Concerns from a "Serious" developer

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:26 pm

NotionGames wrote:Is there c2 plugin support for in c3? i mainly ask because if there isn't then yes, a export package of some kind or even access to the cloud exporters (or whatever is going on with c3) could be extended to c2 devs who have projects that rely on plugins. I know all of my c2 games do.

With some minor tweaking they should work fine.

https://www.scirra.com/blog/193/addons-in-construct-3
For addon developers
Construct 3's addon format is generally similar to Construct 2's. However third-party plugins and behaviors will need to have their editor script (edittime.js) rewritten in to a new format for Construct 3. This basically involves rewriting the action, condition and expression (ACE) tables in to a new format, and moving UI strings to a separate language file to facilitate translation. However the runtime script (runtime.js) should continue work unmodified. There are a small number of runtime features that have changed in Construct 3, but these are usually trivial to update. We'll provide documentation and assistance on the forum around this. We're aiming to have initial documentation on addons ready as early on during the public beta as possible so addon developers can get a head start on porting. Overall it ought to be a quick job to port Construct 2 plugins to Construct 3.

We're aware some third-party developers sell their addons and might not want them bundled with projects. We will provide a way for addons to opt-out of bundling so they stay in the editor only.


For the cloud exporters I assume it's just taking the HTML5 export and putting it through a wrapper, thus not requiring any special plugin code for that. If that's the case it also means they could document the process so you could roll your own with the same process they use.

https://www.scirra.com/blog/187/buildin ... onstruct-3

However, the blogpost however doesn't specifically state what sort of technology they're using for the cloud based mobile build process. Hopefully they'll have more information on how they're doing this in the future.

tunepunk wrote:@Ashley is there any technical limitations not allowing us to use the C3 build service for C2 projects. In an ideal world you would just upload your c2 export in zip file and building with the c3 build service. Until C3 matured and most major plugins has become available to c3.

That is their ideal to just import C2 into C3 without issue. With their official plugins/addons I would expect no issues, but for third party plugins/addons you would need for the plugin to be modified

Construct 2 and Construct 3 export to the same canvas engine and they even advertised taking C2 projects into C3
https://www.scirra.com/blog/191/saving- ... onstruct-3
Importing Construct 2 projects
As promised, Construct 2 projects import to Construct 3 with high fidelity. Construct 3 has all the same features Construct 2 has, and we've written an importer to read the XML-based Construct 2 project format and load it in Construct 3. This is well-tested, as we've been able to import large, complex Construct 2 projects kindly donated by developers like Aurelien Regard (The Next Penelope) and Daniel West (Airscape). So you can rest assured your project will import correctly. (Note if you use third-party addons, you will need to install Construct 3 versions of the addons before importing.)
B
21
S
8
G
6
Posts: 346
Reputation: 4,891

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:27 pm

Thndr wrote:
lamar wrote:I have asked Ashley to respond directly to my post.

You seem to be more of a cheerleader trying to run interference so I would ask that you not respond to me until I have heard a response directly from Ashley to my question.

You reposted the same post and keep saying the same things without addressing any questions when others are asking you to clarify things due to you being ambiguous.

What is wrong with it being browser based?


Man, it's all well and good for him to respond to others but never the other way around. You're either running interference or cheerleading for the team. You'll be marked a lapdog soon if you keep it up. Never speak to he who must not be named.
B
25
S
12
G
11
Posts: 260
Reputation: 7,923

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:32 pm

Bleenx wrote:
Man, it's all well and good for him to respond to others but never the other way around. You're either running interference or cheerleading for the team. You'll be marked a lapdog soon if you keep it up. Never speak to he who must not be named.


Keep it polite - no personal attacks.
If your vision so exceeds your ability, then look to something closer.
Moderator
B
134
S
30
G
84
Posts: 5,388
Reputation: 58,458

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:33 pm

NotionGames wrote:Is there c2 plugin support for in c3? i mainly ask because if there isn't then yes, a export package of some kind or even access to the cloud exporters (or whatever is going on with c3) could be extended to c2 devs who have projects that rely on plugins. I know all of my c2 games do.

@Ashley about the voting system. I do remember that people voted for multiplayer support. So I do understand the hesitation to implement something like that again. But honestly, once the exporters are solid then the rest is just bonus features. Regardless of whether or not people are using the features, if they're paying a subscription and getting what they asked for, then that's fine, right?


+1

I wanna add swell that the comparing multiplayer to exporters is totally different things in my opinion and has no comparison, exporters with decent performance is somethings that every single developer will use, and you will have to publish some were when you finish the game, as opposite of multiplayer that it may or may not implemented by everyone.
So yes it should be the first priority and worth spends the time in, once you have the most awesome engine and good exporters, everything else comes secondary people they wouldn't care that much for behaviors or things missing.
Last edited by tarek2 on Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
B
38
S
22
G
65
Posts: 243
Reputation: 36,574

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:33 pm

@Ashley can I get a direct response from you please?

Ashley wrote:Okay, wow, now a 17 page thread.

I'm not sure what anyone here thinks we should actually do. We've already announced things like our own mobile app build service and new IAP/ad plugins for C3, so that is on the way. We've got Xbox One support just around the corner. Mobile support from what I've seen is pretty solid with WKWebView and Android 5.0+, all supporting JIT-compiled JS and hardware-accelerated WebGL. Maybe we could tweak the way we advertise certain things. Maybe some people have bugs, or unoptimised cases, in which case please file reports, or send me .capxs to profile for performance improvements (as ever, I always ask, and either get sent nothing, or just projects with silly performance-destroying mistakes, hence my skepticism).

Do you want us to rebuild the C3 editor? I would go so far as to say that would probably ruin us, and waste a brilliant opportunity. Do you want us to build native engines? I've covered that in this blog with our rationale around that, which nobody ever really directly argues against, there's just vague accusations of how HTML5 is "poorly optimised" or something, which really is not the case given the potency of modern JIT compilers and the native-equivalent performance of WebGL.

So what have I missed? What do you think we should actually do differently that isn't something we've already covered? If I can't make sense of any specific complaints or clear suggestions on what to do, then I don't see why we shouldn't just carry on as we are - I think we already have a strong plan for the future.


Ashley after reading the many many comments on this and my thread I believe what people are asking for is this:

1- Go ahead with C3 as it may at least be useful to people using Mac and Unix even though most C2 users have said they do not want a Chrome browser based subscription engine.

2- Make an update or addon package of exporters and features for C2 that users have been asking for and fix the bugs you have been promising to fix for years. Put that new team of programmers to work on that along with C3.

We all understand Scirra has to make money and I believe you understand that if you lose your long time C2 users by not listening to us your chances of staying in business are pretty damn small.

So this is a reasonable request and you can charge your $99 for a great package of features and exporters for C2 and I will bet you will sell many more of those packages than you will C3 browser versions.

It also would prove you actually intend to honor your license and advertising that said those exporters would be included in C2 and would probably keep your base happy and maybe they would be interested in C3 later after you get all the bugs worked out.

It seems to me you would want those long time C2 users to hang around and support Scirra but reading through the comments on many threads they are dropping out and pretty disappointed in Scirra right now.

So what do you say?

Can we get a package of features and working exporters for the existing C2 engine at a reasonable price with no subscription Ashley?
Banned User
B
27
S
7
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,790

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:38 pm

zenox98 wrote:Keep it polite - no personal attacks.


Seriously? That's as polite as I can be to a troll who continues to bait @Ashley and @Tom with repetitious questions, tells others their cheerleaders, says people run interference, which is three I've counted so far, and heck, even more than I feel like saying now.

I guess if you can't say anything nice to someone, don't say anything. I'll just abide by that rule, but you guys should seriously think about the constant negativity coming in most of these threads from one ring leader and what you should do about it.
B
25
S
12
G
11
Posts: 260
Reputation: 7,923

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:41 pm

My personal opinion.
A game engine markets itself by the games that have been created with it. Nothing else really works as effective as that.
You @Scirra are currently losing faith from the people that create these "serious" games.

Tom wrote:We were obviously expecting some users to not like the model.

I thing the majority of them are the ones I described above :/

Ashley wrote:Having said that, we do have a feature-voting system planned anyway :P but I am going to strongly caveat it with warnings that "votes are not a guarantee of implementation", for exactly the reason we had with multiplayer. Also I can easily imagine things like 3D becoming #1 voted features, and there are a wide range of reasons why we're holding off on that.[

1) An smart Idea might be to create a REP based voting system. 30.000 rep = 3 votes or whatever, getting significantly less unexperienced and emotionally driven votes
2) Rep locked forums for specific feedback

Ashley wrote:Generally, it's as good as the browser engine is.

Maybe this sentence on your marketing banners with an asterisk


Ashley wrote:Yes, lots on the way here, as announced.

Everyone hopes this works out well, plz be more transparent
Last edited by stefanos on Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
B
35
S
11
G
3
Posts: 97
Reputation: 3,478

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:44 pm

@Ashley @Tom - I think the build service is going to be fantastic if it works without too many crazy hoops to jump through. As @notiongames has said, being able to feel confident to be able to deploy your games properly when they are complete is very important to instill confidence in your subscribers.

The upcoming poll voting system for future features sounds like a great idea too so that you get a clearer idea of what's a priority from the community.

