Frankly, Whats the point of c3?

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 5:35 am

kossglobal wrote:Simplicity and ease is not enough to make a game. Plus comparing Gamemaker/fusion/C2 to Unity is just non sense.


Yes its not enough, but it sure as hell will help get the job done easier. If there was a tool that lets me build the kind of games I want to build in a fraction of the time, without all the unnecessary overhead, with total ease and simplicity....I would choose that in a heart beat. Also, any game dev tool can be compared to Unity.
B
94
S
33
G
11
Posts: 278
Reputation: 12,724

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 10:04 am

Stencyl's price model:
Free: Almost all the features of the engine with some restrictions (branding and stuff), but export only to Web... Yet, you can still test your game on the other platforms.
100$/year: Export to Web, Windows, Linux and Mac (no watermarks or forced branding), have Steam support
200$/year: Export to Web, Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, Android, has Ads, IAP, leaderboards... etc

In short, even if you stop paying, you still can make your games with some decent restrictions. While I dislike subscriptions, Stencyl offers a nice subscription model.

The thing is C3 can't pull this off since is only exporting HTML5 :(
B
49
S
15
G
6
Posts: 534
Reputation: 7,195

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 11:14 am

TGeorgeMihai wrote:Stencyl's price model:
Free: Almost all the features of the engine with some restrictions (branding and stuff), but export only to Web... Yet, you can still test your game on the other platforms.
100$/year: Export to Web, Windows, Linux and Mac (no watermarks or forced branding), have Steam support
200$/year: Export to Web, Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, Android, has Ads, IAP, leaderboards... etc

In short, even if you stop paying, you still can make your games with some decent restrictions. While I dislike subscriptions, Stencyl offers a nice subscription model.

The thing is C3 can't pull this off since is only exporting HTML5 :(


I don't like this. 200 a year for things I might use.
B
28
S
6
G
7
Posts: 678
Reputation: 5,676

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 11:28 am

Ah you never know how C3 will turn out later on down the road. C2 when it first started sure isn't the C2 we got now. I'm sure plenty more will be added in time.
B
18
S
4
G
3
Posts: 80
Reputation: 2,658

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:34 pm

@mumu64
The point was that you can use Stencyl Free version as much as you (no limit to a number of events and even preview native exporters) and buy the 1 year subscription (100$ or 200$ depending on your needs) only when you want to export/publish native.

With C3 Free you will be able to open your projects, but will not be able to edit them if they have over 100 events (or something like that).

You understand now the difference ?

As for the price, C3 also has 150$/year and 500$/year business subscriptions for the same features as the 100$ personal license.

@DarkRoomGames
C3 surely had a great start :roll:
You know what they say about first impressions.
B
49
S
15
G
6
Posts: 534
Reputation: 7,195

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 2:13 pm

It's certainly different from what we're used to with a Scirra product. And personally I'm not 100% sold on it yet myself, but I'm sure they still have plenty more to show before its release. Don't wanna bury em before they're dead, ya know? They might surprise us all with something that we never even saw coming that just blows our minds. Whatever it is, if it's worth the price to me, I'll pay it.
B
18
S
4
G
3
Posts: 80
Reputation: 2,658

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 4:53 pm

ruskul wrote:From what I have seen... c3 is basically c2 that you have to rent. Whats the point? I feel as though I am part of a c2 community that begged for just a few simple features. Features that you sort of need to actually make a decent game (something beyond flappy phone games)... Heck, even working box2d physics sure would have been nice. We weren't asking for 3d, we were asking for the basic tools any game engine needs. (collision filtering, raytracing, collision callbacks, swept shapes, ... I could go on) Not to mention extreme scalability issues when making complex games. And javascipt is stupid for games (but thats obviously a given, a compromise that wont be changed)

Is c3 going to address these problems? I haven't heard, frankly, I don't care because I got sick of not having the tools needed for really making a game in c2 and so dropped it.

And I'm not someone who thinks a behavior should make my game. I program. I have rolled 3 different platform engines on my own, and a custom retro based physics behavior for c2. I just wanted basic features literally almost every other engine has.

I've been happily using Unity for free. With c#. Why would I rent c3 when I only use c2 for simple prototypes ?

I don't care that it is on mac (see above). I don't care that its in the cloud (see above). I don't care that it has a 3 in its name if it doesn't actually fundamentally address the major issues with making a game with c2.

Anyone have any insight?


The point is that tools which can run on tablets are aiming for the educational market, not professional game developers. I had some long, interesting conversations about the direction C3 is taking while at GDC and that's the conclusion which was independently arrived at by most everyone I spoke with. It is making itself the polar opposite of the "best 2D game development tool." Which is fine, if that's the tact Scirra wants to take, as it's their business, but it would clear up a lot if they'd just say that instead of announcing the porting of the sub-par image editor from C2 or...wait for it...rounded corners. Oh, and BBCode in comments, when the text & spritefont objects still can't handle multiple weights or colors.

While it's an impressive coding exercise to run a tool like C2 in the browser - and let's be honest, C3 is really just C2 with a few visual tweaks in terms of features, based on what's been announced - who in their right mind is going to work on larger games through a browser interface? Is anyone really supposed to be excited we now have to scroll to see all Function parameters? Now, if we could name the parameters, that would be a big step, but scrolling forces further mouse interactions (and no, tabbing to the next field is no better), which slow down development, especially if you're typically using hotkeys rather than slowly navigating through C2/C3's multiple popups that would have been better off being combined into the rest of the interface if there's some use case requirement that they remain separate panels at all.
B
81
S
46
G
24
Posts: 525
Reputation: 20,980

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 7:59 pm

TGeorgeMihai wrote:@mumu64
The point was that you can use Stencyl Free version as much as you (no limit to a number of events and even preview native exporters) and buy the 1 year subscription (100$ or 200$ depending on your needs) only when you want to export/publish native.

With C3 Free you will be able to open your projects, but will not be able to edit them if they have over 100 events (or something like that).

You understand now the difference ?


I know and I should have made myself more clear. Stencyl free version with editing possibility comes with a price: pay (more) for all your needs.
I don't like any version of the Stencyl example.
B
28
S
6
G
7
Posts: 678
Reputation: 5,676

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:03 pm

digitalsoapbox wrote:who in their right mind is going to work on larger games through a browser interface?


Could you further explain this thought?
B
28
S
6
G
7
Posts: 678
Reputation: 5,676

Post » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:20 pm

mumu64 wrote:
digitalsoapbox wrote:who in their right mind is going to work on larger games through a browser interface?


Could you further explain this thought?


Browsers can barely handle websites without crashing. Every browser-based tool I've used professionally has had stability issues, often crashing the browser, not to mention performance issues associated with browsers and all such products being dependent upon the whims of the third-parties developing browsers. Standalone applications based on web technologies (wrapped in Electron, NW.JS, etc.) seems to fare somewhat better, avoiding the forced updates of Chrome, Firefox & Edge, but achieve nowhere near the performance or stability of standard applications, including those created specifically for professional use, which are created by much larger teams of developers with proven track records working with web technology. And this is just desktop - Android/iOS bring their own issues with stability, memory usage, and performance.
B
81
S
46
G
24
Posts: 525
Reputation: 20,980

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests