Construct 2 - most wanted

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:39 pm

[quote="Nifflas":3h7icws6] I'm not even testing Construct before either all mathematics and computer software are made 1-based, or Construct is adjusted to how reality actually work.
[/quote:3h7icws6]

Construct is mostly 0 based actually. Only a few things are 1 based. It's not that bad. :mrgreen:
B
25
S
3
G
6
Posts: 1,197
Reputation: 5,620

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:14 pm

[quote="Nifflas":wuqjee1q]I'm not even testing Construct before either all mathematics and computer software are made 1-based, or Construct is adjusted to how reality actually work.[/quote:wuqjee1q]
Quite demanding isn't he!

Is that the real nifflas? I doubt it.
I seem to remember him being quite a bit more level-headed than that.

If it is, then I'm disappointed.
I imagined him to be someone who would relish the challenge of overcoming the niggly bits of Construct that still need to be sorted out.

Whether 0-based or 1-based, Construct is so powerful in so many ways I doubt the real nifflas would turn his nose up at it because of something that will no doubt be fixed at some point.

Krush.
B
2
S
2
G
3
Posts: 406
Reputation: 2,062

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:28 pm

Sorry, going to shoot down your post there KrushBrother:

[quote="KrushBrother":2t5jsylp]Is that the real nifflas?[/quote:2t5jsylp]
I think so, the account was signed up in 2007 before anyone would have any interest in spoofing.

[quote="KrushBrother":2t5jsylp]If it is, then I'm disappointed.
I imagined him to be someone who would relish the challenge of overcoming the niggly bits of Construct that still need to be sorted out.[/quote:2t5jsylp]
You're sounding a little passive-aggressive there, plus that doesn't really make sense: Construct (and software in general, really) shouldn't have "niggly bits" to overcome. Things like an inconsistent number base simply slow people down and catch people out when they're not expecting it. It should definitely be uniformly the same across the entire program, so it's always predictable (you don't have to think about it - you just know what it is). And since 0-based makes more mathematical sense than 1-based, that's the way to go, IMO.

[quote="KrushBrother":2t5jsylp]Construct is so powerful in so many ways I doubt the real nifflas would turn his nose up at it[/quote:2t5jsylp]
Construct has real and serious shortcomings for professional game developers that I acknowledge and am keen to rectify in Construct 2.

Also re: Davioware:
[quote="Davioware":2t5jsylp]Construct is mostly 0 based actually. Only a few things are 1 based. It's not that bad.[/quote:2t5jsylp]
There's enough of a mix that people are regularly thrown off. Changing it in Construct 0.x would break a lot of existing apps - it's something that pretty much has to wait until Construct 2.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,952
Reputation: 178,600

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:55 pm

Can you not add an option (for example on the plugins that are 1 based) to change it to 0 based, but have it by default 1 based to make sure apps don't break?
B
2
S
2
G
5
Posts: 448
Reputation: 2,546

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 8:11 pm

[quote="Ashley":2gkb7fs5]Sorry, going to shoot down your post there KrushBrother[/quote:2gkb7fs5]
No need to apologise.
I've got broad shoulders.
I can take it. :lol:

Seriously though, regardless of whether you should have gone with 0-based from the start or not, his post wasn't very helpful.

I've only been here a short time (It's not even a year yet), but Construct has become what it has because of several people on these forums who were with you from the start.
If they'd decided to not bother with Construct because it didn't do what they wanted, then Construct may not have grown the way it has.

I'm just thankful to those who keep fighting Construct :lol: , pushing it to it's limits so that it can be as tight as possible.
I'm not thankful to those who give up because it isn't tailor-made to their needs.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that thinks this of Nifflas post, but I expect I'll be the only one saying it.
Probably because they admire Nifflas for Knytt Stories, and rightly so.

Would you have accepted a critical "first post" from someone like that if it hadn't been Nifflas?
I'm not convinced you would have.
I mean, look at the tone of the post.