A roadmap as other have suggested of upcoming C3 Features will help people get on board with paying for a subscription and let them know that they are contributing to the future of scirra. A lot of people feel like C3 (right now) is just an online version of C2 with bits of future C3 information spread across different threads etc. The blog posts help, but having all of the plans in one easy to see location would be much easier to refer to for everyone.

A tool that converts C2 2 plugins into C3 compatible plugins. I've spoken to @rexrainbow and he thinks that if he has re-write his hundreds of plugins that it will take him a year to do so. So many people rely on addons that if they have to wait a long time to be able to use them (or to import C2 projects in C3 that rely on them) that they won't subscribe to C3. I'd go so far as suggest you either give them free access to C3 or hire them on your team full time. Plugin creators like him and everyone else who extends C2 are so valuable you don't want them to drop contributing to Construct.

I've seen how far C2 has come since the first version, i can't wait to see how C3 progresses over time.
B
87
S
44
G
16
Posts: 1,002
Reputation: 17,932

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:20 pm

NotionGames wrote:Is there c2 plugin support for in c3? i mainly ask because if there isn't then yes, a export package of some kind or even access to the cloud exporters (or whatever is going on with c3) could be extended to c2 devs who have projects that rely on plugins. I know all of my c2 games do.

@Ashley about the voting system. I do remember that people voted for multiplayer support. So I do understand the hesitation to implement something like that again. But honestly, once the exporters are solid then the rest is just bonus features. Regardless of whether or not people are using the features, if they're paying a subscription and getting what they asked for, then that's fine, right?


I could not agreed more into this, recently i have problems porting my first game called BSB Hero http://www.gameorb.com.br/games/asd2/, into mobile, mainly because i could not get a proper performance and the exti issue from intel xdk.
So i moved into cocoon.io and another 100 usd to pay, thi is a lot from brazil since 1 usd is almoust 4 reais.

I would love to see C3 as a very final project, so i only need external editors as tools to make a one great game and i mean, photoshop, spriter and etc.

My next game quasar http://www.gameorb.com.br/games/quasar/, i have done TONS of work, and i am already concearn on how to make a good deploy so it is a good start, and for both projects i dont even do some sales.. im doing it for free but how to be able to go to a nintendo, microsoft or even steam if other developers already had issues with it.

I do like to saty on construct, but im also thinking about moving into gamemaker.
B
25
S
7
G
2
Posts: 64
Reputation: 2,624

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:27 pm

Maybe off-topic? But since Ashley brought up the poor multiplayer plugin... it is actually pretty feature complete, I think people just have trouble wrapping their head around multiplayer concepts. They have some preexisting assumptions about how it should work, and walk away discouraged before realizing the multiplayer plugin is pretty adaptable.

Someone mentioned missing directly connecting instead of via signalling server, but utilizing a signalling server is pretty much superior any way you look at it (users ARE directly connecting to each other, the signalling server just takes the work out of making that connection). For example if you want to connect to someone by IP, use that as your room name instead.

The second big thing is understanding lag and latency and the fact that no two users will ever see the same thing at the same time. The tutorial spends a lot of effort explaining this and the implications AND the solutions, but I think it turns off a lot of people. This isn't something you can just wish away or ignore when developing multiplayer games, but people go in to it not realizing how important it is. This is no shortcoming of the plugin itself, rather the users. The plugin actually has tons of built in behaviors to make things like interpolation and lag compensation easier to handle for the developer.

I think the last thing is that many people envision server-client architecture for their game, which isn't exactly how the plugin was positioned but it is perfectly capable of doing so. Probably could use a specific tutorial to set up such a system (kind of like how there are two basic tutorials for top down shooter and side platformer - one can be foor peer-peer and another could be for client-server). Doesn't mean it is superior to a fully featured backend service, but those are out there already with working plugins.

Back on topic - while the multiplayer plugin might be under utilized, I think it is still a huge selling point, especially for "serious" developers down the line if some of the other issues get addressed. Even as a feature checkbox, I think not having it would be a fair reason for a prospective customer to turn to another engine.

TLDR: Basically wanted to say voting on features is important regardless of utilization, it usually is a fair metric of what people are looking for, regardless of weather or not they are capable of utilizing it.

Since I haven't weighed in on this thread yet, just going to mention in my opinion the two biggest priorities for "serious" developers down the line would be exporting (already/soon to be addressed) and monetization (ad service support/tutorials).

Also I think an official perlin noise plugin/function/support is something a lot of people are looking for and trending recently, but I suppose a voting system would show if it is or not.
Last edited by oosyrag on Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mistakes were made.
B
51
S
25
G
107
Posts: 1,581
Reputation: 60,458

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest