2D Platformer Engine/Pipline suggestions Created 12 years ago2012-08-01 12:03:17 UTC by Notewell

I've very recently started thinking about potentially building a platformer. However, I don't have an engine to work with. I do have a project using Actionscript I coded last fall, but it's an early version, and I think it's far too buggy to use, especially because I've forgotten basically all I know about actionscript besides that it's a pain in the ass to work with, and likely won't be able to fix it (again) without some serious work re-learning it.
So, rather than relearn a language I'd only ever use once, I'm looking for something that might streamline the process and make it fun enough to make that I might consider doing it again.

Now, I've looked at Stencyl, and it seems like it would be a fairly good choice. However, in order to distribute your work in it as a standalone game, you have to pay for a yearly subscription to the "Pro" version. It also looks like you need to be always connected to the internet to use it. So, does anyone know otherwise? If Stencyl has the ability to work offline, and you can move projects between the "Pro" version and the free version, (or vice versa) I'll likely use it.

Otherwise, does anyone know of any other alternatives to Stencyl that they could recommend?

Use Allegro and build the rest of the engine yourself

Just go with Game Maker.

Unity. It's 3D, but you can easily set it up for 2D games. It's probably the fastest prototyping platform out there at the moment - I'd definitely check it out.

I second Unity. If I could learn to use it, anyone can.

Alright, thanks, keep them coming, I'm looking into all of these suggestions.

will this be top-down or a side-scroller? (or both)

If you prefer to make games with no programming, try Construct 2 at http://www.scirra.com/

Construct 2 requires licensces , Construct classic however is a bit rough around the edges but you can do what the hell you want with what you make with it.

what is rimmy using for his side scroller?

This would be a side-scroller.
Rimrook's using Stencyl, which is what I looked at first. However, it's a bit (read: lot) outside my price range at the subscription cost for the pro version, and I'm not entirely sure if you can upgrade to the pro version from the free version, or how the licensing works for the free version, either. The site's not entirely clear on those points.

Unity. Easy as shit, free download, free license for commercial distribution, and tons of tutorials.

I hafe the free fersion of Stencyl. You also DO NOT need to be connected to the internet to install it or use it. I made almost eferything I hafe so far completely offline. The only thing that you get from the pro fersion is pro support, and the ability to publish to iOS defices and smart phones which also costs more for development kits for those defices. The free fersion has a lot of good stuff and is practically the pro fersion anyway.

Despite the flaming at Stencyl out there, that comes from people who made games in flash before stencyl came around and the Arcade sites blew up with crappy clones of simple games coming from amateurs. With time and effort, you can make some sweet stuff, you can make anything!

Whatefer you choose to work with, I'm sure it will be the right thing for you and the game alike.

(My V key isn't working on this old keyboard... and if you're wondering, I typed that one using ALT+86)

I've downloaded Stencyl to give it a try. It's going to take a little getting used to, especially the behavior code snapping interface, (Which doesn't seem to like me at all, parts won't snap together with the events, argh!) but I'll keep trying to figure it's quirks out. Failing that, I'll probably give unity a try.

Hopefully the secret to making text boxes like in the RPG example game will fall into place soon, Those would need be an integral part of the game if I end up making it, since the humor would be mainly via dialog, and the humor I have in mind is why I want to make it.

Don't use stencyl. Stencyl sucks. Use construct classic. Much more versatile.