• Scirra Construct Showreel - Free 2D game creator
    227 replies, posted
[B]Game making software[/B]: [B]pros[/B]: easier, faster to make, gives a clearer vision of your game (having a game up and running in a shorter time) [B]cons[/B]: complicates adding major features and optimization, mostly data driven (therefore slower) [B]Programming : pros[/B]: gives a lot more control to the programmer, easily add new features, gives insight into how to develop and update games, depending on how efficient the code is: it will be faster, it makes you feel l33t [B]cons[/B]: more difficult to make a game, you have to deal with ever-changing technologies and techniques All in all, when you make games, it's all about how fun it is. Lots of times, new features will make if funner, sometimes it doesn't make a difference.
[QUOTE=mysteryman;22385551]Say a game artist makes a level design, it's created but then he realizes "hey some kind of obstruction like an enemy that does XXX would really make this level harder and more fun to play!" So he designs the enemy, but just because he is drawn all pretty doesn't mean he's done, he goes to a programmer to get the AI for it and other such things. [editline]01:26AM[/editline] because the code is already there! So, as a matter of fact, code DOES matter to a game. You just didn't make it yourself and you have to work with what's given to you. [editline]01:27AM[/editline] Yeah i think you're right man, earlier i was laughing my ass off and some of his replies but now they're just getting moronic. Something's up.[/QUOTE] you think he's trolling by promoting software he made a thread about :frogdowns:
[QUOTE=cccritical;22385740]you think he's trolling by promoting software he made a thread about :frogdowns:[/QUOTE] So you're saying he's granted amnesty for making the thread? Yeah, no. Now if you excuse me i got work tomorrow and need to sleep. If this shit's still up and running then maybe i'll pop in. [editline]01:40AM[/editline] Also using the frog doesn't make you cool, even if you did already use it 4 other times in the same thread.
I can assure you I'm not trolling. Construct is the best thing ever.
If I had time, I would definitely pick this up.
[QUOTE]Evil_Toaster posted: I am telling you, you can make fully featured video games in Construct without writing any code. I've done it before, it works. "making games" isn't about programming anyway. I'm sure, you can make "fully featured" games using this tool, and I have no doubt that they'll be fun to play if it's something with a concept worth playing, but the bottom line is the quality will never surpass that of a good, manually coded game. Nothing is perfect. There are limitations to this tool, just as there are any other tools promising similar end results with minimal effort. cccritical posted: nothing, like coding for example I'll admit that may have been a bit hypocritical on my part, but the amount of care put into things when manually coding something will always surpass that of mindlessly clicking a few buttons and calling it a masterpiece. The results will always be better. What you're doing with this is essentially using templates, putting the right premade components together, and changing their values to your liking. And that's fine, I'll say it a million times yet nobody will seem to understand. But when manually coding something you have complete control. With your logic if coding isn't perfect then something as "perfect" as Construct would never be able to be coded in the first place. cccritical posted: Damn tootin'. You can make an entire Source mod without a single engine edit, when you think about it Python or C++ is as much a starting point as Source, nothing is completely from scratch. I'm not talking about editing the engine code. If the engine you're using is good then you won't have to. I use OGRE for rendering and I've never had to touch any of it's code. But you'll still have to touch the code for all the content, right? Or do you think all the weapons, NPCs, ai, missions, etc... will just appear out of thin air? Something like making a Sourcemod is fine, but it's not creating something from scratch. You're still just editing a template of a generic FPS and adding in your own non-coding aesthetic elements. By scratch I don't mean coding the rendering engine. You can use an engine, like Unreal or OGRE, to take care of all the nasty calculations required to figure out what pixels go where on the screen. But you still need to code the actual game. And using a game maker tool will never allow for the same amount of complexity or quality coding does. Evil_Toaster posted: "making games" isn't about programming anyway. ... I hope you never make games. Were you born yesterday? Coding isn't some new concept that nobody uses. In fact, it's what everyone uses. I'd like you to name me any well-known, current game that uses a game maker like this. I'll guarantee you every single professionally made game out there right now, since the beginning of time, has been made by coding it and not by using a game maker. There's a reason these things aren't used by the pro's. Everything on computers are made by coding them. All games are made by coding them. I'm really failing to see your logic here. I hope you never make games.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Evil_Toaster posted: You don't understand. Game design and programming are two different things. Game design is the act of designing the game that is to be programmed. You can't make a game without programming it. It doesn't just jump out of thin air. Sure you can use tools like these but with all the limitations you'd be crazy to use this over programming things yourself, the way you want to. Yes there are game designers and game programmers--two different things. Those who think up the concepts and those who bring them to life. Both are very vital parts of the game development process. However, you've just acknowledged game programming as a valid resource anyway, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=dvondrake;22385550]One last time: Yes, it is all about the end result. However, the end result will be better if it's manually coded by someone who knows what they're doing rather than if it's made by clicking a few buttons on some "ultimate" game making tool. But either way, you [b]really[/b] aren't getting it. I'm done, all I can do now is rehash the same ideas over and over again until hopefully you finally get it, but it doesn't look like that's ever going to happen any time soon. I'm severely failing to find any logic in what you're saying, and thus have nothing left to say. You win, have fun "making games". Okay now you're just trolling, assuming you weren't earlier. That's it, I'm outta' here.[/QUOTE] I'm severely failing to find any logic in what you're saying. There are reasons why we don't make games out of 0's and 1's now. Ok, how about this, don't use Ogre because you're not coding it yourself and don't have complete control of the events! Or how about ditching C++ and programming your games in Assembly! Or just forget a language in general and code using 0's and 1's. There's a reason why Valve uses Source instead of Goldsrc, or why Epic Games pumps out new engines. Are they idiots for making easier to use software? Face it, things get more easy, simple, and reliable to use. There's no reason to make a program with SFML and slave for hours just designing character movement with gravity involved when you can have an easy and simple way to make a playable game sans the artistic talent of designing sprites in around 40 seconds. It's like saying a caveman is using a wheel for his wagon and the other cavemen with their flat cubed wheels are mocking him for using an easier and wimpier way of moving their stuff. What I think are all the programmers in here who were designing 2D games are defending themselves and bashing Construct because they are insecure.
[QUOTE=Chunk3ym4n;22386205]I'm severely failing to find any logic in what you're saying. There are reasons why we don't make games out of 0's and 1's now. Ok, how about this, don't use Ogre because you're not coding it yourself and don't have complete control of the events! Or how about ditching C++ and programming your games in Assembly! Or just forget a language in general and code using 0's and 1's. There's a reason why Valve uses Source instead of Goldsrc, or why Epic Games pumps out new engines. Are they idiots for making easier to use software? Face it, things get more easy, simple, and reliable to use. There's no reason to make a program with SFML and slave for hours just designing character movement with gravity involved when you can have an easy and simple way to make a playable game sans the artistic talent of designing sprites in around 40 seconds. It's like saying a caveman is using a wheel for his wagon and the other cavemen with their flat cubed wheels are mocking him for using an easier and wimpier way of moving their stuff. What I think are all the programmers in here who were designing 2D games are defending themselves and bashing Construct because they are insecure.[/QUOTE] Everyone listen to what this man says.
Eh, what really keeps me with Game Maker is the fact that it has limited 3D capabilities, even though it requires a fair amount of coding it feels like you made something more unique than the endless sea of Mario fangames and Shmups that it churns out. Just today I started messing with a 3d modeling program designed for it. Still a lot of things I need to figure out but I've messed with basic-interface modeling programs before so with some tutorials I'll hopefully get somewhere. I'll give it a try, though. Oh and before you rate me bad reading: I see that there were some 3d engines created in the past. However they seem do be broken and haven't been working since 2009.
