Most wanted/least wanted in MMF3

With all due respect, LB, I think "Full Extent" doesn't sound like an appropriate name for software - it just doesn't work - and Protocode implies MMF is meant to be used for prototyping exclusively, which is not at all the case.

I would really like to see improvements to how events look and feel. I cant describe in detail what I want since I havent thought it completely through yet, but this image on the construct website got me thinking:

Please login to see this attachment.

It reminds me very much of the "click" series event grid, but it has a better look and feel (in my opinion), is quite compact and more readable. Just by looking at it you know instantly what it does.

Im not saying it should look like this, Im just saying that many improvements can be made and it bears thinking about. It's inspiring to see how others have solved this.

And while I'm at it, some other stuff in regards to events and looping, etc..

A built in for-each loop. I cant get why this has not been added to the runtime already, it should not have to be a separate extension. For advanced projects its really a must since instance selection always has been tricky in the click range. In my view this should be added as a new event to the specific object being looped through. So you can create a new event, select an object and simply pick "for each" or "object loop" or something similar.

Functions. Yes, they should be built in for sure, long overdue. The function object has a nice way of doing it but preferebly they would have unlimited amount of arguments and return values. These would fit in the "special conditions" object along with fast loops.

Variables. They're so fundamental and better support is key if mmf is to compete in my view. Sure, global variables are fine, but 90% of my global variables are only used on one frame (the gameplay frame). I wish one could simply create variables specific to a certain frame, just like global variables. Each variable should have the option to be global as well, not so you can access them, but so when you leave and return to the frame they are kept in memory. And variables should be able to be created during runtime through the "special conditions" object (or similar in mmf3).

Asset library. Maybe this has already been mentioned? This is also something I wish they would have done for mmf 2. A main asset library for all game objects for the whole application, not for each specific frame. This is similar to how almost 100% of other development enviroments does it, and for good reason. If you use the same object on several frames it only need to be stored once, so takes less space, and if you change the object, the changes are instantly applied through all frames (yes please). If you want an object used on two differents frames to be separate, just make a duplicate copy.

Have other stuff I've thought about as well but I need to go to bed now

Quote from SirEatAlot

I cant get why this has not been added to the runtime already, it should not have to be a separate extension.

MMF2 is using an old, broke, and buggy code base that can barely even handle qualifiers, global events, behaviors, and fastloops. They would like to add this functionality but can't without causing hug instability.

Obviously it will be in MMF3

I would like it to have subfolders. I find it very annoying that you can't have nested folders in the Workspace Toolbar.

I think the name CT was leaning toward was Fusion Engine (although I still prefer my own suggestion, Click Engine)

A new name is definitely going to play a vital role in the success of MMF3

Quote from LB

Obviously it will be in MMF3

Sure hope so!

Quote

MMF2 is using an old, broke, and buggy code base that can barely even handle qualifiers, global events, behaviors, and fastloops. They would like to add this functionality but can't without causing hug instability.

Another way to look at it is the mmf2 runtime and main program does some truly amazing things, and performs really well for almost any situation you care to throw at it. It abstracts a lot of the complexity away from general problems of making a game and it has done this through evolution of the original knp idea rather than copy what came before it. Yes that does mean that there are things that work well and things that don't and we all hope that the things that don't work so well, or that could be designed better now we have the benefit of hindsight, will be rectified in mmf3.

I think it is worth contemplating that despite some things we would want to change, mmf2 is still a great tool.

MMF2 is god damn amazing still, not many software packages out there allow such ease at 2D gaming with a mix of exporters.

The exporters are definitely the hit out of the ball park for me. I've been asking for those for years. Never anyone who would even listen to it. So, I rode off into the sunset. Only returned due to seeing the exporters are now offered. I've been hearing rumors and seeing people beg for MMF3 for as long as there has been an MMF2. That is a long time now. So many little irritating things about using MMF2 that could use some talented touches--and I do know this team is talented. One thing that is driving me crazy at the moment is my automatic tendency to hit the <delete> key when I want to get rid of an object. I've lost count of how many times, I end up automatically hitting the <delete> key and ending up back in the Storyboard editor. It is just little usage things that can make or break a program's success. That is especially true when the software is trying to appeal to newbies who may not be as forgiving as some of the old timers and other more advanced users.

I have a lot of nostalgia related to AMOS, Click 'N Play, and Click 'N Create. I decided to spend what I consider a small fortune on MMF2 due to the exporters. My verdict is still out, but I do believe the software is still viable and would love to see it evolve for 20 more years. Keep up the good work CT.

Old topic, but a good one.

Anyway, I thought I'd post here because I have a feature request for MMF:

Add the option: "Count objects in a zone"

Currently there appears to be no way to do this without loops.
We can test the objects position in the frame, we can count the number of objects in the frame, we can test if an object is within a zone, and we can compare to the number of objects in a zone to a fixed value, but we can't simply retrieve "how many objects are in a zone".

I believe this would be useful for a number of users, and I myself have longed for this option repeatedly.

Most wanted: Vector graphics
I'm sure it's widely requested already, but yeah, vector graphics. PLEASE HAVE VECTOR GRAPHICS.

Second most wanted: Qualifier reform
Having only a set variety of qualifiers is stupid enough, but I can work with it fine. What HAS tripped me up on multiple occasions, however, was the fact that you can't test for qualifiers in individual-object-events. Do you know what I'm talking about? It's a serious pain and has made qualifiers almost useless for me.

Third most wanted: Alterable values to be named in individual object event pages
So like, Active 1 "Pump" has an alterable value J named "Gersplooger", but if I want Active 2 "Nozzle" to have an event that causes the Pump to add 3 to Gersplooger, I have to program it as "add three to Alterable Value J".
It forces me to memorize which values are which and I have to go back to double-check. Do this five hundred times, and your brain goes mind head dumb.

Least wanted: More emphasis on pre-made engines in general
I can make my own engine, thank you very much! *huffity puff*
In big-class triple-A games it makes sense to license a pre-existing engine, but in the kind of games you make in Multi Media Fusion--for the most part--the engine is like half the gameplay. So you'd have to start from scratch anyway if you want your game to have a unique feel.

EDIT: This post is directed Pineapple

You mean like this?

Create Object Object -> Pick All Objects in a Zone
Select Object Extension -> Get Number of Selected Objects

I'm assuming you want it w/o the SOE? (which should be an integrated part of MMF2 anyway)

@ LB: Exactly. I avoid using extensions because I develop for flash/ios/android.

One of the most important things would be adding a built-in script language. Since many mmf2 developers are in need for a more flexible way of programming the events of their applications. They may even put a standard version for people who doesn't like coding, and stick with events, and a developer version, with this feature included.

Another cool thing would be adding the possibility of importing complete animation spritesheets into active objects.

Quote from Mephistus

One of the most important things would be adding a built-in script language. Since many mmf2 developers are in need for a more flexible way of programming the events of their applications. They may even put a standard version for people who doesn't like coding, and stick with events, and a developer version, with this feature included.

Game Maker springs to mind.

I think such a model would be scary.
I think that would, eventually, result in the main focus tilting to either one of the products, meaning work would be done to satesfy one portion of the Users at the cost of the other Portion.

CT does something very right.
CT makes programming easier.
Just look at the world, people are working all around the world to make things easier and better all the time.

Script Coding might be very established, but if you eventually could do Script Coding the CT way, wouldnt you do that, wouldnt that be great, save time, and be all around better and faster?
I mean seriously why the need to understand everything on a technical level, do you realy understand where your Orange Pixel at the top-left corner of the sceen is physicaly located, or how the pixel works even?
Whats the point in clinging to something just because its established, when there are other better and easier ways?

Looking at CT as an example, my hope for the future is that such a focus becomes more and more prevelant thoroughout all areas of life.
So its easier for everyone to ba a Cosmologist, Mechanic, Electrician, Physician, Doctor or anything.
I truly believe that this is the way the world has been going all along ( if you think about it ), and i assume this is the way CT is going as well.

ClickTeam, i will certainly not hold anything against you if you so choose to go down another path.
Whatever the case, i hope you prevail and stand tall in the future.
Im just saying i like what youve done and how youve done it upto this point, and hope you do whats best whatever that may be.

...
Instead of having a large messy thread with lots of oppinions and rants, how about a more sophisticated system for identifying the MMF2 "Want's" and "Need's"?
I dont think we are making it easy for CT to identify the Users needs by making such threads as this ( 24 pages ), and i find it hard to believe CT will conclude to make any real changes based on a handfull of scattered Posts ( i might be wrong ).

How about a system for this instead?

SYSTEM

- Registered Users with a Forum Profile can submit Suggestions.
- Suggestions are either marked as a 'Fix' or a 'Feature' ( Fix from MMF2 to MMF3, or new Feature for MMF3 ).
- Users can submit as many Suggestions as they want ( maybe a time restriction to preven spamming ).

- The System will list all the Suggestions, but the Suggestions need to be Moderated so that silly Suggestions are not part of the list.

- 'Each Profile' can state what Suggestions they support by marking a Checkbox next to the Suggestions.
- Each Profile can at any time change their selection by checking/ unckecking the Checkboxes.

This is not a voting system, this system would hopefully be a statistical overview of what MMF2 users Want and Need at any given time.
For such a system to be sucessfull, i believe it needs to be easy to understand and quickly accesible to the Forum Users.

...
What i think would really be a massive improvement however, would be My Face on the startup loading screen of MMF3.
What do you say CT, should i send you a picture?

I would absolutely love a matchmaking/lobby system. Instead of Lacewing servers, we could use an user's computer, kinda like Call of Duty.

samcool_129 - you could do that anyway with Lacewing, it doesn't have to be central server hosted, dynamic on-the-fly servers can be setup on the users machine to host a game(s)...

Quote from UltraHammer

Most wanted: Vector graphics
I'm sure it's widely requested already, but yeah, vector graphics. PLEASE HAVE VECTOR GRAPHICS.

Yes. Given that pretty much all engines that the current runtimes use directly support efficient rendering of vector graphics (HWA, Android, iOS, Flash, HTML 5...) it would be kind of... stupid to miss out on this opportunity. It should at least be possible to render vectors from the SDK and easily be able to draw simple shapes in MMF, if there will be no support for vector files like SVG (which is a bit too complex and unsuited for most vector animations anyway).

I'd love some kind of pause object. Especially for IOS/Android and i think this would save some headaches generally without having to use sub apps for pause menus.

Vector graphics would be nice too, would help a lot especially since i use flash alot for graphics.

Easier online multiplayer options would be good.

Quote from Redsquirrel

I'd love some kind of pause object. Especially for IOS/Android and i think this would save some headaches generally without having to use sub apps for pause menus.

It seems a wide majority of users use this "sub-app technique" for pausing but since using MMF2 I have never used Sub-App to pause any of my engines. I just throw the core coding for the engine into a group called 'Game' and have another group named 'Paused'. When the game is paused deactivate the GAME group and enable the PAUSE group, vice versa for unpause. You can quite easily create a top layer that contains all your images/components for the pause screen and just hide/show it between those two groups.