Concerns from a "Serious" developer

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:43 pm

tunepunk wrote:
I want 3D viewport support, but I know that's not the direction they are going, so I'm doing what I can with Q3D trying to learning that instead of Unity. I can try to build a case on why the should focus on it, but I'm not posting rants badmouthing the devs because they don't provide what I need, saying it's backwards to focus on 2D games..... that's so 80's, 3D and especially VR is the new big thing... if scirra don't provide that they are not listening to customers..... see how you sound now?


"See how you sound now" insinuates that I did that (including bad mouthing the devs). But regardless, the thread is going off topic with this particular concern.

Construct is indeed misleading. It's a lovely engine with a brilliant workflow. The exports have been an issue since the beginning. This will constantly be a topic of discussion if it remains to be a tool best used for prototyping yet promoted as a full featured dev software. I really hope Scirra listens to us regarding this issue. If not, that's their choice and more power to them. But at least I gave it a shot and voiced my concerns.
Image
B
73
S
21
G
9
Posts: 566
Reputation: 14,011

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:53 pm

newt wrote:Assuming you can doing anything you want on Wii


We're here for making 2D games, its been done before as we see with games like Freedom Planet and Shovel Knight and many more that seem to run fine on WiiU (some even some made in Clickteam products), that's not "assuming you can do anything you want", it's assuming 2D games will actually run on the console.

When Construct 2/3 can't compete with arcade + NES level games, I think it's safe to say they shouldn't advertise it as a 2D game maker with the same emphasis on it being professional as tools like GameMaker and Clickteam do. Even the open source engine Godot is used for real desktop and console games, and it doesn't market itself as "professional" as Construct does.
"Construct 4 lets YOU make advanced games! (but not play them)" Construct Classic - Examples Kit Dropbox is a pile of trash and if you need my old files PM me! :)
B
119
S
41
G
17
Posts: 2,213
Reputation: 19,638

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:55 pm

NotionGames wrote:
Construct is indeed misleading. It's a lovely engine with a brilliant workflow. The exports have been an issue since the beginning. This will constantly be a topic of discussion if it remains to be a tool best used for prototyping yet promoted as a full featured dev software. I really hope Scirra listens to us regarding this issue. If not, that's their choice and more power to them. But at least I gave it a shot and voiced my concerns.


Agreed, whether you are a serious developer or just a small time game designer, hobby designer or educator using C2 I think we all need to be respected and this C3 subscription browser direction that is putting in the exporters and features we have been asking for for years in C2 feels like a big slap in the face to me and I think a lot of users.

If they can put those in C3 they can put them in C2 as a complete engine or as an addon that we can purchase.

I think C3 will turn out to be only useful to the Mac and Linux users that couldn't use C2 and will become a small segment of users but if Scirra focuses all their attention on C3 and abandons the many C2 users that has supported them all these years they are making a big mistake that will come back to bite them.

I think more game designers regardless of how you use C2 need to speak up and make it clear to Scirra and @Tom & @Ashley that we want those features and exporters for our standalone C2 but that has to be up to each person.
Last edited by lamar on Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Banned User
B
27
S
7
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,790

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:02 pm

Such a shame to see all this chaos on the forums nowadays. I've lurked the forums every single day for years now (Not often logging in or posting), and it went from being generally quiet with a few odd users now and then, to frequent heated discussions/arguments amongst long-time users. I see people convert from being very supportive, then a blog post or the beta is released, and they switch, etc.

In my opinion, to see that Construct 3 was quite literally an editor change is a shame, although it was told to us for a long time, but this thread shows why remaking the editor may have not been the best thing to spend years on. (tho it is impressive technologically!) It's not a terrible thing to have done, it's great for Mac and Linux users, and heck I'd love to be able to switch to Linux before Windows 7 is no longer supported and I bet a fair amount of people share that thought, but this is what we were waiting all this time for? Other things could have been focused on that seem to be highlighted frequently on the forums... Iuno...

It could all change though, right? I mean, once the majority of editor bugs are gone, what would be the next thing for Scirra to develop in Construct 3, especially after the uproar on the forums? There are genuine concerns being raised and they can't seriously be ignored or shutdown with a statement about technology, HTML5, 3rd party issues, etc. I think a solid road map would be brilliant, to know exactly what direction Construct 3 will go, and for us to make the decision if we want to be part of that journey.

Bleh, I wish Construct 3 was discussed publicly much much earlier, even if it was just a tiny bit.
B
51
S
20
G
10
Posts: 571
Reputation: 9,819

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:07 pm

Jase00 wrote:In my opinion, to see that Construct 3 was quite literally an editor change is a shame, although it was told to us for a long time, but this thread shows why remaking the editor may have not been the best thing to spend years on. (tho it is impressive technologically!) It's not a terrible thing to have done, it's great for Mac and Linux users, and heck I'd love to be able to switch to Linux before Windows 7 is no longer supported and I bet a fair amount of people share that thought, but this is what we were waiting all this time for? Other things could have been focused on that seem to be highlighted frequently on the forums... Iuno...


You see how it was reworked to run on multiple devices, computers, etc? Well, that's exactly what we want as well in regards to our games. We just want the games to work as intended on various platforms as advertised.

I would love to see a roadmap as well because I'm not sure what subscribing to Construct 3 even means at this point. What are we getting? What will come in the future? Why should we subscribe? Why not continue using c2 or any other engine? These are legitimate questions
Image
B
73
S
21
G
9
Posts: 566
Reputation: 14,011

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:25 pm

I have to strongly agree with NotionGames here:

I find very strange and insulting that some people trying to blame and argue with none sense against NotionGames, he has a good point and true reasons why he is speaking loudly this is some weird thing or something? he is not the one that put that advertising and has a lot of rights to complain, I'm guilty too because I felt for it swell,
I knew nothing about coding or game development and the only reason why I started with construc2 is because of the advertising make games no coding and publish every were, since then I spent nearly two years learning the program I put hundreds of hours trying to learn everything hopefully to one day release games to many platforms, I knew nothing about HTML5 Vs native and all that stuff so I keep going learning till today, just to find out recently that maybe all the effort I put these years will be a waste because of all the problems with the exporting that colleagues mentioned here, I haven't release any game yet but to hear this true is discouraging and I'm seriously started to think if I did the right choice. I think everyone deserves to know in advance these things, it should have been put in front before we make the choice to go the route of making games with construct 2 and the learning curve, before we invested that huge amount of time learning the engine because its not that easy,
so what I'm trying to say it shouldn't be advertised as this engine can do this things when is not, so anyone can make the choice beforehand to go with this engine or trying something else if that is not suited for him. before you put any effort into it. And I'm sure like me they are many on this forum that got caught on this. If it wasn't for threads like this we wouldn't know. The worse part I don't see any plans to fix the problem, wich is the most important and crucial part.
At list Scirra should give a statement to wich direction they going so everyone else can make the right choice stay or try something else.
And thank you NotionGames and everyone else to have the courage to speak about this loudly.
B
39
S
22
G
77
Posts: 285
Reputation: 42,686

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:33 pm

I don't know what their roadmap would look like but i bet getting C3 working on "internet of things" devices may be a priority so we can code on our toasters in morning while making breakfast.

Seriously though, I think a roadmap is important with a subscription model, it's hard to subscribe at the moment hoping that they might add feature x at some stage in the future, as C2 in a browser isnt really cutting it.
B
43
S
23
G
20
Posts: 735
Reputation: 12,027

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:52 pm

@NotionGames
Yeah... Some things have workarounds, like using VM's or WINE to run Construct 2 in Mac/Linux, but certain things don't have a workaround, such as this WiiU Export issue. You hit a dead end and there's no solution or workaround. Makes me wonder why time and resources were focused on doing things browser-based for Mac/Linux support when there was already a workaround for doing that, when there's loyal serious developers that would throw all their money at Scirra raising the concern that their export runs poorly and is hindering them. (Correct me if I'm wrong, as i have not used Mac/Linux, just going from memory here.)

Perhaps spending years to have C3 be browser-based may not be strictly for multiple operating system support; I believe there are things such the new Array editor that may not have been able to be developed in C2's environment... but couldn't that have had a workaround? Have a tiny EXE that is a small lil array editor within C2's directory that you can run from C2 by clicking the "Array editor" button or something, which then hooks onto C2? I don't know the logistics of software development that well, I could be completely wrong here.

On a more personal level, NotionGames, it's commendable that you are here voicing your concerns, especially in your position (Anyone else reading this that have been vocalising their opinions lightly or strongly, it's great! It's great to get everyone's opinion and learn what everyone is here for, even the frequent opinion of "can we have native exports".). I have mostly taken the back seat and observed, I've stopped developing in C2 due to a fear of a random unexpected direction that Scirra may/may not take, heck I've stopped developing completely and it sucks, although I'm only a hobbyist. But your thread has taken off, seeing it suddenly appear on the forum with so many pages really shows you have made an impact and created a lot of discussion, hence why I've crawled out from under the shadows once again to comment. Perhaps the sudden surge of discussion is due to your position, or it's the way you've written your posts, but either way, keep on keeping on, you speak for more people than you may realise.
B
51
S
20
G
10
Posts: 571
Reputation: 9,819

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:10 pm

xrosax wrote:@NotionGames No offence but my opinion but I think you are in this for the money mostly only
and I find that a really poor way to make games ... just because call of duty and I know you've talked about this with your friends
but even though call of duty makes millions selling a game that plays with human natural instincts to cash in doesn't mean you need to do that
with stylized casual games that have been ripped off for years even before mobile was around .

You may take offence but Id be interested to hear your reply in a respectable manner.

Construct Engine too me is an engine about allowing you to take your ideas an turn them into reality
in as simple as a way possible and have the ability to let others play it what platform that is
personally to me is irrelevant aslong as the platforms it export to are ones people are into
like the internet that's more then enough for me and people don't directly have to download anything
to play it win win who cares about console unless your game design requires console support are you a big company
trying to make 10k a month to fund your team I think you need to build a fan base who are into your games
and that number can be reached eventually but if you need it really quick then you better hope your game is super meat boy level
or has same technique of impact that tetris had on silly game addicts, I don't know big companies was never a very interesting idea to me
Id prefer to be as small as possible?.



@xrosax there was really no call for that level of name calling. Full-time Indies need food and that means money. Even part-time Indies sometimes need resources that cost money. If your opinion had any factual/legitmate basis behind it Construct would still be free and open source for those same reasons!
Last edited by Jayjay on Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:17 pm, edited 4 times in total.
"Construct 4 lets YOU make advanced games! (but not play them)" Construct Classic - Examples Kit Dropbox is a pile of trash and if you need my old files PM me! :)
B
119
S
41
G
17
Posts: 2,213
Reputation: 19,638

Post » Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:12 pm

tunepunk wrote:Agree with @FraktalZero

But the main thing is...If you want to do Console Games, why do you chose, C2?

I think Construct is it's own nemesis sometimes. It's so easy to do a basic game that pretty much anyone can do it with a little bit of learning how the event sheet works. The problem with this is, do the games run well? I can only speak from my own experience trying to develop for mobile. At first I thought, bleehhhh performance sucks, but it turned out it's my own code/events that sucked. It was easy to make the game do what I wanted, but it's so hard to make the game do things efficiently.

I'm sure there is a lot of talent on this forum, and a lot of people have great ideas, but just because you can do things, doesn't mean it will perform great on your desired platform. I've been struggling on and off with my first game for about 2 years. Often I put my main project to the side, and just mess around with C2 and it's capabilities, doing small test projects, just to try out some features/plugins whatever, and learning.

But one thing I noticed, is that it's much harder than you think, very similar to my previous job developing for consoles. When I worked at DICE, we had a very very limited memory budget for UI, for Battlefield: Bad Company. You have grand ideas of what you wanna do but is set back by technology and what you actually can do....

Developing for Consoles is more to it than just pushing out a game. Every console has their own QA department making sure things are up to par, and performing well. It's not like Google Play store where any "developer" can upload their clones and shovelware. You have to make sure on screen elements for buttons follow UI guidelines, and is clearly visible for a variety on TV screens and resolutions. Your game is not going to pass, if it's not up to par, at least that's what it's what like working on AAA title a couple of years ago. I don't know if it's a bit different if the console has an indie dev section.... but anywho

So even if Scirra provided console export, you have a lot more working against you that just creating a game. Even if html5 games were supported better on consoles. It's gonna be pretty hard I guess.


