Concerns from a "Serious" developer

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:18 am

Having worked with UDK and previously Unreal 3 in the past I thought i'd weigh in on this.
At it's height, Epic had around 10 programmers working full time on the engine for each stable release and 2 Scripters working on the front end code not to mention the entire team that worked on Kismet function (the visual scripting part).

Scirra has @Ashley and @Tom.

My point being; the amount of time it takes to write new features vs the rate they're expected by the user base is vastly disproportionate.

Either we have a stable engine that exports to a fair few platforms or we have a largely broken engine that has a lot of features (see the early days of Unity engine or the first few months of Unreal 4).
There's always going to be limitations to what Construct can do and the guys are simply moving the engine in a direction that will allow Scirra to keep growing as a business and better develop the product we're all paying for.

With only a couple of people working on the backend nobody can seriously expect everything in this thread to be addressed immediately and in the lifetime of C2 we've had a whole lot of new features and things the community has asked for, but everything takes time.

Personally I don't like the idea of a browser based system, but that's just it, I don't like the idea of it. Nobody can judge C3 yet and I wouldn't expect it to be in a state where anyone can judge or berate it for at least the next 12 months.
B
9
S
2
Posts: 69
Reputation: 833

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:28 am

AM_Games wrote:Scirra has @Ashley and @Tom.


I *think* they have more now?
B
41
S
12
G
14
Posts: 1,117
Reputation: 11,253

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:31 am

AM_Games wrote:Having worked with UDK and previously Unreal 3 in the past I thought i'd weigh in on this.
At it's height, Epic had around 10 programmers working full time on the engine for each stable release and 2 Scripters working on the front end code not to mention the entire team that worked on Kismet function (the visual scripting part).

Scirra has @Ashley and @Tom.

My point being; the amount of time it takes to write new features vs the rate they're expected by the user base is vastly disproportionate.

Either we have a stable engine that exports to a fair few platforms or we have a largely broken engine that has a lot of features (see the early days of Unity engine or the first few months of Unreal 4).
There's always going to be limitations to what Construct can do and the guys are simply moving the engine in a direction that will allow Scirra to keep growing as a business and better develop the product we're all paying for.

With only a couple of people working on the backend nobody can seriously expect everything in this thread to be addressed immediately and in the lifetime of C2 we've had a whole lot of new features and things the community has asked for, but everything takes time.

Personally I don't like the idea of a browser based system, but that's just it, I don't like the idea of it. Nobody can judge C3 yet and I wouldn't expect it to be in a state where anyone can judge or berate it for at least the next 12 months.


So are you willing to wait 5 years for C3 to work fairly well like C2 that still has many bugs and exporters that don't work properly?

Keep in mind many of those features, workarounds and plugins we use in our C2 games were actually created by outsiders not Scirra and those will not work in C3 with out a rewrite and many of those designers have moved on to other engines.

I don't see many of the C2 plugin designers jumping for joy for C3 and wanting to design for that engine.

What is to say Scirrra won't decide to abandon C3 for their next big idea in a few years?

Many people outside of Scirra put time and effort into making C2 workable now feel abandoned by Scirra. Not a good business practice in my opinion.
Last edited by lamar on Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Banned User
B
23
S
6
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,540

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 8:46 am

Ashley wrote:
NotionGames wrote:I would say that getting this community more involved would be a great start. Conducting direct polls and really having a way for supporters to give feedback.

This has worked against us in the past. The multiplayer feature was massively voted for, but from the data we look at, very few people actually use it. So the hype effect is a big distorting factor in polls. I don't regret it, it was a super interesting project to work on, but it's something to bear in mind, and is the main reason I have avoided polls since then.

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.


Glad to see that there is a feature voting system planned. Could one possible solution be to have users submit requests, but these be collated and curated by Scirra who then select several which are in line with your objectives with C3 and then the community votes on those? That way you still have control, but we have a good idea of what's coming and are still influencing the direction of the product to a degree. Just an idea anyway, I understand opening it up to everybody would be chaos, but I think that some sort of dialogue between Scirra and its customers on features is still important.
B
64
S
25
G
4
Posts: 204
Reputation: 6,993

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 9:14 am

signaljacker wrote:
Ashley wrote:
NotionGames wrote:I would say that getting this community more involved would be a great start. Conducting direct polls and really having a way for supporters to give feedback.

This has worked against us in the past. The multiplayer feature was massively voted for, but from the data we look at, very few people actually use it. So the hype effect is a big distorting factor in polls. I don't regret it, it was a super interesting project to work on, but it's something to bear in mind, and is the main reason I have avoided polls since then.

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.


Glad to see that there is a feature voting system planned. Could one possible solution be to have users submit requests, but these be collated and curated by Scirra who then select several which are in line with your objectives with C3 and then the community votes on those? That way you still have control, but we have a good idea of what's coming and are still influencing the direction of the product to a degree. Just an idea anyway, I understand opening it up to everybody would be chaos, but I think that some sort of dialogue between Scirra and its customers on features is still important.


Would you buy a car because the car salesman says they will listen to you and maybe fix things you find wrong with it or put in features you want later?

Just sayin'
Banned User
B
23
S
6
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,540

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 9:57 am

lamar wrote:I guess @Tom and @Ashley could tell us what the unique download or use numbers have been for C3 and that would give us at least an idea of how many people tried the beta?

I would be interested in seeing that number?

Like how many tried it the first day and how many new people are trying it each day?


Here's some numbers for you:
https://twitter.com/ConstructTeam/statu ... 2038028289
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,386
Reputation: 53,509

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:00 am

Also Lamar, if you feel we've disrespected you - feel free to leave like you have suggested. No one is stopping you. At this point we'd rather be spending more time working on the software than answering the never-ending spool of questions you've been throwing at us for the last several weeks.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,386
Reputation: 53,509

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:08 am

Tom wrote:
lamar wrote:I guess @Tom and @Ashley could tell us what the unique download or use numbers have been for C3 and that would give us at least an idea of how many people tried the beta?

I would be interested in seeing that number?

Like how many tried it the first day and how many new people are trying it each day?


Here's some numbers for you:
https://twitter.com/ConstructTeam/statu ... 2038028289


10,000 pretty good!

Now how many of those were unique users because I opened C3 at least 10 times that first day trying to get things to work?

How many of those people are still using C3 now after a week?
Banned User
B
23
S
6
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,540

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:12 am

8,000 unique people tried it in the first 24 hours.

Now how many of those were unique users because I opened C3 at least 10 times that first day trying to get things to work?


Your questions are posed in an aggravating way.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,386
Reputation: 53,509

Post » Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:20 am

I'm usually only reading on this forum but I'm getting sick of the way you're hijacking threads lamar. Could you please stop with this nonsense. Critique and discussions in a civilized manner are a great thing but you're constantly hijacking threads, mixing up or completely changing the many concerns of the opening or follow up posts to fit your agenda and then repeatedly target Ashely and Tom with an incredible amount of posts that never lead anywhere and finally destroy the whole thread.
B
8
S
2
Posts: 15
Reputation: 576

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mallorcaredes and 0 guests