If you want an attack to feel strong, a frame freeze is not enough. Practice attack animation phases: anticipation, attack, recovery. A nice impact is about properly timing all three.

Anticipation is usually short - a couple of frames, that show the windup motion.

Attack can honestly be just one smeared frame. The less time it takes, the harder the hit feels.

Recovery - it's the longest one. Make sure the inertia from that attack is conveyed well. Make the character look like they struggle a bit to recover balance or something that shows that they actually applied force.

Those are fundamentals, get them right first. Freeze frames, screen shakes - those are the seasoning, not the main dish here.

> and it reads like you are fine with it and actively push for exactly this thing to happen

I'm not fine with it, but there's nothing we can do to stop it. Accepting AI and using it in our work is not "giving in" - it's actually a way to stay competitive for a bit longer, before most of our jobs inevitably become redundant.

I see your point, but so far ai has been as much of a problem for everyone as it is a tool. I myself tried using it in my job - dropped it as soon as as I understood where it's going. My coworkers did, the result was not a success: company closed due to unrealistic timelines ai promised, people still overworked and underqualified.

I understand that this is not a result of ai itself, but rather a bad implementation of ai, but that implementation was based on the same logic - "we'll be missing out if we don't jump on that train." So we jumped, and it sucked and we all felt no authorship or ownership and it solved zero issues. Essentially it just replaced all the pipelines with a mix of gacha and occasional manual fixes and everyone hated it, but everyone kept doing it, because reasons.

It's not a guaranteed success, it's a bet.

I think we will all be needed as long as ai keeps failing and oh boy it does. I also think it's important to understand that we're not really in a race. For end user, the amount of time spent on the code or art or music is irrelevant. For that small fracture of time the price is too high. All that somehow makes me more optimistic about ai. I think a lot of bad practices will be filtered in time. Maybe with some laws.

dop2000

Yep.. In a year or two we will be flooded with thousands of AI-generated games. Just like the internet is already flooded with AI-generated music and other content. I don’t understand how people don’t see this coming.

It's not coming it's already here in form of overwhelming amount of pure garbage, that's why people are against it.

I honestly don't understand how you can look at this slop wave and say to yourself "yes, this is a good thing. More of that please".

We all see the same thing, we all know what's coming. The difference between our opinions is not in the misunderstanding of the circumstances, but rather in the answer we give.

My answer to this - games are not only products, they are also art and your code is an extension of the game's rules. An artist can't code review properly and I say it as an artist myself. To code review properly I have to go through the junior to mid levels of programming, which I won't be able to do if ai is doing junior to mid tasks! I wouldn't grow as a programmer I would grow as a vibe coder, who is not a good code reviewer.

So how do I even reach the level of a senior+ if everyone keep telling me "just let the code monkeys do the job."? I'm in a position that I either accept the new rules and just disappear as human, or grind my coding skill so I can at least review. But no one is going to ever tell a junior "hold on on using ai. Develop your skills before you can review ai's code." No. Everyone and their cat is trying to sell ai to both juniors and seniors alike, while in reality it seems like it's beneficial only to a small minority of people at high positions and only in small runs.

You said yourself that you need to be a senior+ dev to properly utilize agents(who in this context are essentially just digital vibe coders), but now it seems like you are fine with vibe coding the entire game.

Where is the line between bad "vibe coding" an the good "proper use of ai"?

I will add that the idea that you will be able to create a large scale project alone with vibe coding as your primary tool is just as unrealistic as before. The answer to that problem was always "scale down", because someone will be accountable for the result, ai generated or not, and that person has to be real and skilled.

What I want to clarify is that I’m not calling for Scirra to integrate AI features directly into the engine. That really isn’t necessary. Competing in that space would require the kind of large-scale technical resources that companies like Google or OpenAI have — teams of thousands of engineers constantly iterating on model capabilities.

In fact, I would rather Scirra not attempt to implement in-engine AI features right now. It may be wiser to wait until the technology matures further. Given how fast model capabilities and compute are evolving, today’s integrations can quickly become obsolete.

At the moment, simply saving projects as folder projects already allows developers to use external tools like VS Code or Cursor for AI-assisted workflows.

The main idea of this post is different.

Rather than adding AI features, I’m suggesting that Scirra provide the necessary foundation for AI to grow around Construct. In other words, a clear reference that allows AI to read and understand Construct properly. The cost of doing that would likely be much lower, and it wouldn’t require maintaining AI features directly.

The goal is not automation for its own sake, but enabling AI to understand Construct’s internal data structures well enough to produce accurate and stable results.

Everything you are saying is already possible if you just show stuff from construct to Gemini or something. It can give you explanations, it can read screenshots of your event sheets, give you pseudocode.

I admit It's pretty cool, and it can give you general directions, assist in your learning, but it can't replace learning from others and by yourself and if you think that there is any implementation of ai at all that can make it better - you don't know what you're talking about. And my main point - all ai use is dev's responsibility. If you want to ruin your reputation, ride the hype - do it without dragging others into this circus.

Scirra would just waste time and money on the feature no one asked for and none of you ai bros can even describe. Those resources could be spent implementing and improving actually useful and long waited features, like 3D.

If you are so eager to use ai in your game development - use it, no one is stopping you. You can ask ai for the code, ask it to generate an image for you. What else do you need? Those actions are on you and the amount of disrespect you have for your audience.

There is zero point in shoving it directly into engine. Construct is good as it is, they are already adding features that are actually needed. Ai? It's not needed.