PC browser games only 5%,should Construct change?

Post » Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:13 pm

I posted about this too back in April. It helped make my point that browser games are a dying niche market. And making C3 so reliant on Chrome is like targeting a niche market within a niche market. I don't understand the business logic in that. Good gimmick, bad idea, imo. If C3 allowed people to make games just as easily in C++, can you imagine how many people jump all over that? We wouldn't have to rely on third party wrappers and all the problems that come with that, but I digress. It is what it is.

That being said, I don't think HTML is going anywhere for a very, very long time. So I think it's safe to make games for HTML5, even though it's not a popular method of playing games. A lot of people will still have access to playing your games online, if they wanted. More people have computers, tablets, smart phones than any particular console. Trends show the market shrinking for browser games, but it can easily rise again too. Nothing is written in stone.

I do predict browsers going away though. Eventually, HTML5 will be integrated seamlessly into the operating systems. Everything is moving towards seamless connectivity, everything from children toys to automobiles. You can already get search results and information without even opening a browser. That's the future of the internet. The faster C3 becomes independent of Chrome, the better... or any browser for that matter.
B
16
S
7
Posts: 190
Reputation: 1,823

Post » Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:25 pm

pirx wrote:@Bob Thulfram @glerikud

Good points. I've recently decided to give Construct another shot taking the opportunity that C3 is here (a couple of years ago I switched from native to C2 deciding it was way more effective and fun, but the mobile performance turned out to be a show stopper back then) and I'm loving it. Still have to do some testing on the performance aspect though.


I suppose it depends on what you want to do, and what your expectations are for mobile. Right now I'm building a mobile-first 3D game in C2. I have been watching the Unreal Engine 4 GDC 2017 videos at the same time, and it is really clear to me that each engine has their own strengths and weaknesses. C2 + Q3D gets you 3D visualization technology that is effectively equivalent to what existed in PCs around 15 years ago. It isn't that HTML5 can't do better, it is just that a lot of the modern features that exist in javascript libraries like threeJS or babylonJS haven't been implemented in C2. The big advantage to this approach is the fact that I am WAY faster prototyping in C2, even without a full 3D editor.

I expect my next non-game will be built in UE4 because I will need access to the up-to-date visualization tools for the project. For mobile, however, I still plan on using C2/C3 -- the 3D game I'm currently building runs fine on an iPhone 6, and probably won't be released for another year. I expect that the end product should run great on 3-year-old hardware, which is plenty old to cover a majority of users.
www.simbucket.com - HTML5 Science Simulations / https://www.airconsole.com/#!play=com.n ... obotrumble - Robot Rumble on AirConsole
B
46
S
11
G
20
Posts: 363
Reputation: 14,199

Post » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:50 am

Moot wrote:I do predict browsers going away though. Eventually, HTML5 will be integrated seamlessly into the operating systems. Everything is moving towards seamless connectivity, everything from children toys to automobiles. You can already get search results and information without even opening a browser. That's the future of the internet. The faster C3 becomes independent of Chrome, the better... or any browser for that matter.

I see your point, but in my opinion browsers are just getting more and more functionality and opportunities. Web based applications are rising and you can do more and more work inside your browser. My prediction is that browsers will stay, technology will evolve and we'll see more full featured applications written in web languages. That doesn't mean that they won't be also available for the OSs (through integrated HTML5), but the "write once deploy everywhere" trend will get a bigger audience as technology matures.
B
128
S
33
G
17
Posts: 1,551
Reputation: 20,488

Post » Mon Jun 12, 2017 3:00 pm

I don't think it matters if some platforms fall out of use and others rise to prominence. It could change several times in the coming years, but we already support almost every major platform, so we've got it covered really.

The web has legendary backwards compatibility for widely-deployed features - you can still correctly view the original Space Jam website from 1996! That's a website over 20 years old. Newer features tend to chop and change more, but mainly as the spec is refined to make sure it's robust for the future, and we update regularly to keep up anyway.

I recently saw a benchmark where the C2 engine in Chrome outperformed a competitor's native engine on desktop Windows, and approximately equalled another which compiled to C++. This pretty much confirms to me that the performance argument for native, or this idea that "HTML5 is slow", is totally dead now. Having a native engine does not guarantee good performance, and modern JavaScript JITs are incredibly potent. For years I've already noticed that almost every performance complaint comes down to hardware limitations (e.g. GPU fillrate), and people simply knee-jerk blame HTML5 without understanding what the real problem is. So as far as I'm concerned, we're there: HTML5 has native-grade performance now. There's nothing significant to gain by a native port.
Scirra Founder
B
387
S
230
G
87
Posts: 24,249
Reputation: 192,240

Post » Mon Jun 12, 2017 6:50 pm

Ashley wrote:The web has legendary backwards compatibility for widely-deployed features - you can still correctly view the original Space Jam website from 1996! That's a website over 20 years old.


Not bad. I remember tables and sliced images were popular method of designing webpages around that time.

