As a developer, I also agree that having the *option* to get the xCode project is worthwhile to keep. I like the streamlined process, but if I wanted to integrate something else into my games that's not part of the GS engine, now I'm out of luck. Although I hadn't tried it, before I would have at least had that option. How hard would it be to add a menu item to export to xCode... or a checkbox in the export dialog or something?
+1 for adding this functionality back in, but not as a primary export function
GS: I think you guys can learn a lot about your user base with discussions like this -- I for one am a *developer/coder*, but I am always interested in new ways to accomplish what I am trying to do, especially ways that make things easier, faster and more efficient... hence my interest in the GS engine. I am also expecting to build a couple of games at the $99 level and sell them on the app store, and when/if I make enough to cover the cost of upgrading to pro, I'll do it - gladly reinvest my income to my craft. I'm not going to pay 'up front' for the pro version, however, until I see at least some success with the engine at the $99 level. In the mean time, I'm still using the 'free' version until I'm ready to release a game.
It is my understanding, that although they used to give you an xCode project, that it was "locked", and couldn't be edited anyway. Otherwise you would have access to all of gameSalad's code.
You could only edit the info.plist, etc... Which I believe you can still do with the .app bundle?
@Rob2 - did you figure out how to get the xCode back down from the site or something?
I wouldn't expect that they'd provide anything other than the .gameproj folder-file on the site, which you have locally on your local GS project folder.
A .app file *is* a folder-file the same as .gameproj, but the difference between that and a xCode project is that the source code and images are all compiled down.
@firemaplegames -- if this is true (which I fully expect IS the case), then they 100% made the right move with the current version by eliminating that very developer-centric step, and I stand behind it even more. I agree that GS should be all-encompassing, so GS dev's shouldn't have to rely on using xCode to be able to build complete, sellable game apps.
@ everyone else (especially the GS dev's!!!):
It still doesn't change the fact that there is a LOT of interest from GS users in letting developers plug in 3rd party code into their GS games, be it their own code or someone else's - an opinion that I also share.
In an upcoming version of GS, I think it's a necessity to provide this, especially to drive pro-level GS sales.
I'd love to see the option to import a custom actor into a GS game that would allow a developer to simply 'plug in' content into their GS game. This really shouldn't even be very hard to accomplish from a technical standpoint.
Custom actors would only need to be a set of .h/.m/.xib files that a developer would have to build with a simple get/set attribute I/O structure that GS could access; this would allow a developer to access their custom actor from inside GS to get/set attributes using the GS logic engine (rules/attributes/behaviors). These attribute get/set methods would then either just send a call into the custom actor or access a property of the actor, which would do whatever the developer builds into the code they created for the custom actor.
GS could even provide a light-weight .zip download on the GS site for a 'blank' xCode actor with the proper format. The input/output format on custom actors could be easily standardized for the GS engine, and that would give developers the complete ability to put as much or as little of their own development resources into these projects that they want. For that matter, I'd be willing to build the custom actor example app and share it with the community, if you GS dev's will build this into your engine!
This would be a very eloquent way for GS to 'open up' the GS engine to things like OpenFient and not have to develop a lot of these "extra" modules in house, while giving developers the ability to plug in stuff that they want to have in their games.
For the "how does GS make $$ on this" argument, the profit model and proprietary code behind the GS engine would remain intact, but it would still give developers the flexibility to add something that is beyond the GS engine. In fact, this could easily be a "make it or break it" with a lot of my own game ideas that I can't currently do in GS (and even give me incentive to buy the pro-level version!). It would give developers the ability to make games that require backend server integration (thinking MMORPG or global high score tracking), or ones that tie into other iPhone-specific features, like CoreLocation (GPS) services, etc.
I would find it WELL WORTH paying the PRO-level price tag/year *up front* (ie. not reinvesting money i made on games created with the express license) if I had the ability to just simply create a GS game and import some .xib/.h/.m's from my own xCode project as a custom actor into GS to integrate into my game. For me, that would be a perfectly eloquent and usable solution to this problem.
Additionally, for the "but GS is for the rest of us" argument, this would also allow non-coders to build a game and contract out 3rd party development for a piece that they can't build themselves. I would expect to see a lot of non-coder developers have a LOT interest in being able to do this. After all, 99% of the point of GS (as advertised on http://gamesalad.com/products/creator ) is to open up the world of game design to the "non-developer common person", but give them the ability to compete with other developers that are doing everything by hand.
So, GameSalad developers -- make this happen and make it a Pro-level feature, and I guarantee that you'll get a *lot* more pro-level customers, including myself. Otherwise, I stand behind my previous statement - I'd rather just stick with the 'free' version until I have a couple of games about ready to ship, then upgrade to the $99 license to publish to the app store and see how many sales I can make. Unless I've got the "next Z-is-for-Zombie" on my hands (woot @mulcahy), what else would motivate me to pay for the $2000 license besides losing the GS loading screen, which I don't really mind *that* much anyway? To me, the custom loading screen is pretty much the only selling point for the pro license; while in-game URL forwarding is a great feature to have, it doesn't really help me compete in the gaming marketplace - especially as much as custom actors would allow me to compete.
Comments
+1 for adding this functionality back in, but not as a primary export function
GS: I think you guys can learn a lot about your user base with discussions like this -- I for one am a *developer/coder*, but I am always interested in new ways to accomplish what I am trying to do, especially ways that make things easier, faster and more efficient... hence my interest in the GS engine. I am also expecting to build a couple of games at the $99 level and sell them on the app store, and when/if I make enough to cover the cost of upgrading to pro, I'll do it - gladly reinvest my income to my craft. I'm not going to pay 'up front' for the pro version, however, until I see at least some success with the engine at the $99 level. In the mean time, I'm still using the 'free' version until I'm ready to release a game.
"locked", and couldn't be edited anyway. Otherwise you would have access to all of gameSalad's code.
You could only edit the info.plist, etc...
Which I believe you can still do with the .app bundle?
I wouldn't expect that they'd provide anything other than the .gameproj folder-file on the site, which you have locally on your local GS project folder.
A .app file *is* a folder-file the same as .gameproj, but the difference between that and a xCode project is that the source code and images are all compiled down.
@ everyone else (especially the GS dev's!!!):
It still doesn't change the fact that there is a LOT of interest from GS users in letting developers plug in 3rd party code into their GS games, be it their own code or someone else's - an opinion that I also share.
In an upcoming version of GS, I think it's a necessity to provide this, especially to drive pro-level GS sales.
I'd love to see the option to import a custom actor into a GS game that would allow a developer to simply 'plug in' content into their GS game. This really shouldn't even be very hard to accomplish from a technical standpoint.
Custom actors would only need to be a set of .h/.m/.xib files that a developer would have to build with a simple get/set attribute I/O structure that GS could access; this would allow a developer to access their custom actor from inside GS to get/set attributes using the GS logic engine (rules/attributes/behaviors). These attribute get/set methods would then either just send a call into the custom actor or access a property of the actor, which would do whatever the developer builds into the code they created for the custom actor.
GS could even provide a light-weight .zip download on the GS site for a 'blank' xCode actor with the proper format. The input/output format on custom actors could be easily standardized for the GS engine, and that would give developers the complete ability to put as much or as little of their own development resources into these projects that they want. For that matter, I'd be willing to build the custom actor example app and share it with the community, if you GS dev's will build this into your engine!
This would be a very eloquent way for GS to 'open up' the GS engine to things like OpenFient and not have to develop a lot of these "extra" modules in house, while giving developers the ability to plug in stuff that they want to have in their games.
For the "how does GS make $$ on this" argument, the profit model and proprietary code behind the GS engine would remain intact, but it would still give developers the flexibility to add something that is beyond the GS engine. In fact, this could easily be a "make it or break it" with a lot of my own game ideas that I can't currently do in GS (and even give me incentive to buy the pro-level version!). It would give developers the ability to make games that require backend server integration (thinking MMORPG or global high score tracking), or ones that tie into other iPhone-specific features, like CoreLocation (GPS) services, etc.
I would find it WELL WORTH paying the PRO-level price tag/year *up front* (ie. not reinvesting money i made on games created with the express license) if I had the ability to just simply create a GS game and import some .xib/.h/.m's from my own xCode project as a custom actor into GS to integrate into my game. For me, that would be a perfectly eloquent and usable solution to this problem.
Additionally, for the "but GS is for the rest of us" argument, this would also allow non-coders to build a game and contract out 3rd party development for a piece that they can't build themselves. I would expect to see a lot of non-coder developers have a LOT interest in being able to do this. After all, 99% of the point of GS (as advertised on http://gamesalad.com/products/creator ) is to open up the world of game design to the "non-developer common person", but give them the ability to compete with other developers that are doing everything by hand.
So, GameSalad developers -- make this happen and make it a Pro-level feature, and I guarantee that you'll get a *lot* more pro-level customers, including myself. Otherwise, I stand behind my previous statement - I'd rather just stick with the 'free' version until I have a couple of games about ready to ship, then upgrade to the $99 license to publish to the app store and see how many sales I can make. Unless I've got the "next Z-is-for-Zombie" on my hands (woot @mulcahy), what else would motivate me to pay for the $2000 license besides losing the GS loading screen, which I don't really mind *that* much anyway? To me, the custom loading screen is pretty much the only selling point for the pro license; while in-game URL forwarding is a great feature to have, it doesn't really help me compete in the gaming marketplace - especially as much as custom actors would allow me to compete.
-nate
(PS. sorry for the book!)