Register or Login
Advanced search

Construct Classic vs Construct 2 for Beginners

Forum Home Forum Home > Construct Classic > Construct Classic Discussion
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
8,864 Rep
7
16
41
 Post Options Post Options   Quote alspal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jun 2012 at 9:22am
C2 is getting pretty good and has a lot of features already now, I prefer the editor over CC one, as long as you don't mind making your sprites in a different image application. But it's biggest let down at the moment is HTML5 performance is pretty terrible if you want to make a big action game with with lots of sprites. I'm just hoping that the exe wrapper and HTML5 in general will magically get significantly better performance in the future.

Edited by alspal - 21 Jun 2012 at 9:23am
Back to Top
2,681 Rep
5
2
6
 Post Options Post Options   Quote Azu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jun 2012 at 12:15pm
I'd stick with CC. I personally don't care for web gaming at all. Although, I do wish CC had more support. Eventually, I feel that CC with become [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecation][/url]deprecated software or the TGF2 of Clickteam.
Back to Top
1,671 Rep
3
10
 Post Options Post Options   Quote Zotged Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jun 2012 at 12:32pm
I still strongly believe that CC flew under the radar for a far too large a demography. Its capabilities are simply outstanding in comparison to other much more popular solutions like GM or anything Clickteam has ever even dreamed of releasing. It definitely doesn't pale in comparison even though its development has been bumpy at best for the last few years.

But times do change even though I'll echo what Azu said about web gaming, I have little interest in that.

Edited by Zotged - 29 Jun 2012 at 12:32pm
Back to Top
913 Rep
3
1
 Post Options Post Options   Quote declan_gage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jul 2012 at 4:12pm
thirded, Scirra falling into the HTML5 trap was my biggest disappointment in years
Back to Top
1,095 Rep
1
2
12
 Post Options Post Options   Quote RacerBG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2012 at 7:08pm
Originally posted by declan_gage declan_gage wrote:

thirded, Scirra falling into the HTML5 trap was my biggest disappointment in years


Even for me HTML is a lose. For playing this game you must have pretty good internet connection and not everyone have ie connection. Also I just don't get where is the point of making games for browsers. This are just aplications not real games.
Creating one little thing called a game.
Back to Top
444 Rep
1
1
4
 Post Options Post Options   Quote blackarcadia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jul 2012 at 3:44pm
While Construct 2's HTML5 focus allows for multiplatform releases, the lack of power the technology currently has (or may never have, who knows?) can be severely limiting for more bigger ideas.

Construct Classic while (in my opinion) being more powerful has less official support now and is maintained by the community. It's in dire need of an update and stability fixes from my experience as it crashes way too often with big projects.

If someone somehow makes export modules for Classic that allow it to compile games that'll work on Mac, Xbox 360 (probably via XNA) and what have you then it'll definitely be THE go-to WYSIWYG game creation program. I'm hoping someday that Scirra decides to counter YoYo Games who dropped their HTML5-only version of GameMaker for a true multiplatform GameMaker Studio.
Back to Top
4,049 Rep
4
7
17
 Post Options Post Options   Quote CrudeMik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Aug 2012 at 11:09pm
With r100 coming out soon how are opinions changing?

I went off Classic for a good while after experiencing some really annoying bugs with the bone animator tool. I have followed Construct 2s development closely and for the last few months I've been using it as a prototyping tool as I love the programming side of Construct above everything else, it just makes sense to me.

Recently though, I've started to make a 'real' game with it, I think it's pretty much there and capable of handling my ambition with the exception of having an (easy) way to save a game and also the audio functionality is too basic.

With r100 coming up though, .exe exporting interests me because that means so long as the player has a PC the game is assured to work, unlike with browser which can give varying results. WebGL too, that brings the visual capabilities on-part with Classic does it not? Or not? I don't know.
Portfolio: www.manningaudio.com

Owner: www.crudepixel.com
Back to Top
1,488 Rep
1
1
8
 Post Options Post Options   Quote Jim15 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Sep 2012 at 3:33am
I'm actually about to try out C2 now. The only reason I wouldn't use it before was because, as others have said, I have no interest in purely web based games. I prefer them to be .exes. And with the recent release of r100 of C2, I can now export a project to .exe.

Classic is great and served me well over the past year, but it just has too many random bugs and really slows me down when I seem to get on a roll with my work. I think it's a real shame that Classic was never truly completed, because it's definitely the best program I've used for 2D development up until now. But the problem is, I can't foresee myself making a full game using the engine. Not when I can't even make a full screen without having paralax scrolling; basic features of a platformer.

So it's time to give C2 a shot. :D

EDIT: So... yeah... I didn't realize that it costs $100+ to use the exe feature of Construct 2, so never mind what I said before. >_>

Edited by Jim15 - 21 Sep 2012 at 7:06am
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down