Petition to include built-in exporter/compiler in Construct3

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:18 am

irbis wrote:Daaaamn! What a lovely pixel work you got there! <3 :o
Could you link me up? website or fanpage would do.


Thanks! Chris "hand-draws" (lol) each pixel with a regular wireless mouse :o

And sure! we have a blog at http://www.causalbitgames.com/ but our Twitter is most active (and has gifs posted from our Unity adventures often :) ): https://twitter.com/causalbitgames
"Construct 4 lets YOU make advanced games! (but not play them)" Construct Classic - Examples Kit Dropbox is a pile of trash and if you need my old files PM me! :)
B
124
S
42
G
17
Posts: 2,225
Reputation: 19,887

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:23 am

Jayjay wrote:
irbis wrote:Daaaamn! What a lovely pixel work you got there! <3 :o
Could you link me up? website or fanpage would do.


Thanks! Chris "hand-draws" (lol) each pixel with a regular wireless mouse :o

And sure! we have a blog at http://www.causalbitgames.com/ but our Twitter is most active (and has gifs posted from our Unity adventures often :) ): https://twitter.com/causalbitgames

Well, you've just earned yourself a new follower.
B
29
S
8
G
7
Posts: 643
Reputation: 6,482

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:30 am

@irbis Thanks! I've liked your Facebook page too :) saw some nice graphics on there :D
"Construct 4 lets YOU make advanced games! (but not play them)" Construct Classic - Examples Kit Dropbox is a pile of trash and if you need my old files PM me! :)
B
124
S
42
G
17
Posts: 2,225
Reputation: 19,887

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:34 am

Jayjay wrote:@irbis Thanks! I've liked your Facebook page too :) saw some nice graphics on there :D

Thank you most kindly! Most of what you can find on my social media would have a Steam Store link attached, but Construct simply refuse to cooperate with me on this matter lol (I am now 100% desktop developer, so go figure :lol: )
B
29
S
8
G
7
Posts: 643
Reputation: 6,482

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 8:41 am

mercedescolomar wrote:
tunepunk wrote:
Ashley wrote:I'm not going to keep making the same points about native engines, I wrote a whole blog about it already.

You should probably come up with a different name to talk about exporters - I equate "native exporters" with "native engines". I think you mean built-in exporters or something like that?


Yes, sorry for the terminology. As a Designer I speak a different language :lol: Built in exporter Is probably more in line what people mean when they talk about native export here.... Completely agree with the case against native, as I've read the blog post several time trying to wrap my hand around it. I could care less what codebase is used if performance is similar.

So let me rephrase that.... How big of an hassle is it to have a "built in exporter" for mobile development? As a designer I'm jost looking for workflow improvements, less hiccups, and hassle.

Optimal workflow... Create game. Hit export, upload to Store...

Current workflow... Create game, hit export, import to 3rd party wrapper, build, get plugins working, .... it's not working... try again.... contact support... if you're lucky. Upload to store.

I'm only looking for workflow improvements. How you guys solves it it's up to you. I trust you completely... native or non native, i could care less, as long as my game is downloadable from app store without having to use XDK and such.


Couldn't have put it better!

I think what the majority of sensible users are asking for is a built in exporter and wrapper all in one, that then spits out an apk/ipa.
This will definitely cushion the blow of subscription fee disappointment and convince users that the fee is worth it.
If they can do this then I'm definitely sold!


+1
B
37
S
5
G
1
Posts: 41
Reputation: 2,036

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:42 am

MassimoF wrote:
mercedescolomar wrote:
tunepunk wrote:Yes, sorry for the terminology. As a Designer I speak a different language :lol: Built in exporter Is probably more in line what people mean when they talk about native export here.... Completely agree with the case against native, as I've read the blog post several time trying to wrap my hand around it. I could care less what codebase is used if performance is similar.

So let me rephrase that.... How big of an hassle is it to have a "built in exporter" for mobile development? As a designer I'm jost looking for workflow improvements, less hiccups, and hassle.

Optimal workflow... Create game. Hit export, upload to Store...

Current workflow... Create game, hit export, import to 3rd party wrapper, build, get plugins working, .... it's not working... try again.... contact support... if you're lucky. Upload to store.

I'm only looking for workflow improvements. How you guys solves it it's up to you. I trust you completely... native or non native, i could care less, as long as my game is downloadable from app store without having to use XDK and such.


Couldn't have put it better!

I think what the majority of sensible users are asking for is a built in exporter and wrapper all in one, that then spits out an apk/ipa.
This will definitely cushion the blow of subscription fee disappointment and convince users that the fee is worth it.
If they can do this then I'm definitely sold!


+1

That's the miracle I've been talking about, and literally the only reason I would spend my money on Scirra's product again. Actually, it was THE reason I've spent them last time. Well, shame on me. Got lured/fooled by those:
Image
B
29
S
8
G
7
Posts: 643
Reputation: 6,482

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 11:03 am

irbis wrote:Actually, it was THE reason I've spent them last time. Well, shame on me. Got lured/fooled by those:
Image


It didn't lie. You can publish everywhere. To be fair, the image didn't say it'd be EASY. :D
B
25
S
12
G
11
Posts: 260
Reputation: 7,923

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 11:11 am

Count me in, I want built-in exporters for Construct 3 too.
ImageImage
B
44
S
14
G
10
Posts: 166
Reputation: 7,779

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 11:15 am

Bleenx wrote:
irbis wrote:Actually, it was THE reason I've spent them last time. Well, shame on me. Got lured/fooled by those:
Image


It didn't lie. You can publish everywhere. To be fair, the image didn't say it'd be EASY. :D

I know right? Guess I should have read the fine print in that size=1 font :lol:
B
29
S
8
G
7
Posts: 643
Reputation: 6,482

Post » Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:06 pm

At least with C3 and Chrome's new feature for saving offline would make it so you would only really need a wrapper for iOS and consoles.

Which IMO iOS itself is developer hell and not really a big market compared to android, which allows browsers and html5 technology to progress rather than rely on Safari to be crappy or other devs to make a less crappy wrapper. Yeah iOS devices usually just work, but they're usually really limited too. It's just the consequence of Apple's direction for the platform. Even though they're anti-flash they seem to be slow to adopt many features, if they work properly even after adopting.


The rest of those are just those where you can have a wrapper or play via browser html5. I remember back when the WiiU came out that the Youtube webpage in their browser ran faster than the Youtube app they had due to HTML 5 technology. With the Switch basically being a tablet maybe we'll be able to see easy ports to that as well just like android. (Unless nintendo worked with nvidia to built a unique ecosystem from the ground up, but it looks like it could just be a super modified android/linux OS.)

The problem with the console browsers on those devices is that they're hardly optimized and updated, much like iOS's safari. So even if the games half work there's no real hope in having them completely work without issue.
Then you have to rely on other people porting browser technology and relying on them to optimize it for a different hardware platform, usually closed source or slowly developed. The slow progress in making things actually work like a real browser through the wrappers, witch each wrapper having their own unique subset of features, rather than them all working together to make a system with many features and allowing the person wrapping it to choose what to use.


All of this is when HTML5 was just breaking the mold too, so only recently have we seen better results from said wrappers due to the demand caused by C2 (and other html5 dev tools) and the wrappers not being adequate. They're still not as good as the desktop browsers or even the desktop wrappers (nw.js // electron).


But hey, at least you won't need a wrapper for Android once the chrome feature is out of beta :mrgreen:
B
21
S
8
G
6
Posts: 346
Reputation: 4,891

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest