MMF is a very good Tool with a little to low power and have to big differences with HWA to Standard MMF.
Differences is my problem from Standard mmf with angles of objects, i need rotate a 800x 800 pixel planet and this version (standard) rotate the planet only with 1.0 not with 0.1 value.
The defferences is bad for Flash and iphone applications and the next future exporters, clickteam fault with no fixed (improvement) the standard (no hwa) version.
Originally Posted by Hernan Yeah. I think most people would try Gamemaker first mainly because it's free. A free (but inferior) version of MMF could really help spread the word.
It could be like TGF2 but also include a limit on how big a file it will load or how big an application it will build. Also, it only builds Windows applications, no web applets or screensavers or anything special, has no Lacewing, and maybe you can't change the icon.
Yeah, that would really do the trick. Even when I can convince my bosses our school "really needs MMF", the students will still only be able to use it at school. A free light-edition would reach a whole new audience.
im really not seeing a problem in young people, i know manny people my age who use TGF2/MMF2 and ive even convinced some people to buy it/join the community
They could discount it to a tenner and certain competitors would still be free. Game Maker's a huge competitor with some really good branding (it just makes sense) and I also think the Construct clock is ticking and Clickteam shouldn't ignore it. I'm sure they're not.
They had the strongest marketing in the world back in the KNP days. But today, MMF's really not a good bargain.
It's like MS Word - it's easy to learn. It gives you results very fast. It's got an ugly, clumsy interface. It's the most expensive type of the product out there. And worst of all... the more you use it, the more workarounds you need to actually get something done.
Casual users will go for Game Maker because it's free. Or Construct if they're lazy because the MMF built-in movements are hopeless.
Hardcore indie game developers will go with Construct because it's free too. They'd do a little research and get scared off by how you can't do a lot of things without workarounds. Want to write a formula in the expression editor? Workaround. Heck, you even need a workaround for loops. MMF goes against common programming logic.
If they want to make money from it, they have to take the Microsoft approach - very aggressive marketing. That book one of the Clickteam members wrote is a good start. But they've got to be far more aggressive than they are now. Some better pricing would also help, maybe give a 75% discount or something. At this rate, MMF is going to be as outdated as AGS by next decade.
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 like the free TGF2 Lite/Limited idea, if this edition existed I would probably be using it for my games. And create some workshops around it. I've no intention of using other easy game creation products, although some might be a better fit for workshops.
But does Clickteam want improved sales? Because they would certainly come with some kind of price (or prize for us), better support and probably an up-to-date, rewritten version from MMF, which is called THE GAMES FACTORY THREE, because people create games with it! And not multimedia content. And they would need to spend lot's of time in order to accomplish this rewrite instead of just building upon their previous codebase. Meanwhile they need to create all of those amazing exporters at the same time.
O and by the way, just keep The Daily Click name. Just because people do some projects in non-klik, doesn't mean we should refocus the site. It's totally about klik and should stay that way, even when Clickteam gets extinct. And that's basically the reason why we need a free version of TGF/MMF, because we cannot fork the Clickteam code since it's not GPL-ed. If a free lite version won't be released, should we create it?
Could it be that gamemaker was created because of the exact same problem we're facing here? However gamemaker is a proprietary thing, the creators of construct did a better job by GPLling their game creator program.
Go to construct because they're lazy? Maybe you're right, but let's examine that for a second.
Firstly, Construct is beautiful and the interface is clear.
Secondly, MMF2 hides behind the fact that it can't pick multiple instances of the same objects by using "behaviors" (last time I checked) whereas Construct uses just one page of events and can pick objects ever so simply.
Thirdly, Construct is the most resource-efficient program I have ever worked with-
500-1000 5x5 objects fading out at one time? yup!
Fourthly(?), now specifically addressing what you said: Isn't it lazy to use anything other than programming languages like DarkBasic? Who gets to define what's lazy and what's not? I bet many programmers consider Click, and Construct and Gamemaker to be childish programs for lazy people. Heck, isn't it lazy of all of us to rarely make good games- or even finish crappy ones? I being the worst offender of this, I would have to pay people to play the only game I ever finished.
