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 -
It can't be that much of a pain to copy and paste, can it? If, as you say, you develop from a conceptual point of view, you're likely organized and put things in groups. Just copy-paste the group! If you're developing a "larger scale project" likely each level takes awhile anyway, so what's ten seconds of copy-paste? I don't understand why such a trivial thing is such a big deal.
Because one of the principles of good software design is cutting down on Code Re-use. I have been doing that and it's just irritating to keep everything updated. I need level specific events as well as global events, and often seperating the two in this manner is difficult. I need to copy and paste the global events every time I switch to a different level. It's aggrivating.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Roseweave is right, although it is more commonly referred to as Object Oriented programming. If you need to change code used in every level, would you rather change it just once, or once for every level?
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
What I do is put all new stuff into my test level. From there, I refine the code in the frame editor as I need and keep it all nicely grouped so I can just disable all duplicated code. After refining the code as needed, I copy it, and then add it to that object's behaviors. This effectively makes my test level an internal library; I don't need to put the objects there in any other frame. All I have to do then is have an event that spawns the object.
This way, I can use the frame editor for making events that relate to the actual frame.
What's best about this method is that all the references to qualifiers stay intact, so they basically become global qualifiers. The most work that's required, from what I know, is maintaining the list of qualifiers so you don't accidentally have elevators being death zones.
Originally Posted by OldManClayton It can't be that much of a pain to copy and paste, can it? If, as you say, you develop from a conceptual point of view, you're likely organized and put things in groups. Just copy-paste the group! If you're developing a "larger scale project" likely each level takes awhile anyway, so what's ten seconds of copy-paste? I don't understand why such a trivial thing is such a big deal.
That's exactly what I'm doing. I have about 150 level frames now and 1 giant Global group (thanks subgroups too) with a version number attached to it, and with specific level-only events underneath. It's not hard to use really. I'd like Global Qualifiers but editing the current Global events takes a very long time and makes fluid coding in there impossible. However it only takes me around 2 minutes of Del, CTRL+V, Right arrow key to upgrade the engine to all frames. If I update the engine every week then it's only 2 minutes out of 10,080.
Workaround for Global Qualifiers:
-Make an Active Object
-Give it a behavior. It can have qualifiers.
-Make the object global so when you change its behavior it will be automatically updated in all frames.
-Add this object to any frame you wish.
The problem is that I'm bad at keeping track of every change I make. Everytime you switch levels, you need to copy and paste. I guess it depends on how you make your game - if you're more focused you can stay in the same level and keep track of every change you've made. For me I'll forgot what events I've shoved in global and which in the level events, etc., and get generally confused. There was one other issue with this I forget.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Workaround for Global Qualifiers:
-Make an Active Object
-Give it a behavior. It can have qualifiers.
-Make the object global so when you change its behavior it will be automatically updated in all frames.
-Add this object to any frame you wish.
"Cannot paste the vents: the origin events contain references to a qualifier."
I'm using build 241 though I think, has this been changed in a later build? Or are you using MMF 1.5?
Edited by the Author.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
didnt want to take the time to read all those long winded posts. maybe later.
but on chris' statement that "construct is as buggy as sin". when was the last time you actually tried construct? it has come a long way and only has minor bugs and unfinished/yet-to-be-added features. the only thing stopping me from using it over clickteam products (which i will most likely still use) is that i am waiting for the official v1.0.0 release and all its documentation. until then i'll continue to download the latest builds and play around with new features, report bugs, and read/post on the forums. it HAS been released as an open source public beta and has been for quite some time.
on the other hand there is nothing wrong with the clickteams products except that they cost so much and are progressing as slow as a snail. if clickteam worked as well and as fast as construct is heading they'd have one hell of a better product.
its just a matter of opinion though. if you dont like a product then dont buy it. its as simple as that. theres plenty of others you can use.
@liji - that link goes to a non existing thread. also if it was illegal, legal action would have ended it already. stop posting that.
That's the thing. People go on about the "ethical" issues of Construct, but what about the fact Clickteam have made 2 retail releases offering relatively minor updates?
