Construct 2 and 1080p Capabilities?

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:42 pm

AS already said, a high resolution is perfectly manageable by high end desktop computers.
And the reason you found "poor" looking games on mobiles is just that mobile hardware is pretty weak in regards to desktop computers.

Nevertheless have a look at spriter, such a tool should help with your project.

Carefully designed, a triple AAA game is doable in C2, and you're right, C2 is waiting for a killer app.
But the game you're envisioning won't be an easy task. Whatever the framework/engine you do the game in, each platforms you target have their own specificities and limitations and are very different from one another.
You won't be able to have a high end game execute the same on a high end computer and on a smartphone that was released even before the first implementations of HTML5.

For a starter you should just focus on desktop development. This you can be sure, is handled by C2 and will give you the necessary experience and something to show for.
New to Construct ? Where to start

Image Image

Image Image

Please attach a capx to any help request or bug report !
Posts: 7,147
Reputation: 67,063

Post » Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:56 pm

Also important feedback. PC is actually the "Target" for this, as generally PC gamers have very capable hardware under the hood (though wildly varied). Being able to take it multi-platform would be preferred just because 1) Exposure 2) Expanded demographic.

I'm reading that you can play games offline, but does that mean Construct 2 will export .exe's and so on for a "PC Game", not just something you load in a browser? The expectation there would be to create an installer, upload it to a site, put a price tag on it, have someone pay + download, install, and then click an icon on the desktop.

Off-topic, but important nonetheless. I will continue reading up on it, but there's nothing saying "Create stand-alone PC titles"... Apart from "Create Windows 8 app"... I don't have Windows 8 and it certainly doesn't seem to be a popular OS for games.

Being able to sell the game via Steam, would be nice bonuses... but I know of several "do it yourself" options that work along the same lines. They securely host the data you want to sell, and once its paid for, special links/codes are generated for that user to access and obtain the data.Lovelocke642013-02-01 13:57:57
Posts: 57
Reputation: 514

Post » Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:17 pm

[quote]I'm reading that you can play games offline, but does that mean Construct 2 will export .exe's and so on for a "PC Game", not just something you load in a browser?[/quote]
There's a third party wrapper thingy called Node-Webkit that comes bundled with the last couple of C2 betas. It's still html5 of course, but builds run as a regular exe would. No browser. Seems to work very well.

[quote]AS already said, a high resolution is perfectly manageable by high end desktop computers.[/quote]
Please define "high end". Also, you might be surprised how many people out there use computers that are not cutting edge. I'm guessing C2 users would like to target more than hardcore gamers.ErekT2013-02-01 14:18:00
Posts: 482
Reputation: 4,843

Post » Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:46 pm

[QUOTE=ErekT]Please define "high end". Also, you might be surprised how many people out there use computers that are not cutting edge. I'm guessing C2 users would like to target more than hardcore gamers.[/QUOTE]

Well, there's no shortage of "8-bit" games out there either in development or uploaded to the arcade, and each one of them appears to have issues with framerates on a Windows 7, 2GB Memory Celeron-D (I think it's called) system. By comparison, the same machine is good to go for casual games like Zuma, Diner Dash, and thing of that sort.

I'm speaking of my mother's computer... she likes those games, and on lesser specs, even those simple titles can get bogged down in the framerate department.

Me personally, I have a PC at home that's powered by a Quad Core Phenom Black Edition processor, 4GB of RAM, and an Nvidia graphics card considered high end four years ago. It's suitable for editing/rendering high definition video with Adobe Premiere, including post-processing coloring and effects on the timeline with Magic Bullet/Colorista plug-ins. If you weren't aware, video editing is some of THE hardest things for a computer to do, often times maxing out all four cores while encoding particularly.

Now, I don't have any framerate issues when playing the Scirra arcade games, but I use Firefox. I refuse Internet Explorer, I refuse Google Chrome (Google can't take over my WHOLE life, though I do use Gmail and Android mobile phone, as well as own a Tegra 3-powered Nexus 7 tablet). See, the thing is, "That's a lot of hardware for what's basically going to be Donkey Kong Country running in 1080p... and not everyone's going to have it."

The trick is to make a game that'd be as widely accessible as possible, while simultaneously fulfilling the "graphics whore" demands that modern gamers desire.

"Skullgirls" was nice because it was all hand-drawn sprites, backgrounds and the like. "Street Fighter II HD Remix" was nice because of the same reasons. Now go and download the "Mark of the Wolves" demo and see what a game made in "less than" 480p graphics looks like scaled up to your 1080p display. Blurry, that's for sure. The crispness of running a 1080p native game on a 1080p game is undisputedly better than mastering a game on a smaller resolution and upscaling... and that was the original point of me starting this thread.

Best I could tell, nobody has even set out to try and do a 1080p-native title in Construct. Sure it's "theoretically possible", but not by linking to any web-hosted 720x480 game and asking me to "Enable full screen mode". It's simply "Not the same", and if I'm looking at spending $120 for a license of Construct, $2900 for a license of software to EXPORT to a stand-alone .exe (as I was reading about in older forum threads... remember, this is would in fact be a game for profit), in addition to spending a budget of perhaps $10,000 to acquire/create unique game assets (which I would need SOME way of hiding as to prevent other people from outright stealing our sprites, background, music and the like), you begin to realize that "Theoretically" isn't as comforting as "Officially supported".

It's easy to ridicule this as "nit-picking, be happy with what's already in the engine", but if it's not enough then it's not enough... there's no hard feelings, but my mission is NOT to create the world's most expensive HTML 5 experiment... it's to make a game that makes some money. I would have artists to pay, developers to pay, and so on. If Construct 2's mission is to create an easy-to-create platform, then they've already done it... but for people with thousands of dollars ready to invest, they're going to put that money down on what works -best- for -THEIR- needs.

It may end up that I just use Construct 2 to create a standard definition 480P-native demonstration with all the proposed bells and whistles for the purpose of attracting developers and so on for a larger project, and that's ALSO okay. But that's rather limiting, it doesn't achieve the scale of what I'm looking to create, and therefore it may be in my best interest to look at a more capable (even if more complicated) development environment such as Unity 4. That's a bucket of cash alone for a pro license, but it's proven to thrive in an Android environment, proven to export native to Ouya, to PC, and yes, even to web. But the cost goes up dramatically, and it's something that I couldn't personally tackle without taking years and years of time.

The middle ground, I'm hoping, is Construct 2. Construct 2 needs native .exe exporting, native android exporting, native Ouya/whatever else support. I can appreciate that HTML 5 -should- be supported by everyone, but the more wrappers, money, and crap you have to tack onto the HTML 5 groundwork just to get it to work... then tweak it to get it all running as desired raises so many questions for so many support sites on the web, that at times, if you're "dreaming big" with Construct 2, you're "spending big" to get there... if "there" is even possible in reality. Remember, so much of this is "in theory".

Who wants to be the guy holding the bag on that pricetag with a game that runs well in one browser on one website for 18% of PCs in the world?
Posts: 57
Reputation: 514

Post » Fri Feb 01, 2013 3:20 pm

There are over 2 million pixels on a 1920x1080 screen, which in 32-bit color mode @ 60 FPS is a bandwidth of about 500 MB/s - not including things like intermediate rendering for effects. You need hardware which can reach those sorts of numbers to do that. It's not specific to Construct 2 or HTML5! If you use Unity, your users will still need graphics hardware that can push those sorts of numbers. And note rendering happens entirely on the GPU, so having lots of CPU cores and loads of system RAM doesn't help, only the graphics chip does. Graphics chips also typically have special pipelines for rendering video, since it's simpler than rendering games (where you have factors like over-draw, shaders and multitexturing).

BTW in our latest betas we've dropped Awesomium in favour of node-webkit for desktop exporting. Not only is it faster and working better overall, there's also no fee for commercial use.Ashley2013-02-01 15:24:22
Scirra Founder
Posts: 23,440
Reputation: 186,070

Post » Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:08 pm

Ashley - Excellent contribution! Good note on the node-webkit as well. I will spend some time reading up on that today as well. I'm very glad that there are so many helpful and knowledgable people here in your forums... don't suppose there's a discount code for personal licenses per someone's birthday? Mine's is next Friday, heh.

Yeah, didn't think so. Don't get all awkward and silent on me, had to try.

