Visual, or scripting?

[DavidS14]

Game editor is promising, in that it supports the big 3 in platforms. But I'm a little confused. I found this engine on a huge listing of game engines after a search for non-scripting 2d game engines. (In other words I'm looking for an engine that makes game dev possible for non-programmers) Unity is a hugely disappointing front end for nothing but scripting (no shock, since the team is ninety percent programmers) and the same appears true for Game Maker, which though it has a visual interface for drag and drop functionalities and cobbling together various segments of function, they remain so far down the evolutionary chain that the segments are literally like parts of code having to interact in an exact order to achieve specific purpose. Useless for anyone other than programmers, once again. Does game editor allow users to make various standard 2d games without having to interject script after script?

[MrJolteon]

Does game editor allow users to make various standard 2d games without having to interject script after script?

Mostly, yes. Some things, like gravity, require scripting. But it uses a simplified version of C for its scripting engine, so it's pretty easy to learn.
If there is something you don't understand, don't hesitate to ask on the forums.

[DavidS14]

Selecting an option to set accelerate along a vector should never require additional scripting. If gravity is wanted in a game, then a construct of 'gravity' (accelerate/vector) would already be an inherent part of an engine's abilities, and developers using that engine should only have to add the variable to a player or not. From there, if specific additional functions surrounding the effect of gravity are wanted, scripting can be considered. I maintain (and UE1 through UE4 validates this) the following interactivity points can be used to make about ninety five percent of all games out there, regarding interactive function, and would simply require a tick field for each (maybe a 'select other object' field) to get nearly anything done that's wanted:

gravity (vector move)
collision
move
jump
crouch
triggerEvent
spawnObject
destroyObject
fireWeapon
pickUp/carry
damage
health
targetObject
HUD

None of this includes rendering functions, level object placement or audio access of course: all of that will be deeper API coding, from what I experienced looking over the shoulder of Dave Hagewood, Tim Sweeney, Steven Polge, Laurent Delayen and Per Vorgensen when I worked at Epic. I've worked directly beside programmers my entire professional career and had extensive discussions over each of these guys about the approaches used and why. None of the interactivity above is new. It is standard from the times of the Atari 2600 and is a travesty that game engines today for the most part don't have these as some kind of drop-down module with a few settings, all of which could be extended via script if needed.

But a few people got it right, and they drive around in Lamborghinis. Just a suggestion to the guys here...make GUIS for these standard gameplay aspects and your engine will shoot past all the others which only cater to programming. Don't get me wrong: I have nothing against programming or programmers. Indeed, I'd give anything to be able to pay a team of super experienced and capable programmers to create a game engine under the guidelines above, because almost all the questions I see on this forum, and Unity forums, and GameMaker forums are about these common things.

[skydereign]

Does game editor allow users to make various standard 2d games without having to interject script after script?

Can gameEditor create various games without scripting? Yes. I do not recommend it though. As you've noticed with most tools, you won't be able to get very far without using script. gE is no exception to this as the use of variables is required to make a lot of games. Handling variables without script is very very time consuming, and therefore you if you are completely against learning basic C script, I don't recommend using gE.