Since we're not buying the software as is, but are buying something that we can only hope is upgraded to our specification through extensions etc., it's complicated. But I feel they're taking advantage of us here.
It is amazing how much quicker Construct moves. These guys don't make loads of money. Yet their rate of development is several times Clickteam's. I just don't see the excuse for Clickteam's laziness.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Originally Posted by -Adam- Clickteam aren't lazy at all. Very hard working guys, actually
Please back this up with an example. Because comparing their output to Construct or other game makers their output seems fairly low. Or at least badly prioritise - were HWA and Java really that necessary before Global Qualifiers? These seem like big features but remember that projects like construct often work at several similar features at the same time and do so with a less experienced team that don't get paid except through donations.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Originally Posted by OldManClayton Construct has a bigger team. I would say more but typing on the wii takes ages.
That's pretty irrelevant - Clickteam can more than afford to take new people on or at least encourage more extension developers, for example through contests. There are probably people who would be more than willing to work on these features for a small lump sum.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Originally Posted by OldManClayton Construct has a bigger team. I would say more but typing on the wii takes ages.
im under the impression that construct is pretty much one person. ashley. there are a couple other major people helping himm and i'd say its about the same size as clickteams team. its ashley thats doing almost everything though, with a very helpful userbase that is helping him, suggesting things, testing, reporting bugs, information, etc. thats why its moving so fast, cause ashley is on the forums almost everyday, reading all the reports, threads, responding, adding, and fixing everything he possibly can.
*sigh* I just wrote a post with a lot of swear words and some very valid points. But.. as an admin on TDC, I can't get myself to post that. My personal opinion will stay off the forum and if anyone wants to know why I hate Clickteam, feel free to PM me. Roseweave has a point and plenty of you people are making fools of yourself by making up facts that are obviously false.
MMF is supported entirely by the klik community. Clickteam sells an expensive product to a very narrow user base, which also supports its marketing and customer support at no cost to Clickteam. If TDC dies or suddenly becomes an indie site, I'm willing to bet some money that in 5 years, Clickteam would go bankrupt. That's the way the games industry works.
So, Roseweave, avoid this topic. Some of us agree with you, so don't try to convince the rest otherwise. It doesn't help anyone. If you don't like it, buy it, just to support them to make better software. I know I won't, because it's the responsibility of everyone else with a lot of money to donate huge sums of money to them, including the ones who have pirated versions of MMF.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I guess I don't really understand the hate for clickteam. They are slow to add new features and stuff but I don't find their product expensive. $100 for mmf2 is a small price to pay for the unbelievable amount of time I have spent using their software. There also seems to be a small userbase for their products as compared to other software that sells millions upon millions of copies at much higher cost. I don't know much about construct (or why it's illegal that link didn't work) but I would gladly welcome competition to the gamemaking program industry. I don't see that every really happening though. The userbase for these programs is barely big enough to support one company much less 2 splitting profit.
If anyone could do it better than Clickteam they would have. That's how business works. But since they've had pretty much a hold on this area for the last 15 years, they must be doing something right.
So that's my 2 cents - but as I said I don't really know all the politics behind this argument, and even if I did, as I said, there really isn't an alternative to mmf2 anyway.
Originally Posted by JustinC If anyone could do it better than Clickteam they would have.
Construct? Oh, but it's illegal because it copies MMF's patented & copyrighted interface
$100 is not a small price, unless you live in some country with very high wages. $100 is a month's pay as a research assistant in my country, not including transportation and living costs. A person can really learn to hate something that he starved on for a month to buy and then find out that it's pretty much the same as the previous thing he also bought
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
were HWA and Java really that necessary before Global Qualifiers?
Yes they were. There are 3 good workarounds for qualifiers. From my understanding (which is not much) Global qualifiers are not possible without completely redoing MMF2 where as HWA (which was needed very badly) wont be nearly as difficult to add to MMF2.
I dislike this limitation just as much as you do but i was aware of it before i bought the software. It's not like click team didn't release a demo.
If you are upset over the lack of improvement/price, then you should do what I do. Skip every other generations.
Originally Posted by JustinC If anyone could do it better than Clickteam they would have.
Construct? Oh, but it's illegal because it copies MMF's patented & copyrighted interface
$100 is not a small price, unless you live in some country with very high wages. $100 is a month's pay as a research assistant in my country, not including transportation and living costs. A person can really learn to hate something that he starved on for a month to buy and then find out that it's pretty much the same as the previous thing he also bought
Or you could just use something that is completely free.
Originally Posted by RoseweaveI wish I could understand what Adam Phant is saying... I think he's talking more about the frame editor than event editor though.
I said the same thing LIJI said, just in a more verbose rambling way.
Originally Posted by JustinC If anyone could do it better than Clickteam they would have.
Construct? Oh, but it's illegal because it copies MMF's patented & copyrighted interface
$100 is not a small price, unless you live in some country with very high wages. $100 is a month's pay as a research assistant in my country, not including transportation and living costs. A person can really learn to hate something that he starved on for a month to buy and then find out that it's pretty much the same as the previous thing he also bought
Just for comparison:
Adobe Creative Suite costs $3000.
$100 is a VERY low price for a powerful software as MMF2. And, to add more on this, Clickteam offers effective discounts for people owning previous versions. And even more, if even THAT is too expensive for you, they even offer a cheaper and more limited version of the software named TGF2.
Moreover, MMF2 has tons of new features against MMF1.5. And if you are disappointed with it, you should have tried the demo because that's the reason it's there.
Clickteam has thought about the Click interface and idea in 1994 and worked hard and kept improving it constantly until today. (And people saying MMF2 is nothing new against MMF1.5 are talking purely CRAP.) More than that, they keep providing free updates to ANYONE who legally own this product ranging from simple new objects to major core functions such as Java runtime and HWA. Again: All that for free.
But suddenly these Construct guys pop out of nowhere and shamelessly clone ANY unique feature the Click range had for ages, the features that Clickteam has been working hard on for ages and thought about them by themselves, not other hard-working people.
People who still support an illegal product such as Construct despite of these facts are completely insane idiots. There's no justification for ANY of Construct's actions on this subject or any of their illegal actions that I've mentioned in previous topics. I'd like to hear Mrs. Ashely justification on this one.
But suddenly these Construct guys pop out of nowhere and shamelessly clone ANY unique feature the Click range had for ages, the features that Clickteam has been working hard on for ages and thought about them by themselves, not other hard-working people.
People who still support an illegal product such as Construct despite of these facts are completely insane idiots. There's no justification for ANY of Construct's actions on this subject or any of their illegal actions that I've mentioned in previous topics. I'd like to hear Mrs. Ashely justification on this one.
Reinventing the wheel is silly. Using an existing interface as a basis for your own has been something that's been done for years. We could apply the "cloned unique features" bit to virtually any digital graphics program, any non-linear editor, or even 3D software. Heck, just to stretch the bounds for emphasis, I could throw in syntax editors for programming languages.
Now, don't take this as me supporting one side or the other, I'm simply making a point of reference from a developer's standpoint.
At the end of the day, Construct is still in beta and until it is out of beta I can't see anybody using it to make a game.
And LIJI, I doubt people will base their choice of product based upon the actions of the developers themselves. I see where you're coming from, but I think people would rather think about the quality and price of a product, than whether the product itself is illegal.
Though I still don't see why what they have done is actually illegal. Unless Clickteam have a patent in place, I'm pretty sure that the only thing protecting them is copyright which doesn't actually protect how the product is created or made. Feel free to correct me on that if I'm wrong. And I know you say that they tried hacking Clickteam's servers or something - but that still doesn't make the product itself illegal (though I agree I wouldn't want to support a company who carries out those actions, if the allegations are true anyway).
I think CT vs Scirra discussions should be banned from the forums, as much as Next gen console debate threads should be, too. The same points are said, over and over, there's very little point to these threads.
Originally Posted by -Adam- I think CT vs Scirra discussions should be banned from the forums, as much as Next gen console debate threads should be, too. The same points are said, over and over, there's very little point to these threads.
I agree, but sometimes it can be good to discuss stuff like this (plus people might see it as censorship, which would probably get them all angry and stuff)
$100 for mmf2 is a small price to pay for the unbelievable amount of time I have spent using their software.</quote]
But add on top of that the cost you no doubt paid for MMF1 and 1.5 Even though you get an upgrade discount, it's still very small. It should have been 75% off, not 75% of the cost.
I dislike this limitation just as much as you do but i was aware of it before i bought the software. It's not like click team didn't release a demo.
The problem is a lot of features get added in later. With MMF2 I wasn't buying it as is, I was buying it with the expectation it would be expanded like others have been in the past. Also, I had no reason to believe they'd remove the old workaround for global qualifiers.
Just for comparison:
Adobe Creative Suite costs $3000.
$100 is a VERY low price for a powerful software as MMF2.
It's not really fair to compare a professional product with a huge team behind it to MMF which is really a rather simple tool that's been built up over the period of 14 or so years. Even though a small amount of professional games are made in MMF, it's still not a professional level product.
And, to add more on this, Clickteam offers effective discounts for people owning previous versions. And even more, if even THAT is too expensive for you, they even offer a cheaper and more limited version of the software named TGF2.
Why would I want to upgrade to a more limited version? Seriously, TGF2 doesn't have extensions. And the discounts are tiny given the amount of features that are actually added.
Moreover, MMF2 has tons of new features against MMF1.5. And if you are disappointed with it, you should have tried the demo because that's the reason it's there.
I'm disappointed because I thought they'd really develop it like they did with MMF1. MMF1 was awkward and terrible with it's first version but gradually became a lot more usable.
(And people saying MMF2 is nothing new against MMF1.5 are talking purely CRAP.)
I'm not saying it has nothing new. I'm saying the features are not worth even the upgrade discount cost. Java and HWA are definitely an improvement and I commend them for adding those features but really HWA is something that should have been done long ago in this day and age.
More than that, they keep providing free updates to ANYONE who legally own this product ranging from simple new objects to major core functions such as Java runtime and HWA. Again: All that for free.
Um, so? There are tons of other companies that offer free patches and updates offering new features. Valve for example are adding a bunch of new features to TF2 pretty soon. With Game Maker or Construct, you get loads of new updates for free too.
I mean really, how many companies do you see with the cheek to sell a "1.5" version product at near full price?
People who still support an illegal product such as Construct despite of these facts are completely insane idiots.
Construct is not an illegal product. You provided evidence for one of the people developing it engaging in very questionable activities, but that does not make the software itsef illegal.
I think CT vs Scirra discussions should be banned from the forums,
In terms of THIS SHIT IS ILLEGAL stuff, I'd agree with you. On terms of the merits of Construct which is similar to a click product and therefore should be relevant to our interests, and weighing up the merits of it against the merits of MMF, then no, that would be silly to ban.
This is a Click community. No place for these Scirra theft guys here!
But if the software is as similar as you say wouldn't it be relevant to our interests? I don't like the idea of a forum dedicated entire to one company. It makes more sense to be dedicated to Click-based game creation in general.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
I have always supported Clickteam, I like how they're very in-touch with their user-base etc. And I've been using Click software for a while now - unlike a lot of people I went from TGF to MMF2 (to MMF2Dev after the Xmas comp) so I haven't seen how similar 1.5 is or isn't.
Global qualifiers are needed by a select group of people - where-as more people are after HWA and Java and as a small team (hardworking or not) they can't make everything at once. They did just release another update today with a big list of fixes and changes, so they do listen and will eventually put things in.
As far as Construct goes, it's a good application it but it lacks the polish and stability of MMF. MMF just feels like it isn't going to shut down at any second, Construct has a shiny interface and it pulls people in until you do something trivial like select 5 objects to move and it crashes. It does however have some very nice features that people have asked for from Clickteam before and the developers seem to work very quickly too. Right now, in my eyes anyway, it isn't a viable alternative to MMF or to any other game creation software - once it hits the big 1.0 that might all change however.
I always told myself (and I intend to stay true to it) that when I move on from MMF2 it won't be to another "easy" product - I'll just go into actual coding so I don't think Construct is for me really. It will be a threat to Clickteam once it's stable and has the same feature set (it's missing a lot of things I use a lot like the Text Blitter and the event editor is very slow to use) and anyone who's so pro-Clickteam not to see that it is a functional product is just being silly.
The legal implications are kinda irrelevant now that it's a free (open-source) project - and anyway Clickteam should just keep bettering MMF2 rather than compete with Construct and I'm sure a lot of potential switchers won't even bother because of the hassle of relearning another product.
We should be able to have a discussion about game creation products without a flamewar rocking up every time.
Global qualifiers are needed by a select group of people - where-as more people are after HWA and Java and as a small team
Where is your backing for this? Global Qualifiers are something that any game with multiple levels would use. The majority of people will make use of Global Qualifiers. And besides that, it's good software practice. I don't know why more people aren't asking for it, but it doesn't change that looking at it logically, it's still something you need. People are strange.
Whereas HWA and Java are something that are required for as many games.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
It's not really fair to compare a professional product with a huge team behind it to MMF which is really a rather simple tool that's been built up over the period of 14 or so years. Even though a small amount of professional games are made in MMF, it's still not a professional level product.
Why does it matter?
Also the number of professional MMF2 games relatively to the number of total MMF2 games is about the same as the number of professional Adobe Flash games relatively to the number of total Flash games, if not greater. MMF2 is about as professional as Adobe's product, and it doesn't matter if Adobe is 1000 times more popular than Clickteam.
I'm disappointed because I thought they'd really develop it like they did with MMF1. MMF1 was awkward and terrible with it's first version but gradually became a lot more usable.
So you're saying they should've released an half-assed version of MMF2 a year before the release and improve it until its current state today? I think I'd be stupid.
I'm not saying it has nothing new. I'm saying the features are not worth even the upgrade discount cost. Java and HWA are definitely an improvement and I commend them for adding those features but really HWA is something that should have been done long ago in this day and age.
So why did you STILL buy it although you didn't like it? That's your problem!
Um, so? There are tons of other companies that offer free patches and updates offering new features. Valve for example are adding a bunch of new features to TF2 pretty soon. With Game Maker or Construct, you get loads of new updates for free too.
That wasn't my point.
I don't know much companies that provide free core updates with major new features (HWA and Java in our case) to commercial products. Updates that they haven't promised to give in the first place.
Construct is not an illegal product.
Yes it is. I pointed to a post that proved it but someone has deleted it.
Why does it matter?
Also the number of professional MMF2 games relatively to the number of total MMF2 games is about the same as the number of professional Adobe Flash games relatively to the number of total Flash games, if not greater.
But the amount of professional Adobe Flash content in general is far greater than professional MMF content in general.
So you're saying they should've released an half-assed version of MMF2 a year before the release and improve it until its current state today? I think I'd be stupid.
What? No. I'm saying they should be developing MMF2 a lot more quickly than they are being aware of what people need.
So why did you STILL buy it although you didn't like it? That's your problem!
We've been through this. First off, I had no idea they'd scrap Global Qualifiers completely, I was using the glitch before. Secondly, Click products are generally expanded through extensions so taking a product as is, is not the definite solution. I had to buy MMF2 if I wanted to keep recieving new extensions and patches/support.
I don't know much companies that provide free core updates with major new features (HWA and Java in our case) to commercial products. Updates that they haven't promised to give in the first place.
Valve do. And don't forget it's not as if they're not making any money from it - these are features that will attract more people to buy the software, and future versions of the software expecting this functionality to be expanded. The Construct guys are genuinely doing it for free.
Yes it is. I pointed to a post that proved it but someone has deleted it.
No, it didn't prove it. They may have broken an agreement and engaged in other activities but that doesn't make Construct itself an illegal product.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
PROTIP: Experienced MMF users never use global events or qualifiers, because they keep everything in one frame and make level editors instead. Problem solved!