Rich food for thought today people. I'm actively going to link my team/peoples to this thread as it goes on... I'm going to keep fooling around with the free edition but I can already feel the walls closing in on me, so to speak. It's not your fault, I'm just hesitant to spend "more money" on "programs like this" to discover their limits halfway through a project and have to abandon everything while I read up on alternatives.

Surely you know of "The Game Creators"? No good rat b-------... they put some of their game creation software on sale with a selection of model packs, and once I swipe the card and get it all downloaded, installed and updated, I discover that over half of the content bundled "is no longer compatible with the program" as of 8 updates ago. So, the tradeoff there was, "You can use the buggier, unstable older version of the program to fully utilize your purchase or update to the latest version and suffer through it's headaches while you gamble on buying model packs that may/may not work... ever."

Gamemaker Studio feels obtuse. It's very "small" considering, but what made it worth trying was the fact that it HAS been used in a handful of commercially-released, money-making games. It's a proven platform, even if it too has its limits.

Gamesalad... they want $300 a year or so, and if you're developing in Windows there seems to be a distinct disadvantage compared to developing on a MAC. Right there that's asking me to pick up a $2000 machine (I never buy entry level, that's my own fault there) just to experiment with something that ultimately releases heavily unoptimized gameplay experiences on it's target devices. It IS very easy to use however, and for web game experiences? Pretty straight forward. A lot of people will probably get a lot of enjoyment from it, but it doesn't do what I'd like it to do.

Construct 2 is where I've settled, I'm in love with the son of a bitch, but I want to "do right" by it. We've got the guts, creativity and (hopefully soon) the know-how to do something head-turning for Construct 2, but you look up at the history of horror stories we've had, you will see that "we spent a lot of cash and time producing titles and learning environments and have zero to show for it". It's put up or shut up time, and Construct 2 looks like it'll hold up its end of the bargain the more we talk about it.

I have no problem starting off with "retro" games as a test bed/experiment... but such a thing doesn't really flex the muscle here. Such a thing can get lost in the sea of similar "retro" games that are springing up all over the internet. Who knows? If our big game idea proves unfeasible, these may very well be the kinds of games we work on, but 1080p is still the target.

At this point I'm even leaning towards 720p to be honest... just how does Construct 2 upscale the image for full screen display? Can you just blow it up pixel-perfect, akin to playing the NES on a 65" widescreen display, or does it try to somehow "soften" or "smooth" the picture? That stuff drives me nuts. I'd much rather retain my pixels.

For now, my thoughts will go towards creating a web game I suppose. If we can stand out in the arcade, I know we can stand out in the real world as well. Does the free edition allow export for stand-alone PC titles? Or is this one of the features we're gonna have to buy upfront to test? (Raises eyebrow)
Posts: 57
Reputation: 514

Post » Tue Feb 05, 2013 4:33 pm

We developed Mortar Melon with a target resolution of 1600x1000. It's a bit less than 1080p but we're using the same resolution on mobile, tablet and desktop devices, with no loss of performance.
Posts: 900
Reputation: 11,830

Post » Tue Feb 05, 2013 5:35 pm

[QUOTE=thehen] We developed Mortar Melon with a target resolution of 1600x1000. It's a bit less than 1080p but we're using the same resolution on mobile, tablet and desktop devices, with no loss of performance.[/QUOTE]

Very nice. Would you care to specify what mobile and tablet devices you are testing with? I'm not finding it on Google Play w/ my phone.
Posts: 57
Reputation: 514

Post » Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:43 am

Mortar Melon is on the Windows Store and soon to be on the Windows Phone Store as well if it isn't already. It plays great on my Surface RT. One thing that you need to know is that Mortar Melon is a physics/catapult type game. Not an Angry Birds clone, but of the same genre. This means that it doesn't have as many moving sprites on screen at once, but relies heavily on physics, which leads me to believe it is more CPU bound than GPU bound.

But playing it on the Surface means it is basically using the IE engine when I run it and it still performs seamlessly at HD resolutions though IE is definitely not the front runner for HTML5 performance. So not sure how much of a direct comparison you can draw, but HD and running in IE and it still does great.BluePhaze2013-02-06 02:44:22
Posts: 1,833
Reputation: 14,538

Post » Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:40 am

about the performance, when you play on your browser, the game runs better or worst then when exported for desktop?or its the same?

i steel have the free version of C2 and, is not possible to export in this version

Posts: 25
Reputation: 539


Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests