Is ActionScript more powerful than Construct?

Hi, I'm just wondering if ActionScript can handle and do more stuff than Construct because I'm thinking of learning it. Just wondering if it would be a good option?

Thanks.

I'm not really sure because I've never used ActionScript. However, as far as I know, Flash has no hardware acceleration or DirectX support, so all those features (V-sync, performance, effects, motion-blur, etc etc...) probably aren't available.

No, it's definitely not.

It's meant for online games and web applications such as streaming music and video, and very little else. Not a substitute for a desktop game/application creator, but viable if you want to make certain online games.

But is it a good language to learn to make games?

But is it a good language to learn to make games?

if you want to make simple games to be played in a web browser, sure.

How simple?

How simple depends entirely on your knowledge and creativity, but you ideas will be limited by just slowing down much sooner than say in Construct.

I personally hate flash games with the exception of one or two that don't feel like flash games.

Well what do you think would be the powerful thing you could do in ActionScript?

That's easy, most powerful thing is the ability to play your game entirely in a web browser.

Almost everyone has flash.

No I mean what is the highest thing it could handle for example particles system?

Yes, it can do particles, but you have to code your particle systems from scratch.

Basically you can program whatever you want in Flash, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to run well. The more complex your game visuals, the slower it will run. And it doesn't take much complexity to start bogging down.

Frankly, I'm surprised that Flash has become the standard that it is, and I wouldn't mind seeing it go away forever. I mean, who the hell thought it was a good idea to do vector graphics in a browser? Fundamentally it just doesn't make much sense to me.

It wasn't intended for games initially and still really isn't. So naturally, making a game in it is going to be inefficient.

As for vector, they chose that because it's smooth. Web stuff needs to be clean and vector provides that the easiest way.

Makes sense to me. People are just using Flash for more than simple intros and menus.

My point is that raster graphics take a lot less processing power than equally complex vector graphics, so that would make more sense for a web app, especially since everything else in your browser is raster anyway.

There is no commonly used web standard for vector images, for instance. Everything uses gif, jpg, or png.

Sure, they're not scalable in the same manner, but still.

Well I guess you could argue swf is the standard for vector hehe. I do see your point however.

ActionScript is fine for making menu's on websites... but I would hardly consider it a valid game making tool.... 99.9% of flash games I have ever played SUCK.

~Sol