TLDR:
When you have a game you want to develop, I think it's better to chose the tool right for the job, than expecting your tool to adopt to your needs. Your best bet is to chose an engine that is specifically designed for your purpose and does it well.

So back to my first question. If you want to do Console Games, why do you chose, C2/C3?, it's not designed for it. And consoles are generally not designed to run HTML5 games.

It's like choosing MS paint to do advanced photo editing like what you would do in Photoshop.


Maybe people chose C2 for console because they claimed Wii U support? And over a year ago, announced XB1 "beta" support, and again recently announced XB1, to the point where it's listed as a supported platform for C3? Wii U export was more or less unworkable and WebGL shader support in Edge (which would have to be depended upon on XB1 export) is almost entirely broken, so claiming "support" for those platforms is misleading at best, purposely vague overstatements that are known by Scirra to be not entirely true at worst. Combine that with those of us who've already had their games approved for release on Wii U & XB1 not being able to do so because of the engine not being able to do anything close to what's event remotely been promised platform-wise, and you're headed pretty deeply into the territory of misleading marketing. Consoles don't need to be designed to run "HTML5 games." Games built in HTML5 need to be using HTML5 tech that can run on consoles - all of which are capable, spec-wise, of doing so. Scirra's complete lack of desire to support consoles in such a way that the HTML5 games it exports run well on consoles is the issue. The "we're sticking to standards" approach falls apart when nobody else, including web browser developers on PC/Mac/Linux/Android/iOS, sticks to standards. It's an oft-repeated excuse used to dismiss criticism of engine performance and feature set. With C3 just being an editor update on top of the same engine, I think the length of this thread points to the more experienced devs trying to make money by releasing games built in C2 being over the excuses.

You're basically ignoring those facts to tell everyone who wants to port to the platforms that Scirra has claimed are supported by their engine that they're wrong for expecting the tool set they landed upon to do what's advertised, as are those of us who are well aware of what's required to get a game running on multiple platforms or as wide a range of hardware as possible on a single platform like PC. I certainly didn't spend time hacking resolution switching - even if it's just the canvas, it helps with performance on lower-end GPUs, however many times Scirra may say it doesn't matter (they're completely wrong) - into Sombrero for my health. Reading UI guidelines isn't a big deal for me or others who use C2, since we've spent decades having to do exactly that for UI design for other types of software products. Experienced used are what Construct needs to grow beyond a userbase of hobbyists and students - unless, of, those are the target audiences for Construct moving forward, in which case experienced users will move on and the showcase for C3 will end up looking pretty sparse. Well...more sparse.

I built Sombrero in C2 because I dug the idea of the event sheets. Heck, I switched from Unity to C2 because at the time Unity didn't really have very good 2D tools. The issue isn't the editor/interface/whatever, though don't even get me started on how every concern I had with going to a browser-based IDE has proven true in a single week of stress testing. It's the woefully out of date or missing features of engine itself. Scirra saying "no, we're the best with a super-advanced HTML5 engine" is kind of nonsense after a certain point when the games can barely run on PCs that can handle games made in other engines just fine. Nobody cares - especially those purchasing games - how many times graphics drivers are blamed, when it's not an issue with other engines. I'm pretty over that excuse when I can run advanced games that came out a month ago on a tablet PC like a Surface Pro 4, but just about any complex C2 games is choppy as all hell, and they blame a graphics chip that can run advanced 3D games (even if at lower resolutions). "It's just as fast as native" is such a bold-faced lie that I don't know how Scirra keeps thinking they can get away with claiming it, outside of a mostly inexperienced user base. Being "the best tool for 2D games" involves more than just saying a tagline. It involves results. That we haven't seen.
Last edited by digitalsoapbox on Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:53 pm, edited 16 times in total.
B
80
S
46
G
24
Posts: 525
Reputation: 20,955

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests