance is a top bloke. I raced a few times with him online and he bought me a spolier for my kart. Incredible >>>
[quote]Clickteam and have to wonder exactly what your personal issue is with the Clickteam guys besides them not incorporating the feature you ask for (they probably will include Global Qualifiers in a later build at some point I should think)[/quote]
It's not some minor trick that I need for my game, it's something 90% of MMF users could really do with, and a good portion literally need. For me It's a bottleneck on the level of complexity than an MMF game can have.
It's not a minor feature, making it into a personal thing just I want doesn't really help the issue. They took long enough to add layers too.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
MMF is the most powerful game creation system available that does not use code. I have researched it for literally years. It has the best layout. And frankly, I'm getting sick of users popping in to say how much MMF doesn't work. Parallax scrolling, for the record, is possible in TGF. I think this topic does NOT need more discussion, as you said; it's been discussed to death and it never gets anywhere. Not trying to be mean, but It's really getting on my nerves!
But global qualifiers is an essential feature for many of us, and strongly desired by the rest!
That alone is a good enough reason for this to be discussed - if it's not- then Clickteam won't think it's an essential feature! It doesn't matter if the discussion doesn't get anywhere, only that it's discussed.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Sure seems like a minor thing when everyone else have made do with out it for years... And not requested it
It would be nice to have, indeed. But if you try a different approach you can surely get the same results.
For example, I was programing some flash(actionscript) some weeks ago, I had 100 lines doing something simple, but I re thought how I did it and now it is 10 lines. Same goes for mmf.
Anything you can program with Even maths, there are different approaches.
And I don't know much about the other products...
And about the extension idea I haven't read it but seems unneeded if you ask me(Extension dev).
Sure seems like a minor thing when everyone else have made do with out it for years... And not requested it
I honestly have no idea why that is. I'm guessing people just aren't very assertive. But looking conceptually at game making in MMF it IS a feature that you need. Code re-use is one of the things that in software engineering, you are meant to cut down on. Not having global qualifiers is inherently poor practice, because either way you will have to copy paste, either for objects in a group or for groups on each frame.
Apart from making your own level editor which is not very practical for most of us, there are no other work arounds.
Plus, what features do get asked for on a regular basis? There are no common trends of what's asked for. This is probably the most common.
Being able to use the same events for every frame is not a "minor" thing, no matter how few people ask for it.
Edited by the Author.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
"Being able to use the same events for every frame is not a "minor" thing, no matter how few people ask for it. "
Global events..
"Code re-use is one of the things that in software engineering, you are meant to cut down on."
Cut down on? :S Code re-use is one of the things you want to do...
Polish your coding skills and you will get there, don't blame the software, I mean, there is one person who made a fully working mega man movement in 2 events
It would be nice to have, and it might come in a future build, the rumor is that the request list of features is a mile long.. with font size 10
My coding skills will not make any difference. There is no way to code in Global Qualifiers once they're absent. Do you not realise what is being talked about?
It is cutting down on Code Re-use. For example, if I want to use Qualifiers, I have to copy and paste any events with Qualifiers into every frame. Conversely, if I choose not to use Qualifiers at all, I will have to copy and paste every event multiple times for example with each enemy, instead of just using Group.Bad to test for the event. I cannot test for object groups in Global Events. Meaning in a game like the ones I'm developing which have many enemies and objects that act similarly to one another, it gets awkward
There is no clever way of coding around this, it is a limitation that is built in. You have to either copy and paste or create your own level editor and keep every single event in the same frame.
Edited by the Author.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Advertisement
Edited by the Author.
Even maths, there are different approaches.
