Native Desktop Exporter for Construct 3

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Thu Jan 29, 2015 11:12 pm

@Nesteris

As for the engine we currently have that is "very powerful, what we need is a new editor" I dare you to say that to the devs of Airscape and The Next Penelope, who managed to do what very little Indie developers do a make a game that companies want on their company and are fully ready to pay yet are handicapped by Construct 2 not having the exporters. MMF might be a UI nightmare, but to be fair it is more powerful than Construct 2 and has all the exporters anybody should ever need. And using MMF is still easier than writing real code.

"Look how far we've come by relying on HTML5 alone!", yes I can see, two developers got crushed by it and even more have stated, in this very forum that they're not going to use Construct 2 and someone even mentioned going to my personal nightmare, Stencyl. (Shudder).

Aurel could have developed The Next Penelope for infinite years to make it infinitely beautiful, but if every movement was going to constantly stutter and the FPS was going to constantly appear to be dropping even though it's technically at 60 then nobody is going to play it. And Node-Webkit is not going to get any of the blame, or Construct 2, it's the developer that has to deal with everyones abuse.

Honestly, it sounds like a lot of the users here are defending Sccira because they don't want to look bad because they spent money on it.

We need either Ashley to make Construct 3's own native exporters or him to get somebody to hack his engine to do so, otherwise Construct 3 is just going to be Construct 2 with a better editor, in which case paying another 130 USD for it is going to feel like theft to me no matter how good the new UI is.

Improve the engine, don't make it look prettier, improve it.
Stop stalling and do it, because you're eventually going to either have to do it or abandon calling it professional and fully featured.

Actually it's not fully, fully featured now. Every other engine I've ever encountered has native exporters and it's ilk.


+1

I think there are 3 issues why there won't be native exporters:

1) it's easier for Ashley and he doesn't want transform Scirra into big, serious company. Also it could be risky for him. So it's much easier to talk all time about bright future. Just wait for CocoonJS... just wait for Crosswalk... just wait for Cordova... Anyway: yesterday I read about some bug in Chromium that was not fixed since 2012.

2) most of the C2 users are newbies, so they will make clone of Flappy Bird, release some one screen apps for Android... So... jittering? Micro-stuttering? No problem... We can wait 10 years. So they will not push Scirra.

3) I guess that it's much more profitable for Scirra to sell C2 for schools (with monthly payments) than get 1-time payment from devs.
Last edited by szymek on Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:13 am, edited 9 times in total.
B
18
S
6
G
1
Posts: 783
Reputation: 4,187

Post » Thu Jan 29, 2015 11:18 pm

it's not just a new UI, its a new edittime so plugin developers and scirra themselves can integrate complex features into the editor. currently the editor is severely limiting to plugin developers, who can't do more than provide a simple interface through value properties. With the new edittime you'll hopefully have plugins to make a lot of tasks much simpler, and workflow will then be greatly improved.
B
75
S
13
G
8
Posts: 1,973
Reputation: 9,841

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:12 am

Instead of the devil test make a flowchart app for people to see the difference between what they want, and what's doable.
Do you want to make games?
Are you willing to deal with some compromises to do so?
Do you know code?
ETC
Blah
Image ImageImage
B
168
S
50
G
163
Posts: 8,224
Reputation: 105,067

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:57 am

szymek wrote:@Nesteris
+1

I think there are 3 issues why there won't be native exporters:

1) it's easier for Ashley and he doesn't want transform Scirra into big, serious company. Also it could be risky for him. So it's much easier to talk all time about bright future. Just wait for CocoonJS... just wait for Crosswalk... just wait for Cordova... Anyway: yesterday I read about some bug in Chromium that was not fixed since 2012.

2) most of the C2 users are newbies, so they will make clone of Flappy Bird, release some one screen apps for Android... So... jittering? Micro-stuttering? No problem... We can wait 10 years. So they will not push Scirra.

3) I guess that it's much more profitable for Scirra to sell C2 for schools (with monthly payments) than get 1-time payment from devs.



I finally got +1'ed! I feel special.

But yeah, I know how you feel. Also WOW on the 2012 bug. Not surprised though.
I think we should petition Sccira to take off their "full featured and professional" tag line from the front page :P
The moderators are corrupt and ban for no reason, especially that condescending neckbeard asshole Kyatric. The forums are filled with fanboys.
Banned User
B
22
S
7
G
1
Posts: 558
Reputation: 2,925

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:10 am

@Nesteris

Sorry, I was wrong. This bug was found in 2010:

"I found out about this bug a long time ago, and it’s been raised with Google via its Chromium bug tracker for a long time. It has, for the most part, been ignored. The first report was in 2010"

and this article is from 2014:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ianmorris/2 ... p-battery/

so I can wish us good luck with Chromium issues :)

Also

"True multiplatform support." on Scirra main page could be updated by:

"* - jittering and micro-stuttering may occurs. Scirra does not guarantee that your game will be playable on any device. But you can freely report your bugs/issues to Chromium, Crosswalk, CocoonJS etc. teams."
B
18
S
6
G
1
Posts: 783
Reputation: 4,187

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:35 am

I vote -1 here.
Improve workflow is more important than gain the run time performance. It is meaningless if the application was not completed before deadline.
Since the resource of developers in scrirra is limited, these features (for normal size project, native exporter) could not be all done, like @Fimbul said.
B
108
S
26
G
259
Posts: 4,430
Reputation: 145,679

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:03 am

Here are my opinions for C2 so far (after 1 year and half)

Exporters:
I don't give a c**p about native or emulated or HTML5 exporter. Most of the players don't care about this stuff, they care about how the game looks and plays.

THIS is where the REAL issue starts. Construct 2 is dependent on 3rd party wrapper. In theory should not be too bad since @Ashley can focus on C2 and the 3rd party can focus better on the wrapper. Well, in practice is not so good (see Ludei/CocoonJS and the current Chromium/nw.js)

Also another "problem" is consoles support. C2 currently supports only WiiU (and is still not fully compatible due to some Nintendo WebFramework limitations); don't know more details about the Xbox One support.
Example: @Aurel and "The Next Penelope" , with no Playstation wrapper and no access to source code, he can't port his game.

Yes, I am aware that native performance is better then HTML5 (C2 performance is now closer to CC, but after many optimizations that CC does not have).

Plugins:
While some plugins can be installed separately, in my opinion plugins like Paster/Canvas, LiteTween, Mode7, Pode's HTML Pack and some other should be already integrated in C2 since they are VERY usefull.
On this point Spriter should be integrated better (1 object in editor instead of many).

3D already:
Between this and this witch one looks better ? Of course the 3D one at least for the backgrounds.
And is not impossible, nor too much resource hungry, @QuaziGNRLnose already demonstrated it in his Q3D Plugin
Most user don't need advanced 3D functions, only to move, rotate, scale and animate 3D objects, something like Construct Classic.

Multiplatform:
Current: Construct editor -> HTML Games -> Wrapper
The current method... Overall works good, but the problem is usually 3rd party wrappers

Another way: Construct editor -> Game Instructions (Events + Layouts + Resources) -> Platform runner/player
The "problem" is that the "runner/player" for each platform has to be coded separately and maintained/updated when Construct updates some instructions. Also the plugins will have to be made for each platform.

Also, there is Unity's take on HTML 5 that is to convert C and C++ code to asm.js using emscripten .
To be honest, I think Unity's take could be the best compromise: The developer can export his game in C/C++ if he needs the source code and also can export to HTML5 (multiplatform).
Or to continue this way, but to pay someone (or Kickstarter) to make a wrappers for the platforms that are now not supported (like PS4 for example).


Overall Construct 2 is a great tool for making small to medium projects on a budget, but at the moment is not suited for more ambitious projects.
B
49
S
15
G
6
Posts: 531
Reputation: 7,189

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:09 am

Maybe Ashley would like to release some way for the plugin developers to make 3rd party exporters possible.
B
119
S
30
G
8
Posts: 214
Reputation: 13,160

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:37 am

Why is there a negotiation between the native exporters and better editor? Why can't Scirra work on both? If you need to hire more people then hire more people, get budget and take time. You are not a small scale company anymore as far as how you showcase C2 in your webpages. Why there is an option between these two?. Release with the native exporters first and then work on the better editor. It may be easy for me to just say, but hey! you're competitors are driving fast.

Before I bought the license from Scirra, I checked every other application stencyl, GM and all. I am glad that I bought this coz it is easy for a create games. But did I earn from this. NO. My aim is to publish decent games in Android and IOS and after a bit of experience, much better games. I published my first simple game using Intel XDK, either the size if way too high for my simple game(Crosswalk for Android) or the performance is too damn bad(Android). This may looks like a small problem to you, but believe me, there will be more users who might have just left C2 or crossed this part with hard feeling. I am loosing interest with C2. When I speak to other mobile developers from the community, then feel the same. And most of them soon planning to start learning a new application. You have to focus on the tiny developers too. If they create simple game, you never know, It can come out as a big hit in the Android and IOS market. They will be ready to buy more. How many of our users bought Business License? Tell me.

Just click my game in the signature section of this post and check the size. It's 24 MB, for a simple puzzle. Too damn bad. It is suppose to be 2MB.

See how many members are in members page. How many members active in this forum? A way too much difference. If you offer them that they cannot refuse, this forum could have many more members.

Don't just focus on Desktop users, you have no greats mobile games to show in the Home Page, Coz you have to give them an option. When you have a better native exporter, users could try exporting it easily. I am tired of using intel XDK or cocoonJS for export.

Most importantly you have to focus on 3d and all other 3rd party plugins to be added into C2. Coz, usually in applications 3rd party plugins will be something like add-on from the basic requirement. But see all your most used 3rd party plugins, Is that suppose to be an add-on or already embedded with C2 Itself?

I still appreciate @Ashley from getting here and answering the issues. It shows he is interested to lift this company to the next level. But you got to understand C2 have two users, Mobile dev and desktop dev. You have to feed both of them.

As a mobile dev, I would like to see these features in C3
- Definitely Native Exporter - with better performance and optimized size.
- Good performance in the game itself.
- Definitely embed the most used 3rd party plugins in to C2 itself.
- Clean way to create share and leaderboard options

To all the advanced C2 users out there, If you think these are silly things to ask and if you think it wont help in the future, believe me, you haven't met all the users who had left this C2 for not having this.
Last edited by Madrasmadnes on Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:37 am, edited 3 times in total.
Image
B
31
S
7
Posts: 197
Reputation: 2,497

Post » Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:41 am

TGeorgeMihai wrote:Here are my opinions for C2 so far (after 1 year and half)

Exporters:
I don't give a c**p about native or emulated or HTML5 exporter. Most of the players don't care about this stuff, they care about how the game looks and plays.


I take issue with that, because a game needs to be supported the the platform the player wants to play it on. Otherwise they can't look or play the game. And I think they care a very great deal about that.
The moderators are corrupt and ban for no reason, especially that condescending neckbeard asshole Kyatric. The forums are filled with fanboys.
Banned User
B
22
S
7
G
1
Posts: 558
Reputation: 2,925

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: R0J0hound and 9 guests