Multiplayer

@ipe Any multiplayer kit/extension will require an extensive amount of code, which will probably have to be platform specific unless someone can find server software that works with Haxe.  This isn't just a few lines of code that I or some of the other Stencylers who know a little code can add.  We need real programmers to do this sort of thing, those who can make entire software with code alone.

Also, those talking about extensions are referring to the new feature in 3.0 to create blocks, similar to custom blocks but they appear in all your games and don't need behaviors to exist.  I think a kit might be more appropriate though.

In my opinion, an extension would be the way to go. Someone with a little Objective-C knowledge could enable game center multiplayer for iOS, probably with very little effort, through a native extension.

The problem is, there's no definitive multiplayer solution for other platforms. Many current solutions also require you to set up a server which would handle the bulk of your game's functions. This is the real tricky part; most developers capable of doing this would have no problem creating an extension for Stencyl to connect to it.

Yea i agree that it would be good for stencyl with an multiplayer extension, but we need someone to make its, thats the missing block in this discussion

Cole, isn't it C++ in 3.0?

Native extensions are a bit weird. From my (basic) understanding, there's a layer of Haxe on top of either a layer of C++ over Objective-C, or a layer of JNI over Java. The basic idea is the same for either platform, though: the middle layer (C++ for iOS and JNI for Android) exposes the native code to Haxe, which is then usable by Stencyl.

If 20 people give money, would it then be fair that all on stencyl got it, then it would be fair the 20 got it.

The point is that, with funding scenario described, if I don't pay $20, then I won't get the feature - if I do pay $20, then I will get the feature - whether or not anyone else gets the feature is not relevant to me!

There are plenty of Kickstarters for open-source projects, where people donate to the project and receive nothing more than people who do not donate to the project, other than maybe early access and input to how it is developed.

You lot do part with money quickly, don't cha?

$20 is nothing for a feature like this. I understand that, for someone who is using the free version of Stencyl, it's $20 more than they paid for Stencyl, which seem like a lot! However, for a subscriber who is using Stencyl for creating commercial games, a one-off payment of $20 is nothing.

Also, it's a simple matter of economics... If I don't have the extension, then I can't use it to make money. The quicker I have the extension, the quicker I can use it to make money. If I want the feature, I can either develop it myself which is too expensive in terms of time and opportunity cost, or I can sit around and hope that someone else develops it. Alternatively, I can pay $20 (or even $100) and have the feature developed for me whilst, at the same time having some control over the specification.

Also, an extension won't work like this...

To clarify, I'm talking about an extension for 3.0.

Hm, i see your point innes, probably doesn't seem like too much...
And, i didn't know extensions will work differently in 3.0, from what i know of extensions before that is you have to have them in a separate tab, and they can't modify anything.... If in 3.0 they can, then that's pretty great.

Alternatively a "extension marketplace" with free and paid downloads could "force" the initially reluctant people to get the feature for $20 so therefore the extension makers could potentially make more money.

As Innes was saying is a matter of time and money, for me is well worth $20 for a feature like that.
For example if somebody did extensions for ad systems, the little investent would be easily recovered without wasting hours trying to learn code etc, as Jon pointed out in one topic, something like a "ios camera" extension could be only a 1-2 hours project for a programmer and again I would happily pay $20 for it

I like the idea of paid extensions, but how would you restrict it to the buyer? Hacked extensions would be available soon.

i almost have an electroserver behavior running, connecting anyways..

i almost have an electroserver behavior running, connecting anyways..

Its not that hard, i cot it easily to work on my windows, but i could not on my mac -.-'

yeah, i managed to get it connecting too, and i think i had 2 people walking around at the same time, but i could never get the enter and exit scenes going, so i left it. I think i deleted it too

I still think the extensions market would be a solution, about avoiding piracy for those extensions, I don't think a download like that would be on torrents sites or anything like that, maybe a system to avoid sharing could be implemented.

Maybe people from companies selling services like electrotank would offer themselves an extension to get more people buy their service... maybe it's too early at this point to imagine that scenario but I would love to see something like that in the future

Where did we get with this? Is anybody skilled enough to make an extension for 3.0? I would love it, and pay for it.

There's a good tutorial here (http://www.raywenderlich.com/5480/beginning-turn-based-gaming-with-ios-5-part-1) on how to implement Game Center Turn Based, but I have no idea how to code like that.

I really want this feature.