Ashley's Recent Forum Activity

  • Download Construct 2 public preview 29

    Link to release 28.4

    A new touch plugin for mobile devices, and an object panel for inserting expressions.

    <img src="http://www.scirra.com/labs/exppanel.png">

    The new expressions panel has several improvements over the old 0.x one:

    • It's free floating and can be positioned and sized as you like.
    • It's modeless so remains present as a sort of 'palette' you can take expressions from at any time.
    • You can search it like the event wizard.
    • The list contains descriptions of each expression.
    • It lists instance variables for objects which have them.

    This should make it a lot more useful than the old one!

    Changelog

    • [ADD] New floating objects panel for parameters dialog. Allows you to browse and insert expressions easily, including instance variables.
    • [ADD] Touch plugin. Basic touch support for iOS/Android (doesn't properly support multitouch yet, but the 'On touch object' and 'Is touching object' conditions are multitouch enabled and should be good enough for on-screen touch-controls)
    • [CHANGE] Keyboard prevented *any* key reaching the browser (even F5, backspace, etc.) which was obnoxious - now it only blocks scrolling keys like up/down
    • [FIX] Initial values for instance variables were wrong (all instances of one type used the first instance's values)
  • CrudeMik, Is that a new issue specifically with 0.99.97?

  • That's funny, just yesterday I read an article on Reaper's pricing model and I liked what they were doing. $225 isn't much for big business though - is that per user?

  • Do you write plugins only because it's open source? I don't get why that means "there's not much point" now.

    We're not going to re-write Construct! Not again :S It's very much in our interests not to make any breaking changes, because it means we have to change all the official plugins too. To be honest, it's likely any changes will be minor, and if there aren't too many plugins, I can just go through and make the changes myself so nobody needs to worry about it. The 'change at any time' bit is just a disclaimer on the off-chance we do need to really give things a make-over, which I can't see any reason for in the near future.

  • Hey, check the last section of the new features thread for the situation on that. Chances are there won't be any backwards compatibility.

  • Well this kills any enthusiasm I had for the project, so much for donating.

    I should have mentioned: obviously if we went closed source and commercial we'd either refund everyone who donated or give them a free license worth more than their donation - we don't want to leave you out in the cold! We appreciate your generosity! There'd be an awkward couple of weeks of transition but it'd be necessary and I think we can do it fairly and without leaving anyone screwed over.

    [quote:388yrlxi]HTML5 would have been the best option as the baseline exporter since the code it generates is pretty much open and relatively unobfuscated, which would allow a good codebase to work on to create new exporters.

    Considering the javascript sources are incredibly difficult to protect since they're just plain-text files, it would probably only be the C++ sources to the DLL that got closed sourced.

    [quote:388yrlxi]Of course the poll is just an empty gesture, I doubt the results of it would sway your opinion one way or another since once a project starts seriously considering going down a closed path it's basically a done deal.

    We don't make decisions solely based on a forum poll but I put it there as a quick way to get overall feedback from everybody, so lurkers can put in their view without having to type out a full "I support this" or "I don't support this". It's still a really useful indication of whether or not a decision we want to make is popular: if it's overwhelmingly popular, we can go ahead, if it's incredibly unpopular, we know that if we go ahead anyway, we probably need to do something or change something to mitigate the unhappiness it could create. So no, we're not going to make this decision solely on a forum poll even if it goes against us, but it's still important information to take in to account.

    ...

    I really hope I can always make time for the project and I have no intentions of ever leaving! But it is true that if we can come this far in our spare time, what could we do if we went full-time?

    It would be amazing if we could go full time solely on donations, but we're simply not big enough to do that yet. It's obviously very kind of people to send money over off their own back, but in practice, the cold truth is this is not remotely enough to cover full-time work. It's a very, very long way from that. To demonstrate this, 0.x was about 250,000 lines of code, worked on for about three years by three people part-time, downloaded 275,000 times so far, and the donations have always been well below ?100/month. Do a bit of math for the wages for three full-timers and you see it's not really making a dent on living cost. And if we went full-time, we can make Construct at least twice as good for everybody - I mean, C2 so far has still been a spare time project - think if it had a full time team behind it! Again, we appreciate the generosity of those who donate, but we're just looking at this in a real-world sense.

