Greetings

Yello all. I'm a veteran TGFer (Yea, that's right, TGF) and I thought I'd check Construct out. There were a few Hoobity-hopde-hwas about it going on over at TDC, so I'm givin' it a look. I'm downloading it now. I doubt I'll switch, considering that all of my files are TGF format and I'm used to the interface of TGF, but I'll give it a whirl. (not to mention the fact that Construct is a teeny-weeny bit buggy and MMF has been around longer to be fixed) Anywho, just thought I'd pop in and introduce myself in case I ask for help later on.

Welcome to the forum, and i had a TGF too .

Thanks! I gave the thing a try, it seems like it's well designed but I prefer TGF and TGF2/MMF2's interface. I can already whiz around them at a sickening pace. Now, if this thing included real 3D support it'd quickly become one of my favorite programs. (HINT HINT)

I never coded in Fusion, not in Factory. But as Far as i know, they are not oFFering 3D.

In other words, only because you are Familiar with the F's made you decide this about this Fing ?

Or to drive the car as it should be driven, straight Forward, to get somewhere ..

Your decision was made before you looked ?

Or, are there features that you mis ?

Or, i should be blind, but, yet i see a line in F people dropping in and do a stand up commercial for the F things ?

TheInstance, don't overthink this. My guess is that Construct was mentioned in the forums for other similar tools, so people are dropping in to take a look at what this is all about. If, like Clayton here, they find that both systems do roughly the same thing, then obviously they're going to stick with the one they've spent a lot of time learning and where they can reuse all the code they've ever written. (Note that I don't personally know any of the "Brand X Washing Powders" you guys have been mentioning -- I'm speaking in general terms here.)

I never coded in Fusion, not in Factory. But as Far as i know, they are not oFFering 3D.

His point exactly: If Construct did do 3D, then that would be one strong reason to use Construct instead of his current tools that don't offer 3D support. As it is, he's decided that switching wouldn't be worth the effort. Feel free to join me in shrugging.

Construct can do a tiny bit of 3D, but as long as it's a six-faced 3D box, heh!

More primatives would be a great and easy start

Pyramid, Low-Poly Sphere, Cylinder, etc.

*dodges evil looks*

Is it possible to set the width/height of the 3D box with values, so you don't have to try and resize it perfectly? Or can you only set the width/height in the event editor?

Construct has so much more potential than MMF. MMF is stable, but i kept finding i ran into its limits. With construct i keep finding little cool things that surpass MMF's limits.

Without a doubt, construct would be far better than MMF if it was stable. Not to mention i paid "bare dollar" for MMF.

I found this app 3 days ago, and I can't put it down. Been useing MMF2 for some years, and have done more in Construct in days. Don't think I can go back to MMF2 after this experience. Good job

Thanks for clarifying that while I wasn't here, Znirk. ) Maybe if I knew exactly what limits in MMF you are surpassing in Construct, I'd give it more time... But since I already have years of code base in TGF, there's no real incentive. I'll likely hang around, because this seems like a nice place, and who knows, I may switch sometime in the future.

[quote:387nvcfz]I'll likely hang around, because this seems like a nice place, and who knows, I may switch sometime in the future.

you will surrender soon enough. Its such a good place to be

Why switch when you can use both? Whenever you make a program Construct can't handle, use TGF/MMF and when you want to make a program TGF/MMF can't handle, use Construct. Also, some features that arent found in TGF are layers, multiple "action points", physics, shadows, bump mapping, pixel shaders, built-in real time strategy and selection box movements and quite a bit more still. Construct still lacks a path movement though (although paths can still be done by having invisible objects with private variables that give them a waypoint number and then moving the object between the "waypoints" through code)

EDIT: Sorry, I forgot to say hello XD Welcome to Construct!

Well, I suppose I could use both, but I'd have to learn it, and I REALLY don't want to do that again... Thanks for the welcome!

Actually its not that much to learn, its surprising how similar the coding style is to the Click products, sometimes I find Construct easier even (especially once you start using sub events which can allow better structure and hiding large events when they are minimized)