But the amount of professional Adobe Flash content in general is far greater than professional MMF content in general.
I do not completely agree, but pretending that you're correct, it's only because Adobe is much more popular than Clickteam.
What? No. I'm saying they should be developing MMF2 a lot more quickly than they are being aware of what people need.
See Ben's message:
"Global qualifiers are needed by a select group of people - where-as more people are after HWA and Java and as a small team (hardworking or not) they can't make everything at once. They did just release another update today with a big list of fixes and changes, so they do listen and will eventually put things in. "
We've been through this. First off, I had no idea they'd scrap Global Qualifiers completely, I was using the glitch before.
They didn't. They will add this feature when they're done adding other, higher demanded features which most of clickers will agree that are more usable. I'd prefer Clickteam to add completely new features first and only then add features that can be EASILY done with workarounds.
Secondly, Click products are generally expanded through extensions so taking a product as is, is not the definite solution.
So you're wrong by understanding the meaning of extensions. Extensions in MMF2 (And Construct for this matter) only provide new objects, not core functions.
Valve do. And don't forget it's not as if they're not making any money from it - these are features that will attract more people to buy the software, and future versions of the software expecting this functionality to be expanded.
Valve isn't "many companies". So here's another great company.
The Construct guys are genuinely doing it for free.
Only because they were legally forced to.
No, it didn't prove it. They may have broken an agreement and engaged in other activities but that doesn't make Construct itself an illegal product.
Originally Posted by Phredreeke PHREDTIP: Move on to Java or C++. If you're clever enough to make a level editor, you're probably clever enough to learn Java.
True, lol. That's what I'm doing at the moment anyway. And that's what Mr Pod did with The Underside once he got fed up with MMF's limitations.
This is really boring. We've all been through this already several times and I am prepared to let it go, but LIJI is working industriously to sour the relationship between Scirra and Clickteam. Still, I'll try not to hold anything against Clickteam even though I'm pretty sure they paid him at some point and have also assured me he wouldn't be a problem again, but I guess he's just a stray 15 year old on a forum.
You can talk about the ethics of the situation all you like, but Construct is not an illegal project. I have discussed the matter with legal experts on the subject. Have you? Under what UK law (which is my jurisdiction) is the project illegal? As far as I am aware, nobody on either side has patents, so that's not an issue. And as for copyright, which pertains solely to the source code, we're open source for the world to check for any illegally used code. There isn't any, because we wrote it all ourselves or used free libraries. That's as far as the law goes. You can't just make up some reason. You would have the case thrown out of court.
For the record, I acknowledge Construct is buggy and unstable in many situations, since it is in beta, and we are aiming to correct this by the 1.0 release. As I have stated on my own forum before, I would not recommend large or important projects are started in Construct before 1.0.
Hopefully LIJI won't be foolish enough to try, at the detriment of everybody and himself, to STILL argue it's an illegal project, but he's only 15 and certainly no legal expert. I hope everybody reading his posts takes this in to account. I won't be responding to any more of his wearisome comments, for the benefit of everybody (but expect a line-by-line analysis where he debunks every point I make in a 100% unrefutable way and therefore wins the argument).
Ashely is angry because I didn't invite her to the grand opening of my 100 floors building that I bought with the money Clickteam paid me for showing the world the side of Construct she wants to hide.
Seriously, do you really think Jeff woke up in one morning and thought- What should I do today? Oh! Let's pay LIJI to talk some rubbish about Scirra! that'd be hilarious!
No. You're retarded.
To clarify, I was not implying Clickteam pay anybody to badmouth me or Scirra. I was making the point that LIJI has worked for Clickteam, therefore is closely affiliated with them.
You know, this thread was quite respectful and mature, surprisingly so and it was good. But the problem LIJI you really came in and started flinging crap around, first at me and now at Ashley. I specifically said to keep this kind of rubbish out of it. I don't blame Ashley for replying and being upset. You are the reason we can't have mature discussions about the merits of Clickteam vs. Construct and other alternatives.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Advertisement
Edited by the Author.
Even maths, there are different approaches.