Ashley wrote:I recently saw a benchmark where the C2 engine in Chrome outperformed a competitor's native engine on desktop Windows, and approximately equalled another which compiled to C++. This pretty much confirms to me that the performance argument for native, or this idea that "HTML5 is slow", is totally dead now. Having a native engine does not guarantee good performance, and modern JavaScript JITs are incredibly potent. For years I've already noticed that almost every performance complaint comes down to hardware limitations (e.g. GPU fillrate), and people simply knee-jerk blame HTML5 without understanding what the real problem is. So as far as I'm concerned, we're there: HTML5 has native-grade performance now. There's nothing significant to gain by a native port.


You say that, but there is an overwhelming amount of people who say otherwise. A lot of C2 developers have switched to Unity because of performance. Who should we believe?

Performance aside, I think C2 and C3's biggest problem is third party wrappers. I haven't found a wrapper that I haven't experienced some trouble with. If C3 was native, you wouldn't need to rely on HTML5 wrappers. Construct is fantastic for browser games, but it's a real pain trying to get it to work on other platforms. :|

glerikud wrote:My prediction is that browsers will stay, technology will evolve and we'll see more full featured applications written in web languages. That doesn't mean that they won't be also available for the OSs (through integrated HTML5), but the "write once deploy everywhere" trend will get a bigger audience as technology matures.


That's possible too.
B
16
S
7
Posts: 190
Reputation: 1,823

Post » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:57 pm

Yeah performance-wise it depends a lot on what you do. For example coding a simple 2d game in Unity is a huge overkill in my opinion. however, if you have lots of high speed action with advanced logic things might get choppy especially on older devices. I agree though this is not a HTML problem per se.

Btw one small bone I have to pick with HTML though are its web-related things that make life harder for developers of web unrelated projects (I.e. Games). I'm talking about stuff like text boxes floating above the canvas etc.
B
16
S
7
G
1
Posts: 154
Reputation: 3,117

Post » Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:07 am

Moot wrote:Performance aside, I think C2 and C3's biggest problem is third party wrappers. I haven't found a wrapper that I haven't experienced some trouble with. If C3 was native, you wouldn't need to rely on HTML5 wrappers.

The downsides of writing native engines would be far worse than any issues people have with wrappers.
Scirra Founder
B
387
S
230
G
87
Posts: 24,249
Reputation: 192,240

Post » Wed Jun 14, 2017 10:38 am

HTML5 Forever!

!. Both mobile and desktop devices are getting faster every year. More memory, faster processors, better GPU.

2. Browsers are getting faster, especially using JavaScript, but internally lots of speed tweaks.

3. HTML5 specs don't change once they have been agreed upon.

4. The field is narrowing. Chrome, Edge, Safari. But the largest percentage are using Chrome and will only increase.

After spending two years trying to keep up with yearly changes on iOS, Android, and Unity, I've given up on them. The mood of those engines seems to be break things and run away fast. :D

So learn Construct 3 and let Ashley worry about changes in the exported platforms!

And after a few weeks playing with Construct 3, I can say that most of it operates the same way except that:

1. You can now do your coding on PC, Mac, Android, and Chromebooks. Use the cloud and you can code on a different machine every day.

2. Most of the mechanics seem the same. The only thing I'm noticing so far is that we can now use booleans, which are nice.

3. I'm noticing lots of little things that make stuff easier. Lots of little tweaks.

So pay your money. $100 a year isn't trivial, but GameMaker 2 will cost you $1050 for the same value. That's ten years of Construct 3. Or as a wise man once said, 3 > 2. I enjoy GameMaker, but you wind up needing to use their GML code for a lot of things. I love Construct 3 because I don't have to code. I spent many years coding in Assembly, C/C++, Java, Swift, C#, and JavaScript, and I'd rather not.
Proud Construct 3 subscriber.
B
20
S
5
G
5
Posts: 205
Reputation: 4,614

Post » Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:29 am

Just bring flash back to mobile and all problems will be solved. Still, by far the best development tool for casual games. In this current environment, I am going with Construct, but Flash solves so many issues that HTML 5 has and will probably continue to have.
B
13
S
6
Posts: 24
Reputation: 1,073

Post » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:02 am

Do you know about Adobe Animate CC? It has all the tools of Flash, but exports to HTML5. If you already know Flash, this might be the best thing for you.

http://www.adobe.com/mena_en/products/animate.html

and

https://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/welcome-adobe-animate-cc-a-new-era-for-flash-professional/

$20/month, but if you like time-line-based animation, Animate is for you. It still exports Flash, but operating systems and browsers don't like it much. You can use ActionScript 3.0 but not lower. And as people here will tell you, HTML5 runs everywhere, Flash runs fewer places every year.

Hmmm $20/month. That's $240/year, less than half the price of Construct 3.
Proud Construct 3 subscriber.
B
20
S
5
G
5
Posts: 205
Reputation: 4,614

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: johnnym and 6 guests