Construct 3 - many questions (native exporterts)

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:52 pm

@gamecorpstudio
and for comparison ... Stencyl = Scratch


oh, I get it now... well that's not true at all.

That's like saying... Construct 2 = Clickteam fusion 2.5

Just because they are similar, it doesn't mean they are the same.

I don't know why you guys look at stencyl like if it was the worst thing ever.

Perhaps you had some bad experiences in the past? but it seems fine now.

I'm not a fan boy I just use what works, thats it.
B
7
Posts: 23
Reputation: 830

Post » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:59 pm

@droxon
--- never mind...

as for the stencyl=scratch read stencyl license and terms of conditions ul see its source code is from scratch ... from day 1, there for it has limitations. unless they redo it entirely in some new framework not using scratch mit source code anymore which limits the compatibilities with so many platforms, outside web content.
Last edited by gamecorpstudio on Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:22 pm, edited 4 times in total.
B
76
S
22
G
69
Posts: 1,353
Reputation: 43,833

Post » Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:04 pm

@gamecorpstudio
its never going to be better in performance the the stage it is now, so c2 may be having performance issues now, but later on will be always open space for improvement.


How do you know that? Performance can increase or decrease on either engine.

The guys at stencyl implemented haxe and openfl in version 3, so I'm guessing anything can happen.

Construct 1 exported .exe files only, and now it's Html5 only.

It's a software, anything can change.
B
7
Posts: 23
Reputation: 830

Post » Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:31 pm

@droxon wrote:lennaert
Are you sure? If you take a good look to the ghost song thread you will see that the developer is using a lot of layers, physics, particles, objects, he is not even using tiles at all. I'm sure there might be a work around or like you say a different approach but still I don't think C2 can handle that many assets.



Quite sure.

It does not really matter what is applied or used.
It matters how it is applied and used.

Construct 2 has the same functions and then some.


If the amount of assets would become an issue, you would have to split up your layouts and objects more wisely.
Who dares wins
B
57
S
17
G
21
Posts: 1,878
Reputation: 19,572

Post » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:54 pm

Er..C2 would have no problem doing something like Ghost Song. Ghost Song keeps each room in a separate layout so there aren't very many objects at any given time. There are no physics. He doesn't use tiles because terrain 'stamps' are more versatile and the better option for this type of game.

As for all the particle effects and such, Stencyl has "simple actors" for graphics and fx that have practically no overheard whatsoever. C2 might benefit from something similar, but I'm not sure a bunch of single-frame sprites will be that bad either.
Image
B
243
S
30
G
13
Posts: 1,787
Reputation: 18,770

Post » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:56 pm

I would think The Next Penelope is FAR more intensive than Ghost Song and I haven't seen many people complaining about performance on that..

(sorry for double post. forums are screwed right now)
Image
B
243
S
30
G
13
Posts: 1,787
Reputation: 18,770

Post » Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:30 am

I'm always happy to investigate the performance of any .capx files if you think the C2 engine is the bottleneck. Usually however either people complain but don't send me anything so there's nothing I can do, or they send something and it is clearly bottlenecked on the hardware, e.g. hammering the GPU fillrate or ramming it full of WebGL shaders. In that case a native engine won't help since you'll just run in to the same hardware limitations. This is part of the reason I am very skeptical of claims to move to a native engine to solve performance issues - none of those hardware-bottlenecked games will get faster.

Note that if it occasionally drops frames, that's not the same as a performance issues, that's more to do with the browser v-sync scheduling. Chrome has had some issues with that lately, but they're getting a lot better (Canary is already much improved for me). In these cases the engine/hardware are perfectly capable of hitting 60FPS, or possibly even much higher, but timing errors in the v-sync scheduler mean it occasionally fails to schedule a new frame even when it has the resources to do so. That should not be confused with performance issues where the engine or hardware do not have the necessary resources to reach 60 FPS.

Note that single frame Sprites with no behaviors are specifically optimised to be zero overhead in the C2 engine.
Scirra Founder
B
397
S
236
G
88
Posts: 24,389
Reputation: 194,448

Post » Thu Jul 02, 2015 5:41 pm

Ashley wrote:Chrome has had some issues with that lately


What if it never gets better? How can you rely on third party if that can make C2 look bad if they do something wrong?
Just to be clear I'm not talking about browsers, it will be insane to create a new browser right? but what about Nw.js?
Or any other of the third party wrappers you rely on. Is it that hard to create your own wrappers?(considering that native export is not an option anymore)
At least this way you will have full control over it.
I know that Nw.js is getting better and also the intel xdk is getting better, but what if they get worse?
I might be talking crazy here, it's just an opinion. (i'm pretty sure I'm not the only one)
B
7
Posts: 23
Reputation: 830

Post » Thu Jul 02, 2015 5:59 pm

What if one day nobody uses Windows more and only Steam OS? What if one day computers will have 3 legs and run away if you click a mouse button? What if...

We always depend on third party software and hardware! As a developer you never should depend on one solution. If one day C2 doesn't work more for you, then you need to learn another engine. That's it ;)
B
11
S
2
Posts: 213
Reputation: 1,266

Post » Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:03 pm

We've now hit the inevitable "Why don't Scirra make their own wrapper?" point of the eternal "C2 doesn't work very well discussion", with a side portion of "C2 depends too much on 3rd parties".

None of these points are bad or wrong. In an ideal world C2 would have a game focused, light weight, cutting edge HTML5 wrapper tailored for each platform. But Scirra's a small team making two products.

They've recently expanded, and personally I hope some of the new resources go to finally ending these deployment debates - I'd love a C2 fork of nw.js, but I'll settle for a stable product.
B
59
S
21
G
10
Posts: 643
Reputation: 10,293

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests