Scratch

Ecliptic wrote:

I don't really like it. 

Neither do I. It's not as open or free as Scratch, and forces you into a mold.

I also don't like how it puts the Stencyl logo on everything you make 

Many Scratchers use Stencyl.

Last edited by trinary (2012-03-15 23:10:04)

cheddargirl wrote:

XD, kind of old news already. A while back, Jon914 came on the Scratch website introducing Stencyl here, he actually got permission from Mitch Resnick to design a game-making software from Scratch's drag-and-drop design. 

Not exactly an ideal program if someone wants a programming language to design non-game programs, but for someone who is just focused on game design it's a good jumping platform after Scratch. 

I agree. But I think Stencyl Really has to fit your needs, or it just won't work.

I mean, everything is developed to fit a game, so you have to go to great lengths to make something different. While, scratch has way less tools and functions, but has very high ceilings for different types of projects.

I personally like the community better here, on Scratch. But making games is more productive on Stencyl.

I like stencyl better than scratch, although it is harder for sure.
My stencyl username is majormax. See my profile and play my game platformy here

I never really understood it.

To be fair though, that's probably because I installed it, opened it for around five minutes, had to go, and completely forgot it was on my computer until now.

slinger wrote:

To be honest, I think that Stencyl  does most of the programming for you(from what i've seen and done in it). Also scratch is way more flexible.

Scratch is in no way more flexible. Well, it's easier to use, so unless you're good in stencyl, it's more flexible. I find it easier and faster to make games in Stencyl, and better games in Stencyl. You can also export as a swf, so it's my favorite programming engine.

As it's harder to use, I bet most people here only used it a couple of hours, didn't understand it and left. Give it a chance before saying it's bad.

And to StevetheiPad-Really? I like Stencyl's more, but I guess it's only because there's not as many kids as here. Here too many people are kids, it's fun for a while but it gets annoying.
I haven't been on here in a long time, while I've been on Stencyl for half an year, though, so I don't know how it's now.

Last edited by Death_Wish (2012-04-01 11:49:04)

Death_Wish wrote:

slinger wrote:

To be honest, I think that Stencyl  does most of the programming for you(from what i've seen and done in it). Also scratch is way more flexible.

Scratch is in no way more flexible. Well, it's easier to use, so unless you're good in stencyl, it's more flexible. I find it easier and faster to make games in Stencyl, and better games in Stencyl. You can also export as a swf, so it's my favorite programming engine.

As it's harder to use, I bet most people here only used it a couple of hours, didn't understand it and left. Give it a chance before saying it's bad.

Erm nope.
I meant flexible as in what you can make with it(I completely agree with cheddargirl so why write a whole paragraph on it?). Stencyl never struck me as powerful... I don't make games, maybe that's why I don't like it 
I gave it a chance >.>
I spent a couple days on it. I'm just saying that scratch > stencyl.

I find it a little easier then Scratch actually, but that's because I'm a lazy coder that lets the program do most of the work.
There is more to learn, though. I find the layout a bit weird.

I think Stencyl is great.  It's got speed, portability (in terms of sharing projects on multiple devices), and ease of use. 

To be honest, though, I think Stencyl would benefit from allowing the user to interact more with the code itself, rather than the superimposed "block" scripts.  I don't have a problem with the "block" idea in Scratch, the difference between the two being that Scratch projects are intended to run within Scratch (they don't compile to an external file format), whereas Stencyl creates code -- that compiles to iPhone apps and .swf's -- as it goes.  I guess if you wanted to develop serious, high-performance apps, you would just use a traditional IDE... 

Anyway, I can imagine Stencyl being a very powerful learning tool for teaching programmers how to manage their code.  If block programming is a more natural or instinctive way of writing applications than sending cryptic messages to a processor, then Stencyl could show how best to represent "natural" programming in a language that feels unnatural.

I despise Stencyl.

At least the blocks in scratch made sense.

illusionist wrote:

I actually made an effort for a few weeks to figure things out. I really only made a mess.    I thought the design layout of the program was terrible and un-intuitive, and unnecessarily complicated for what it was. Like many of you have said before, it included far too many things built-in, which made it hard to make exactly what I wanted.

The best program that uses the block-based scripting is easily BYOB 3, in my opinion. 

Do you, like, read minds or something? That is exactly my opinion.

veggieman001 wrote:

I think it's more difficult to use than Processing.

you have a big ego.
[/sig]