    It's been really interesting reading everyone's views and nothing's set in stone so do let me know if you have more thoughts. I honestly don't have a clear pre-determined agenda that I'm following, I'm still trying to figure everything out, and what everyone is saying here is factoring in to that. The situation is just that it'd be best for everyone if we could go fulltime on this (personally it'd be my dream job! I do this all the time anyway), and the fact is, in order to do that, something is going to have to go closed source. We just can't figure out a good commercial business model if it's all open.

  • Sure, it would be nice if you had a mention it was made in C2 somewhere though.

  • It's too early for us to have plugin distribution - try uploading them to dropbox or similar for now.

  • Folks, to be honest, at this time it looks best for us to close-source the editor as well.

    We're discussing all our options behind-the-scenes and there are a tonne of options (like taking royalties on sales of third party exporters) that are impossible with an open source editor. By having any part open-source, our options rapidly dwindle to very few limited choices. We can be an awful lot more flexible with licensing with closed source.

    Obviously this isn't aimed to rip off indie devs, I'm still in favour of a cheap or free indie/personal license. It just means that suppose Google came along and wrote an Android exporter and started selling it - we can ask for royalties (for example - this is not a definite plan). That's a neat possible revenue opportunity and it's just impossible if the editor is open source.

    As far as open-source contributions have gone in 0.x, we've had some cool patches by R0J0hound which is great and we're thankful for. However, in terms of options for making money, this is incredibly limiting, and given that we haven't exactly had hordes of developers battering down our doors demanding to write code for 0.x, it seems a logical move to go closed source.

    Again, not definite and still very much a work in progress, but it's on the cards and we're thinking it over. We don't want to rush in to any decision but I thought I'd let everyone know what we're considering. I guess it wouldn't be popular, but it makes it much more likely that we can really build something great. And the sooner we do it the better, to get ahead of anyone who forks the code already available.

    What are your thoughts? If C2 went closed source but still had a cheap or free edition, would that put you off it? How important is the open source to you?

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • The 'cannot find object expression' appears when the expression name in the AddExpression at edittime does not match the expression name at runtime. For example if your AddExpression adds "GetFoo", then you say exps["GetBar"] = function..., then it looks for "GetFoo" but can't find it.

    In your example it looks like you've deleted a crucial line for some reason. You should have something like this:

    (function()
    {
    	// This is the line you were missing, it creates a local 'exps' as a reference to the object expressions (this is taken from the Mouse object)
    	var exps = cr.plugins.Mouse.prototype.exps;
    	
    	exps["X"] = function (ret) ...[/code:2myipk7s]
    
    Without that line, you're writing the expression functions to a new global variable called 'exps', so C2 will never find the expression routine.
  • Can you post a .cap of that not working properly on the tracker?

  • In all the object methods, 'this' refers to the current instance, so just do this.now = new Date() etc.

Ashley's avatar

Ashley

Early Adopter

Member since 21 May, 2007

Twitter
Ashley has 1,769,568 followers

Connect with Ashley

Trophy Case

  • Jupiter Mission Supports Gordon's mission to Jupiter
  • Forum Contributor Made 100 posts in the forums
  • Forum Patron Made 500 posts in the forums
  • Forum Hero Made 1,000 posts in the forums
  • Forum Wizard Made 5,000 posts in the forums
  • Forum Unicorn Made 10,000 posts in the forums
  • Forum Mega Brain Made 20,000 posts in the forums
  • x126
    Coach One of your tutorials has over 1,000 readers
  • x74
    Educator One of your tutorials has over 10,000 readers
  • x5
    Teacher One of your tutorials has over 100,000 readers
  • Sensei One of your tutorials has over 1,000,000 readers
  • Regular Visitor Visited Construct.net 7 days in a row
  • Steady Visitor Visited Construct.net 30 days in a row
  • RTFM Read the fabulous manual
  • x42
    Great Comment One of your comments gets 3 upvotes
  • Email Verified

Progress

32/44
How to earn trophies

Blogs