[QUOTE=dvondrake;22384815]Getting a bit feisty now aren't we. It's not that I'm elitist--I'm not. I love how you're talking about generalizing when you automatically assume I'm one. I'm simply saying that for me it's just so much more fun to code manually. If I use any "game maker" I feel like I'm cheating. And either way, it's bound to have it's limitations. There's no way in hell it could be completely 100% limitless and superior to programming in every single way. And it's not an ease of use problem either. Programming is easy for me, I don't really have to work my ass off to prototype an idea. If that's what it feels like for you then you're probably a shit programmer to begin with. Are you saying that instead of artists manually painting their works you'd rather have a machine do it for them? Sure it's easier, possibly more efficient if the painter isn't really that good, and arguably produces similar results. But there's no fun in that. What I'm trying to get at is no matter how you look at it, this is just clicking buttons and working with a bunch of presets and changing the values of things here and there. It's like buying a table from IKEA, putting it together, then claiming you made the table from scratch yourself. Sure the end result might be fun to play with, and I'm sure you'll be able to make some neat stuff with it. But it'll have it limitations, there's no such thing as an "all-in-one, does-everything" machine. If you happen to make something cool with it, good for you. But it'll never beat coding games yourself. The end result will always be better. Also to the bolded part, thanks for telling me what I can and can't decide for myself. I don't see why you're getting so upset anyway. So I like coding things myself and I personally don't believe this will ever beat coding things manually, big deal. "Oh no, someone on the internet has an opinion that differs from mine!? FLAME!!" That's like saying you shouldn't have to learn how to paint to make a painting. So you can only fingerpaint and instead of learning things the proper way you use stencils.[/QUOTE] Sept of course you're assuming that other people would enjoy coding the same amount you would or find it just as easy. I love coding myself, which is why I do it over tools like Construct. However other people probably don't enjoy it as much as either of us, considering that everyone isn't a programmer. Though it was sent harshly it wasn't really flaming. But it's so easy to find a programmer who is butthurt about development tools like this, your badmouthing it easily puts you in this category. Though I am a bit of a hypocrite for automatically generalizing you and others. [editline]10:54PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Aredbomb;22386439]Eh, what really keeps me with Game Maker is the fact that it has limited 3D capabilities, even though it requires a fair amount of coding it feels like you made something more unique than the endless sea of Mario fangames and Shmups that it churns out. Just today I started messing with a 3d modeling program designed for it. Still a lot of things I need to figure out but I've messed with basic-interface modeling programs before so with some tutorials I'll hopefully get somewhere. I'll give it a try, though. Oh and before you rate me bad reading: I see that there were some 3d engines created in the past. However they seem do be broken and haven't been working since 2009.[/QUOTE] Oh no, Game Maker has terrible 3D support. Bah, I remember when the first plugin came out... So bad...
[QUOTE=mysteryman;22385788] Also using the frog doesn't make you cool, even if you did already use it 4 other times in the same thread.[/QUOTE] 4 times and I haven't gotten the point across
[QUOTE=mysteryman;22384924]This is what specifically got me. I'm half/half with dvondrake with what he said but what you have here, that's different. I care how a product was made. If some guy did a completely half-assed job of making a game, causing a fuckton of bugs and other problems, it's perfectly acceptable as long as the game has some aspect of fun. The same could be made for food. Some company could make something like a cupcake, filling it with obscene amounts of fats, sugars, and other things that are not even remotely needed,. Their factory can be incredibly dirty, workers with no hairnets scratching their dandruff filled head over vats of cake batter, but hey, fuck my health if it's delicious![/QUOTE] What. All your examples are components of the end product, the bad for you part? The bugs? Those are all part of the end product :\
Love it, it's just like Multimedia Fusion or The Games Factory. Learned how to use it instantly.
look, although no game programmers use some game-making-software. a few do create game making software and then make games using that. also, game design and programming are 2 different things (as said above), so a game making program is simply doing the programming for you, nothing wrong with that, as in the industry, the game designers are normally not the programmers.
[QUOTE=LyokoJames;22389605]look, although no game programmers use some game-making-software. a few do create game making software and then make games using that. also, game design and programming are 2 different things (as said above), so a game making program is simply doing the programming for you, nothing wrong with that, as in the industry, the game designers are normally not the programmers.[/QUOTE] I doesn't quite work like that actually. It doesn't 'generate code on the fly' or whatever. It's just data driven and event driven using the features the guy has implemented. It's a pick and mix scene management in a way. I'm trying to get my point across in a less asshole-ish way but I know some kid is going to come along and see it as disrespecting this software.
What a shitshtorm. This is for people who do NOT want or can spend their time learning to code. If I am a 2d artist, I can easily make a game in this without the need for a programmer. This is not meant to be AAA quality commercial game, it' just for fun.
[QUOTE=layla;22392164]I doesn't quite work like that actually. It doesn't 'generate code on the fly' or whatever. It's just data driven and event driven using the features the guy has implemented. It's a pick and mix scene management in a way. I'm trying to get my point across in a less asshole-ish way but I know some kid is going to come along and see it as disrespecting this software.[/QUOTE] go back to your home section, where opinions are allowed.
[QUOTE=johanz;22392494]What a shitshtorm. This is for people who do NOT want or can spend their time learning to code. If I am a 2d artist, I can easily make a game in this without the need for a programmer. This is not meant to be AAA quality commercial game, it' just for fun.[/QUOTE] Yup and that's fine. [editline]04:47PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Ohforf;22392880]This thread in a nutshell : Dude1 : " Hey this gamemaking program is pretty neat, and doesen't require learning a complex coding language " Programmer : "[B]HAHA WHAT A PIECE OF SHIT, I COULD CODE A BETTER GAME LOOK AT ME I KNOW PROGRAMMING[/B]"[/QUOTE] No need for the jealously m8
I'll give you a serious suggestion, here. Get the best arists of the MS paint forums, and find the best coder, or the best coders, and make a facepunch game. Artists like Plutonia and Xamllev.
constructor useful not only for games [img]http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/8522/temp2010060518474598.gif[/img] btw it's still don't have some networks tools to make multiplayers games
No, in all honesty guys, i think this thing is pretty awesome. But some people are praising this like you could shoo away all programmers and still make grade A games. I can understand where dvondrake is coming from, but i can't code for shit. Obvioulsy a game made from scratch from a skilled coded could easily beat any game this thing cranks out because has exactly what he wants instead of working with what is given to him by a premade program. [editline]12:16PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Chunk3ym4n;22386205]It's like saying a caveman is using a wheel for his wagon and the other cavemen with their flat cubed wheels are mocking him for using an easier and wimpier way of moving their stuff. .[/QUOTE] Actually, in this case a better metaphor would be that All the cavemen make their wheels using only their hands and other rocks resulting in a smooth, well rounded wheel. Then some other caveman finds out that he could something to make wheels much faster and without a lot of effort involved. The result is an essentially similar wheel, but not as smooth and with a few chinks in it.
I'm pretty sure you can make "grade A" games with Construct.
Sure, but what? You can only make things using the features the guy has implemented (unless you make an extension (but if you're willing to do that then you may aswell just write it yourself anyway)). That's not me being a dick or anything, it's a fact. Best example would be if this was using OGL to render. He could have only implemented display lists and you needed to use VBO's because display lists would be too slow for your needs. You would have to grab the source and add that yourself. So why not just work with OGL in the first place? I 100% agree this is a bit of fun for people who want to get into game development but you're going to save alot of time by just starting where you're meant to start (in my opinion) Would you atleast agree with me on that?
[QUOTE=Evil_Toaster;22393953]I'm pretty sure you can make "grade A" games with Construct.[/QUOTE] you're really just stoking the fire here. My first post i even said this was great, but it HAS limitations. Stop living in the clouds where this program is 100% perfect in every way, shape, and form.
no ur wrong this does everything shut up :(
[QUOTE=layla;22394352]no ur wrong this does everything shut up :([/QUOTE] all you are doing is repeatedly shitposting in this thread trying to ruin it for others
[QUOTE=layla;22371739]Because it doesn't take years? Sure, by all means make a little game but I would not want to be bound my the limitations of someones framework when I can cut out the bullshit and work directly with a graphics api, cos that's all this is doing underneath, you're just setting the scene. It's the equivalent of making a map in half life, adding some textures and scripting out a scenario. Have your 5 minutes of fun but I'm just throwing this out there.[/QUOTE] i dunno man mapping is p fun
[QUOTE=VaultBoi;22394399]all you are doing is repeatedly shitposting in this thread trying to ruin it for others[/QUOTE] Sigh, you still don't get it. No matter how nice i try to be about it, no one will listen to reason. I'm not ruining anything nor am i telling anyone what to do. Just read through my points.
[QUOTE=layla;22394524]Sigh, you still don't get it. No matter how nice i try to be about it, no one will listen to reason. I'm not ruining anything nor am i telling anyone what to do. Just read through my points.[/QUOTE] I think most of the people here just thumb through the posts.
Layla, we get it, you're not a fan of game making programs. That doesn't mean you should shit up the thread with how you're better because you do it the 'right' way. Half the posts in this thread are you saying it's shit and people should just program their own stuff. Let it go.
[QUOTE=mysteryman;22394561]I think most of the people here just thumb through the posts.[/QUOTE] Yeah, the above post pretty much confirms that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.