Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文（簡体字中国語）
繁體中文（繁体字中国語）
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština（チェコ語）
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia（インドネシア語）
Magyar（ハンガリー語）
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português（ポルトガル語－ポルトガル）
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română（ルーマニア語）
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
ルールとガイドライン
この投稿を報告する
http://www.clickteam.com/fusion-3-development-blog?f3id=8687
I would like to start off with
OMG: I love the new expression editor syntax. It is very similar to VBA which I love the simplicity of it and that it shows you a list of syntaxs you can choose everytime you add a new chain. This allows you to see all the options you can do, I loved that in VBA and this will make it awesome in Fusion 3.
It essentially eliminates "bare bone guides" for syntax. That was one reason I had an easy time learning VBA, and this will just make Fusion 3 easier to learn.
The other topic I want to discuss is Zoom capability. I only found a way to zoom in (viewport object), but zooming out was a nightmare. I had to use the grid object, a ton of math, and object frames of varying sizes (or scale, which I didn't like) to imitate a zoom feature (with a scroll feature as well). I then had to create my own wrap on background images because it would be too big to cover the entire grid. Essentially the background would follow grid up to a point the snap back, creating an illusion of movement.
Coordinate System and Layer Topic:
http://www.clickteam.com/fusion-3-development-blog?f3id=8747
http://www.clickteam.com/fusion-3-development-blog?f3id=8729
With the new Coordinate System and Layer, I could imitate the zoom capability in an easier way. The expand, fit inside, fit outside, stretch can help open up possibilites. But the Coordinate System differences per layer can essentially eliminate the grid object.
But... is there anyway we can get a Zoom object that can do all this?
http://www.clickteam.com/fusion-3-development-blog?f3id=8716
Out of curiosity, how could the nested events work with groups.
So right now I do the following
Group 1
Always + Condition c : Event a
Group 2
Always + Condition d : Event b
I could put all code on one line, but I wanted to seperate code because of group differences. Also if you want to activate or deactivate groups.
With nesting it would be
Always
- Condition c
-- Event a
- Condition d
-- Event b
How can Groups be used in the nesting? (if they can be used) Or will it still have to be seperate as so:
Group 1
Always
- Condition c
-- Event a
Group 2
Always
- Condition d
-- Event b
I am just looking for optimization, groups make me repeat conditions that are the same, but have different events because I need to keep them grouped for readability or if I need to deactivate a group.
1. I would like some good improvements in the physics system and more control over it and every aspect it involves, it's very limited in 2.5.
2. The addition of an "else" command for any "if" condition would be awesome as well and time saving avoiding some extra instructions.
3. Another thing that would really help is that you could make sort of "libraries", for example a library of variables and commands that you can apply to a group of levels just calling that particular library, it's a pain when you gotta make the same changes 20 times because you have 20 levels and you realize there is a mistake or something new you want to add to the game, and you must make changes 20 times, that in the best of the cases, sometimes that leads you to cause problems in other levels where you added certain instruction to correct something temporary but you forgot it, when you add this new one the level gets bugged and causes another time losing problem to deal with... So in resume, I think libraries would make the language more solid and organized when the expressions begin to get long and the program more complex and bigger.
4. And last but not less important, I hope that people buying MMF 2.5 dev from the beginning at full price get a very good discount for it, it really hurted me someway when I saw the whole pack in humble bundle for 15 dollars after having paid over 300 dollars myself... don't take me wrong, I think it's nice for everyone to have access to this awesome software, but I think you all get my point and I think it's fair enough!
Cheers!
Second would be a basic inventory, something simple that users can just plug in for rough testing purposes, or just building upon.
Last but not least would be a new, updated raycaster object.
http://www.clickteam.com/fusion-3-development-blog?f3id=8762
That new storyboard editor will come in handy because yes, I start to forget what each frame points to. I can also see where I have disconnects when I forgot to point to a frame.
I assume the "frame diagram flow" (I am dubbing it that) is only a pictorial and has no interaction with the code itself.
The only novel thing that I've noticed are matrix transforms (3d functions) which GDevelop doesn't seem to have.
Who are stealing who? I think those features are common in modern game engines nowadays and Clickteam are trying to catch up.
Sometimes I wonder why Clickteam is still in the business...
MMF2 was far from 'dead' when CF2.5 is launched... it was still getting constant updates until they release CF2.5. And people were still using MMF2 to develop products in that transition phase. CF2.5 was their effort to generate funds to boost Fusion 3 development.
Yea, they're still in business, it's amazing right? :D
If you aren't happy with Fusion as much as you are with other tools, why stick around man? We don't want you to have to suffer. If Fusion isn't cutting it for you, your not going to hurt our feelings having to go to these other tools you keep mentioning. Fusion works great for ALOT of people, but we can't make everyone happy.
So in summary if you plan on continuing to give Fusion effort and time that is awesome. And we will all do our best to help. But I am going to ask you to start thinking of ways to slant your questions and/or concerns to the "positive" side of the spectrum. cool?
Thing is, I want CF to be best possible tool for 2D games. But with Clickteam constantly playing catch up and not doing their own R&D and CF costing hundreds of dollars, I don't see that happening.
Hell, I'd be more than happy if you hired guys behind GDevelop (they're also French so it wouldn't be much of a problem) and use GDevelop's code as a base for CF3. GPL allows for making your software closed again if all contributors allow.