I'm not trying to say Construct is a better program, I'm saying it is what certain people prefer, not because they're lazy.
I certainly hope this poorly worded/planned post does not convey sourness.
In Click, it takes a lot of tutorials to pick it up. There's not that many start-off-from-scratch tutorials. There's a few custom platform engines and others out on the Internet but you have to work on them.
In Construct, just create a sprite, assign a few movements and you can get a decent game running. It's more work for someone moving from MMF to Construct to relearn the new system, but someone starting off from nothing will choose Construct, simply because it gives them 360 degree movement, platform engine, and physics in just a few clicks, compared to a few days in MMF.
So, for someone not eager to build their own custom engines or workarounds, between the two, Construct is the lazy choice
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 paid $150 for Multimedia Fusion 2 so it must be better."
But seriously, I've tried using Contrast 3 times and I've been very turned off by it. It's not even that it's unique and difficult to get used to, I've worked with real mainstream editors pretty fluidly including UnrealEd and Hammer and work with 3ds Max. Jumping to different interfaces and getting the job done isn't something I'm a stranger to.
However I will give Construct the benefit of the doubt by saying that it's probably difficult for me to make the switch because it is so similar in a lot of ways, but different in a lot of other ways.
The problem I have with this is that Construct seems to have ripped down the parts of MMF2 that actually worked really well and replaced them with larger more cumbersome methods to do stuff, which results in making immediately impressive stuff faster but simple stuff requires heavy workarounds. Sounds to me like it's priorities are backward.
Edit: Also, their decision to use the Ribbon interface was an absolutely horrible design choice in my honest opinion.
Look at all that empty space in the whole right side of the ribbon. I know MMF2 can be guilty of empty space, but that's only because it ran out of buttons to put there, not because it decided to stack them all up against the left and make a thick ugly ribbon. As far as I know, the interface is also not easily editable. The ribbon is a developers worst nightmare.
I personally use and love my widescreen monitor. Multimedia Fusion 2 can take advantage of the widescreen by adding the thicker toolbars to the left and right sides. Construct decides to bulk up it's horizontal menus and this is an absolutely horrible use and waste of screen real estate.
A few clicks... though I disagree, let's say that you're right for a moment.
Isn't it the objective of ClickTeam to make that possible? The idea of easy game making is not focused on wasting time and energy searching the internet for a workaround, but using your creativity to make a good game, is it not?
Also: I made the transition from Click to Construct very smoothly, it was not very difficult at all.
@ silverfire, the right and left ones are easy to dismiss, just click the little to the left of the close button, that way, they scroll open if you move the cursor to them. I have always liked the top area, it never annoyed me...
Could you give me an example of what you tried to do in construct that was difficult and required work-arounds?
The Construct vs MMF2 debate is pretty pointless, since they're so similar.
That's actually the biggest problem I have with Construct - the fact that it's a shameless rip-off.
Having said that, MMF2 is far too expensive, so I can't blame anyone for using Construct instead. For someone with no sense of loyalty to Clickteam (ie. those who haven't been kliking since KnP) it's a no-brainer, simply because Construct is free.
Originally Posted by 0ko @ silverfire, the right and left ones are easy to dismiss, just click the little to the left of the close button, that way, they scroll open if you move the cursor to them. I have always liked the top area, it never annoyed me...
Could you give me an example of what you tried to do in construct that was difficult and required work-arounds?
You completely missed what I was saying about screen real estate. The left and right docks are actually doing what they should be, using screen real estate properly... widescreen monitors thrive off of side docks. However that damn ribbon dock at the time is so thick and half of it is never used! Theres no point in having a dock that is that thick if everything you fit into the left side could be easily filled out across the whole dock and made thinner.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by Rob Rule
jenswa.neocities.org
.
