Construct 2 - Realistic State after 1 gazilion downloads

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:46 pm

Juryiel wrote:The difference is that developers of said engines / exporters, native or otherwise, are working to fix those bugs, acknowledge them, provide timelines for fixes, etc. C2 tells you to 'hope for a brighter future' and some sort of Messiah like Intel or Ludei because they themselves are unable to do anything, given their setup.


Intel XDK have been very good with their feedback handling, they have given estimated timeline for fixes and have delivered. Currently its able to handle large complex games, audio issues are fixed, screen orientation fixed and its improving quickly.

Certainly its true, Ludei have been left wanting.
B
70
S
24
G
19
Posts: 1,757
Reputation: 17,614

Post » Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:53 pm

Silverforce wrote:
Juryiel wrote:The difference is that developers of said engines / exporters, native or otherwise, are working to fix those bugs, acknowledge them, provide timelines for fixes, etc. C2 tells you to 'hope for a brighter future' and some sort of Messiah like Intel or Ludei because they themselves are unable to do anything, given their setup.


Intel XDK have been very good with their feedback handling, they have given estimated timeline for fixes and have delivered. Currently its able to handle large complex games, audio issues are fixed, screen orientation fixed and its improving quickly.

Certainly its true, Ludei have been left wanting.


And maybe Intel will be the solution. Maybe not. We're still not there yet, for me, I have a well-done, optimized, polished mini-game done but publishing is not possible at the moment because of remaining bugs. So again, your assertions that things are fixed are not really relevant to me. And because of that I wouldn't even dare think to start a serious project in C2 for mobiles.

I was actually originally hoping to port the MOBA-style combat engine I built in CC to C2, but it's a big project and given my mini-game doesn't perform, I don't wan tot invest the time. Instead I started porting it to unity.
B
11
S
2
G
3
Posts: 283
Reputation: 1,968

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:00 am

And if you use a native engine and it has bugs... what then? Here you assume its the fault of the engine itself. What if its not and its the fault of your implementation? Because I see other people's game running fine on mobiles, i would therefore have to assume its not the engine's fault. It may be a wrong assumption to you, but to me, if I see others achieving something using the same tools that I am but I am not achieving it, I assume its me and not the tools.

Lets agree that things could improve more and leave it here.
B
70
S
24
G
19
Posts: 1,757
Reputation: 17,614

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:12 am

Silverforce wrote:And if you use a native engine and it has bugs... what then? Here you assume its the fault of the engine itself. What if its not and its the fault of your implementation? Because I see other people's game running fine on mobiles, i would therefore have to assume its not the engine's fault. It may be a wrong assumption to you, but to me, if I see others achieving something using the same tools that I am but I am not achieving it, I assume its me and not the tools.

Lets agree that things could improve more and leave it here.


Your assumption that 'if someone can do X I should be able to do X' is not just a wrong assumption to me, it's a wrong assumption period. If someone can do X I can also do X, but I'm actually trying to do Y and not X, so your assumption doesn't apply. That's the whole point. The fact that you have no problems because you're trying to do X doesn't mean that someone trying to do Y won't have problems.

If I have a bug in my own implementation, which is surely possible, I can send code to other users to look over or look over it myself. But I'm talking about known issues in html5/webgl implementations of chrome, on which Crosswalk depends.
B
11
S
2
G
3
Posts: 283
Reputation: 1,968

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:50 am

If we're not talking about bugs but actual engine features, then if I use a particular native engine and I want to do Z and it doesn't do it, do I then blame that engine also? You do what your engine is capable of, if it isn't capable of doing what you need it to, then use another engine.
B
70
S
24
G
19
Posts: 1,757
Reputation: 17,614

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:59 am

Silverforce wrote:If we're not talking about bugs but actual engine features, then if I use a particular native engine and I want to do Z and it doesn't do it, do I then blame that engine also? You do what your engine is capable of, if it isn't capable of doing what you need it to, then use another engine.


I'm not sure what you're not getting. HTML5/WebGL implementation in chrome / Crosswalk are incomplete, especially so on mobile versions of chrome. It's not that 'the engine is not capable', e.g. I can do a lot of the things on the desktop version of chrome / node-webkit. It's just that wrapper C2 depends on for mobile is in a BETA stage, Crosswalk labels itself as such. And yet here you are telling people that they aren't experiencing bugs, even though crosswalk itself calls itself a beta wrapper.
B
11
S
2
G
3
Posts: 283
Reputation: 1,968

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 1:02 am

When did I say Crosswalk doesn't have bugs? Are you kidding me? I noted it was improving quickly.

When you design for mobiles you compromise, especially so with HTML5. You make do with that works and redesign your game. If that doesn't fly with you, then go with a more native engine. HTML5 just isn't matured yet.
Last edited by Silverforce on Sat Mar 08, 2014 1:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
B
70
S
24
G
19
Posts: 1,757
Reputation: 17,614

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 1:11 am

Silverforce wrote:When did I say Crosswalk doesn't have bugs? Are you kidding me? I noted it was improving quickly.

When you design for mobiles you compromise, especially so with HTML5.


Ok, improving quickly, but then your whole 'if someone isn't having problems then you shouldn't be either' stuff is both unnecessary and missing the point.

As far as your second statement, again missing the point. The test game I'm making for mobile would have no issues with a better export solution. So you only have to make sacrifices when designing for mobile if using C2 with such simple games. Using another engine this would have no issues, it's just so simple and not a real game, just a game designed to test the state of C2 before investing into a real project.

Anyway I'm not really interested in convincing you, I'm just interested in you understanding that your experiences do not represent other people's. For many people, C2 is not working as advertised. And those people just don't care that it's working for you or that you're willing to excuse its shortcomings.
B
11
S
2
G
3
Posts: 283
Reputation: 1,968

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 1:16 am

The question is, what kind of game do you want to make and is it possible with C2 and Crosswalk? If it isn't, you either change your game or you look elsewhere. That is the price you pay for using a HTML5 easy to use game engine. The price is compromise because again, HTML5 isn't there yet.

I certainly know people have problems, there's no need to say it, everyone troubleshoots and fixes bugs. The fact remains that if some have managed to make complex games work, then there is hope for myself personally, and so I try my best to make it work also. Either that, or I go learn proper programming and do it all native.
B
70
S
24
G
19
Posts: 1,757
Reputation: 17,614

Post » Sat Mar 08, 2014 1:24 am

Silverforce wrote:The question is, what kind of game do you want to make and is it possible with C2 and Crosswalk? If it isn't, you either change your game or you look elsewhere. That is the price you pay for using a HTML5 easy to use game engine. The price is compromise because again, HTML5 isn't there yet.


I understand that I can use another engine. I am doing just that. I don't see what that has to do with anything. C2 advertises its ability to make mobile games and doesn't say that HTML5 is not ready, instead Ashley preaches the opposite, that it's the same as native and blah blah blah. People use their money to buy it based on that. So they have every right to expect C2 to be able to make games rather than serving as a beta test for some buggy third party export wrapper.

Anyway I think this conversation is useless. People who buy a product because its advertised to be able to do something will complain when they can't do that thing with the product. You coming into threads telling them to go buy another product or that the product is fine because YOU are not having problems so therefore any problems they are having are not due to the product is just useless. I don't see why you do it, and I don't see how you can justify doing it without offering to buy them the other products you are recommending or at least covering their C2 expense. If you're not buying them another engine, covering their C2 expense, or fixing their bugs, there is no need to reply to their complaints.
B
11
S
2
G
3
Posts: 283
Reputation: 1,968

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests