Son of Bryce

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Son of Bryce

  1. I really love Construct 2. For me, it just makes it easy and fun to make games. Without have to worry about digging in code and all sorts of technical issues that involves. I think if you spend some time to get familiar with it's design and its limitations, it's easy to design great stuff with it. Really quickly. I've never been a fan of Game Makers interface, in comparison. It's very capable but the interface is ancient feeling and counterintuitive to me. I think that is Construct 2 is more streamlined and easier to get into. But the main difference is that Construct 2 just exports HTML games. You can wrap them or whatever, but Game Maker supports many more executable formats off the bat. The free version of Construct is good enough to get an idea if you'd like it. I think Game Maker has a similar free option or demo. See for yourself!
  2. I don't know if there any tools people have made to work especially with Phaser but there isn't anything Phaser specific you need to worry about with developing a Facebook game. The Facebook API is all javascript and they've got tons of examples on their developer site.
  3. AAG, I think it's easy to think the mine version is better because the art is nice and you probably can't draw as well. But as others have stated, your minimal version actually works better functionally for the gameplay because it's clearer to understand with the simple shapes and colors. It's important to remember that game art isn't just for looks, but it must help the player understand what's going on as well. That said, they're both fine and I think you should just show both versions if you're trying to decide which to show. Certain people will find each version more appealing so why not cater to everybody? You might even be able to sell both versions to the same person if they want to present it as a new game further down the line. Just my thoughts!
  4. b10b, sorry if I came off a bit abrasive but my initial expectation was that lots of news outlets would've covered the announcements. In retrospect I feel like the news wasn't as big as some places thought it'd be. Game development news sites have been hyping up this new Apple TV as a console killer, with its new controller, but it doesn't appear to be the case. I don't think gaming has ever been a focus for Apple. I see it more as luck that iOS became such a great gaming platform. I feel like it's more of a side effect of creating an open platform over catering to game devs and targeting the game audience. So in that respect, I don't think the Apple TV is going to trump PlayStation or Xbox out of the gate, but it has the potential to eat away at that market as the devices become more commonplace underneath TVs. An important detail is the new Apple TV is $150. Which is a bit more than the impulse-friendly $99 usually attached to the Apple TV. Being so expensive I dont think it'll be super hot when it releases (past the initial enthusiasts) but assuming they'll be frequently updating these, they'll probly have the current model for $99 next year. At some point they might just sell them for $50 and have 3 different price tiers. When they get cheap enough, there's potential for there to be one in every household, which could make it a very viable game platform. During the presentation, they demoed a multiplayer Crossy Road using iPhone/iTouches as separate controllers. This shows potential for great party games on the platform. All there needs is to be some kinda runaway success to really solidify it. They also got Harmonix (Rock Band) to make music themed Wii Sports styled game. But as you said, b10b, it all depends on the adoption trends. Apple TV's already been pretty popular with such limited functionality. We'll have to wait and see. Red Spark, I think you're being too rational! I think there's more possibilities than ever with so many ways to connect people and devices. If you follow the unbeaten path, anything is possible. chg, from what it looked like the basic functionality of the touch screen is tap and swipe (up, down, left, right). You swipe to browse thru menus, which seems like it might actually be annoying. I'm not sure if it can a directional click ability or somethign.
  5. Yeah, it should be no prob doing that. I did something similar with a game I made in Unity a few years ago. Here's a post I made on it, . I think the first few steps would be the same. Set up your app and whatnot. FB has a javascript API that you should be able to use to make calls to the FB api. I'm not sure if there are any kinds of limitations with the Javascript API since I could imagine there might be security issues with making calls from different domains but you can look into it! Once your user is autheticated by logging into their FB acct, you can save a score for the game. And you can pull up that score for all of their friends. When I used it, you couldn't have multiple high score lists (like level 1, level 2, etc.). But I'm not sure if they've improved on that since then. Good luck!
  6. Yeah, good idea. Could make an interesting game out of the effect as well!
  7. b10b, Apple's regular product announcements. You must've been sleeping under a rock to know nothing about it or not be able to put that together based on seeker's post. New iPhone. iOS9 supports adblockers, no telling what else that entails. I think it's released publicly so others can report. The new chips are waaaaaaay faster supposedly which means HTML games will be significantly faster. New iPad Pro is a psedo-PC. Stylus accesory. It's got more of a "PC grade" ARM processor. Higher resolution screen It allows you to split the view and have a full resolution iPad screen on one side, another app on the other. Still uses iOS so it's still pretty limited as a computer, though. New Apple TV has an open ecosystem now. New controller with touch pad, accelerometer. You can connect iPhones/iPads to use as additional controllers. I think that's about it for game related stuff.
  8. I haven't release an app yet but you can use Phonegap/Cordova to wrap HTML games for Windows Phone.
  9. One thing to keep in mind, is that if you plan on doing WebGL Unity might be a great option. I'm not up to date with the progress of the Unity 5 WebGL exporter, but it seems like it'll be the best option for doing something in WebGL. The problem of WebGL is that it's complex to setup stuff and there's no IDE which would be helpful for this process. You're doing everything in pure code without being able to get a view into the world you're creating. It's doable but I found it too time consuming and I'd rather spend more time focusing on the game, rather than getting basic things like loading models and textures working. Unity does have more overhead, but it's become more reasonable for smaller projects now that it has 2D tools and some functional GUI tools.
  10. I don't think he means building a native project but using an HTML wrapper like Phonegap to create an app.
  11. It wouldn't be too difficult to adjust the contrast of the image on the frontend in HTML with a canvas using Javascript. A quick search and I was able to find this tool:
  12. Will the game work locally in all browsers? Firefox and Chrome? There are certain permissions restraints when loading local files from your browser. Loading images or json might throw this error. Try loading from web server to see if it works on android. If it works, youll probly need a wrapper like Phonegap to run on your phone.
  13. Nice game (played web version). I like that you can select the by moving the block at the title screen. There should be a bit of delay for when the game starts moving once you start, it starts so immediately that it's difficult to be prepared. It doesn't reset the game state after you lose, because of that you can only get one play out of it. Would be more addicting if it actually reset.
  14. Nice game. Worked for me on Windows Phone although the resizing is squashed in landscape.
  15. I played on my phone and it appears squished horizontally, so I was forced to play it in portrait style. I had fun with it but felt it could be improved with a few tweaks. Most of the screens I played were really repetitive, often its just jump as soon as possible, wait and jump as soon as you hit the ground. I understand this is because of the one screen limitation, but I feel it would be much more interesting if you added scrolling to have linger stages. I got as far as the lava stages and didn't understand the point since touch the normal walls kills you anyway. I got up to lv 18, I hope it remembers my last level. Nice work.
  16. This looks pretty sweet. I couldn't figure out how to pan the camera though. I expected to be able to hold space and click to drag the camera.
  17. Hey Ya'll! I've been working on a three.js/WebGL demo over the past couple weeks. It's still super rough and there's no real gameplay yet but I'm just gonna put it out there in hopes I get around to iterating on it in the future. Early release, my friends! Play it at: Screenshots: I created the models in Blender: And here's a concept I sketched to motivate myself: So at this point, it just has a scrolling background and you can move the ship around. I've got some WIP Leap Motion integration in the works and still haven't even sketched enemy ships yet! I'm aiming to update this every now and then as I have time. I used three.js and open-sourced software for the development. Tried to see how life was without Adobe, haha. Painful but doable! Blog post about it at: Thanks for taking a look! Peace! -Bryson
  18. Oh man, this is pretty awesome! I'm hoping that it saves automatically, haha. I just got the key to the first door. Issue I had with it when I first started was that my window was too narrow and it pushed the text box at the bottom in the middle of the screen and I couldn't click anything. Also, it took me a while of trial and error on the keyboard to figure out the keys. I hoped that arrows would work and when they didn't I was about to give up. Maybe it says it when you start, but making it more obvious would make it a lot easier to get into when you're first starting. It was too frustrating just using mouse for me. Looks great, keep it up!
  19. I think an iPod touch is good enough to test. I think the only functionality differences might be stuff that's phone related, like testing what happens to your app if a call interrupts it. The hardware's typically the same. iPod Touch 5th gen is actually better hardware than iPhone 4 (more ram and faster processor). The 4s seems to be on par with a 5th gen iTouch. iPhone tend to have better cameras as well. Oh yeah, I guess the big difference is the screen whereas the iPod Touch 5 screen is the same 4in as iPhone 5, and the iPhone 4's have the smaller screen. An annoying thing to have to test for... Personally I use a 4th gen iTouch for testing, its pretty similar to an iPhone 4. Works for me!
  20. I have an iPad 1 and it doesn't crash in the App Store. I've never heard of that. It's true that a lot of newer games might not work, when you're talking Infinity Blade or something, but I don't have much problems playing most stuff on it even if it's a bit choppy sometimes.
  21. Thanks for this explanation cang! I couldn't figure out why my player was jumping back every time an item was collected.
  22. I'm not sure if this is even relates, but I've come across this before. Maybe it's helpful:
  23. I've used a little bit of Spine, I find it pretty awesome. The interface is pretty intuitive and I like it because it has runtimes for many platforms including HTML, Unity & Flash. I animated something in Spine and played it back in HTML with Pixi.js and it worked out pretty well. I've never heard of Dragonbones but it looks pretty neat. Looks a bit similar to Spine, although the workflow is different. There's a demo for Spine, it's fully featured except for export/save I believe. It's worth checking out. I don't know anything about the vector support though. You can import .ai or .eps files? Do they generate spritesheets as well?
  24. Thanks Pedro! Is this correct that there's no way to set the FPS? If that's the case, is there a time variable to use for determining how long it's been since the last frame? I'm trying to figure out how to account for the differences in playback on a desktop and mobile.