the whole idea of the logo or splash is that it is undesirable

you get to try out the product, make a full game if you wish

then you say, you know what, I've gotten this far. my game is awesome. I want to sell it. Construct 2 is definitely a worthwhile investment. Let me pay the license, and get rid of this logo

or it irks you 5 days into using it, and you pay for it then.

It seems a fairly harmless thing to me, for what's basically an endless free trial

probably best not to keep replying to your thread over and over.

Make the player an immovable physics object as well. And just move it with the platform movement. Or make your own platform movement for the player out of physics operations. If you use the first method, you'll notice the boxes move out of the way, but with no real force. To fix this, you can give your immovable physics player commands like

always -

----set physics horizontal velocity to. Platform horizontal velocity * factor

I don't think those are the actual expressions, but I don't have my pc in front of me. Factor will be a number of your choosing, expirement till it seems right. Even though you won't actually be moving the player with physics, this will let the physics engine know the object is moving

I have a potential fix for physics that will make it work naturally with outside movement without the extra steps. Hopefully it will make it into a future version of construct

It wouldn't be a burden, construct can create destroy and move literally thousands of sprites each frame without slowdown. The spritefont plugin was made for this. Unfortunately I no longer have the source code to check up on it. Initially some people were complaining of disappearing letters, but I think it may have been an issue with an older version of construct, because I've had several people tell me they use it all the time with no issues.

Also, if you change the sample mode of the application from linear to point that will cut the antialiasing off the whole screen, which should cause both text and sprites to look less blurry, if you decide to use regular fonts

Yeah, you can test itby opening anything let's you type text, andbegin holding keys one by one, until the key you press doesn't show up on screen

Yes, definitely worth learning construct 99.x

They will have the same sort of event system and logic.

C2 will be more stable and extensible

Also, its still possible to make something in c1. Its just quirky, not broken. Also, some bugs will still be fixed and features added by the community, as ashleys begun opening the svn to other users. Id recommend using c1, and testing c2 along with the rest of us until its ready

And welcome to scirra

I know if you add an ace item in between two others on the ace table, and then load a cap made with the previous version of a plugin, it will mix up your actions.

EDIT: forget what I said about physics. I fixed that. but still curious if it's possible to remove something from the ace table without breaking old caps

I haven't messed with this yet. Is it stable and ready to go? is it ok for commercial use?

my 2 cents on the scirra game arcade service as a sale. I feel the total opposite. I'd rather pay to dewatermark an otherwise fully working version of construct.

I don't want to sell my game on scirra arcade. I want to sell it on steam, itunes, and the android app store. no offense, but I never even consider buying games from a "all games here made by our special tool" stores.

I would hope anything I was trying to sell could stand on it's own. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a scirra arcade. I'm just saying I think construct 1 or c2 is powerful enough to make "real" games. I think making the business model revolve around a scirra store wouldn't work. The truly successful games would sell better elsewhere, leaving scirra with only profits from less successful games.

I still think the most important thing is to decide exactly which part to sell, probably making it a pay this much if your game makes over 100,000 type license. Make it cheap enough it isn't worth the trouble of pirating, and I think it will go far, and ash and the gang can live comfortably as we head toward construct 3

I asked this a while ago, but the question is probably more relevant now. Would it be possible to make it so behaviors are abstracted and they interface with the runtime, thereby avoiding the need to rerwrite for each runtime, since behaviors operate on construct specific parameters, that aren't affected by alternate runtimes.

Also, do you think it'd eventually be possible to merge objects, that way, the official mouse plugin for instance, you would have one set of events that would export to the official linux exporter or windows exporter or html 5 exporter, without having to redo events for each?

> ...ashley said that a plugin should be able to modify any part of the ide due to their being javascript.

>

Actually, it's any part of the runtime - javascript plugins can't yet mod the editor.

Ah, I see. My mistake.

Though, you say yet, does that mean its a planned feature? Or just a possibility?

I like the idea olf being able to pay for source code access. I believe the havok physics engine has a license like that, or maybe its physx that does.

Especially since ashley said that a plugin should be able to modify any part of the ide due to their being javascript. Almost any of my c1 plugins would have benefitted from being able to alter the ide. I could easily imagine all sorts of things, an isometric movement plugin, with corresponding layout editor tweaks for level creation,

I know I've mentioned it twice already, but id like to be more straightforward about it. The exporter thing. When I'm done with my current project, probably a year or so off, my next would have been to write an importer for c2 for the files this project exports. After that iwas going to focus on writing exporters for the mobile platforms, or if I'm incapable of doing it myself, I was planning to hire out the work. Id be willing to do the profit share thing with c2 if these exporters proved worthy, but its more to have these exporters than to profit from them.

If construct doesn't have an android or iphone exporter by then, what sense would it make to not have that avenue open for other developers to contribute

Also, a plugin store would be awesome if integrated with the site. You could sort by rating, or most downloaded, or search only free plugins, etc...