You need some fire in your belly Ash.
Being calm is one thing, but you need to learn to stick up for your baby now and again. :wink:

Krush.
B
2
S
2
G
3
Posts: 406
Reputation: 2,062

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:03 pm

Err, sorry to disappoint, people who know me also know I tend to get upset randomly like this. Thing is, the process of creating my games is a lot about fighting the quirks of MMF2 and the lack of many essential programming options that Construct seems to do a whole lot better. Still, design decisions like tend to cast a dark shadow over how I percieve the product. If a flaw like this was decided early on, my brain tells me there's got to be more. Besides, I'm not checking these forums often, I don't know enough about the product to have insight in if it would have to be done from the start or can be implemented now. All I know is that I'm kind of growing out of MMF2 and although I'm hoping for MMF3 to come and save the day, I'm open for switching to another tool that doesn't get in the way, and doesn't force me to deal with quirks and workarounds all the time. I simply don't want to fight my development tools. I don't expect all products to be made for me, but I guess I overreact when fundamental design rules with one obvious best solution isn't done "right".

I suppose you're right though, perhaps Construct is actually so good that something like this can be ignored, and that I'm just being very unhelpful complaining about things that are already well established. I probably should have tested the program instead of going instant-critic. I added some comment at the top of my website source so you can ensure it's the real nifflas you should be disappointed at. Well, this way you get to know the dark and horrible truth about my personality and tendency to overreact from the start, as many have experienced before you. ;)

Anyway, installed. I'll keep my mounth shut until I've actually tested Construct, and try to be nicer when I open it again.
B
2
S
1
G
6
Posts: 11
Reputation: 1,422

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:49 pm

Now that's the Nifflas I remember from the MMF2 forums.
I guess I must have missed your dark days over there. :D

I fought with GF/MMF2 for a couple of years.
Because of a corrupt save file which went back through a lot of my backups without me noticing, I actually had to start Smiley Fruit Machine from scratch, using the corrupt load to write down by hand most of the code so that I could then program it all again into MMF2.
I think it came to about 50 A4 pages, and at times I wondered why I bothered with GF/MMF2.

It was worth it in the end, and was a good earner for me.

When I found Construct about 11 months ago, it was in pretty good shape then IMO, and I think the latest couple of updates are very close to the finished article.

There's still some important things to fix, and some not so important, but I think they're getting there.
I'd recommend giving Construct some serious time to try out some proof-of-concept demos.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Be sure to back up though. :D

Krush.
B
2
S
2
G
3
Posts: 406
Reputation: 2,062

Post » Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:55 pm

Well, I've just tested it for a few minutes, but the event editor seems packed with stuff I've always felt I've needed, it probably more than compensates for that thing, so I guess an apoligy from me is in order. But anyway, I better not bring this topic further into the swamp of off-topicness.
B
2
S
1
G
6
Posts: 11
Reputation: 1,422

Post » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:24 am

I recently mentioned Construct on the MMF2 forums but it got censored, lol.
B
134
S
65
G
16
Posts: 1,766
Reputation: 19,190

Post » Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:11 am

[quote="Nifflas":20ygdrdi]I'd say 0-based. I'm not even testing Construct before either all mathematics and computer software are made 1-based, or Construct is adjusted to how reality actually work.

4 mod 4 is 0, not 1. Sin, cos and tan centers around zero. A variable defaults to zero (don't tell me variables are also 1 by default in Construct). The value that is returned in place of "aaw, that's unset" is also zero, unless a NULL value is supported. The range of an unsigned byte is 0-255, not 1-256. The top-left position of a screen and object is 0,0, not 1,1. You move an object 0 pixels to not move it anywhere. In every situation when negative numbers are used, it's a pain to have 1 in the middle. I'm just going to be too annoyed over dealing with this that I'd rather stick to what I use now where things are randomly 0 and 1 based (because at least some features are 0-based).[/quote:20ygdrdi]

Basically all those things you mentioned are zero-based in Construct. I think the only things where the 1-base shows are loops and arrays, where the loopindex of the first one is 1, not 0 (though if you run a for loop from 0 to 255, the first loopindex will be 0).

So yeah, if you don't regularly use arrays, pretty much the only time you need to remember the 1-base is with not-for loops. A minor annoyance, really. But an annoyance none the less.
B
16
S
8
G
4
Posts: 136
Reputation: 3,144

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: randomly and 16 guests