The case for a Unity2D Exporter

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:47 pm

Take a look at a caproj, and the c2 runtime in a text editor.
Its a little more complicated than making a translation.
In a way a C2 game is already being interpreted into javascript, which is itself an interpreted language.

To look at things work wise, would you rather have a Unity exporter, or C3?
Image ImageImage
B
172
S
50
G
183
Posts: 8,439
Reputation: 115,597

Post » Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:37 pm

There are already quite a few visual editors for Unity, but none that are as easy to use as C2. This one based on Scratch(also used in Stencyl) is about the closest you will find:

http://www.plyoung.com/plyblox/index.html

I haven't used it, so I have no idea what it is like and there is not much feedback on the store. There is also the well known Playmaker, which some people swear by, but is not really my cup of tea and uScript which is more like Blueprints in UE4.

The only game IDE's that have scripting in the style of C2 are MMF/Fusion (which C2 took it's inspiration from) and GDevelop (which is a shameless rip of C2, just not as good , but does do native desktop export and is free/open source).
B
11
S
2
G
1
Posts: 108
Reputation: 1,899

Post » Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:51 pm

unity is moving fast and there step to ease 2d creation is smart, i would not be suprised if there next step is making there own eventsystem, and they have a webgl version in beta i believe, so no more plugins, pretty crazy stuff
ImageImage
B
71
S
22
G
7
Posts: 827
Reputation: 10,177

Post » Tue Jan 27, 2015 12:06 am

I don't really use Unity any more, as I have moved onto Godot for 3D, but I do keep up with the general news and forums. My impression is that Unity is developing at a very slow rate and yes, they definitely should have incorporated a visual event system by now, but I wouldn't hold your breath. Playmaker has been the best selling asset for a long while, so it is amazing they didn't hire Hutong to create it natively for them like they did with the developer of NGui (for the new GUI system).

If you want to see fast development, then check out the progress of UE4....wow that is moving at an insanely fast rate that is helped by having a pseudo open source model with community code contributions, as well as it being the inhouse engine for Epic. At this rate Unity will most likely always be playing catchup. Also keep an eye on Godot, as it is growing fast and will be very competitive to Unity in coming years. Also watchout Gamemaker, as Godot's 2d is very powerful as well. Currently no visual scripting so C2 has nothing to fear :)
B
11
S
2
G
1
Posts: 108
Reputation: 1,899

Post » Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:42 am

@zendorf, fast is relative, but i do think they are covering there base pretty well, many exports, graphic pipeline, 2dworkflow, the logic step would be to make the coding more easy, on the other hand maybe its more interesting for them to get extra funds from pluginmakers on top of selling there main engine, if they make there own, then these plugings become mostly obsolete.. but for now im mostly interested in unity for providing assets in the future,

i will check the other engines, thanx for mentioning
ImageImage
B
71
S
22
G
7
Posts: 827
Reputation: 10,177

Post » Tue Jan 27, 2015 12:36 pm

jayderyu wrote:Mammoth, your better off just having have the EventSheet system re-created in Unity.

This seems to basically do that: http://www.hutonggames.com/
B
19
S
6
G
7
Posts: 1,101
Reputation: 6,146

Post » Tue Jan 27, 2015 12:47 pm

I'm a bit off topic, but I couldn't help myself but reacting to the assertion that GDevelop is a shameless rip of C2 ;)
I first created GDevelop when I wasn't aware of the existence of Construct (Classic), and both software evolved separately. Of course some objects and features are inspired from C2 (maybe also vice-versa, I don't know) ;) But the event system was clearly invented without looking at Construct.

That's all :D (I hope my message won't be considered as spamming, as I'm the developer of GDevelop. Just wanted to make things clear!)
B
3
S
1
G
3
Posts: 9
Reputation: 1,068

Post » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:18 pm

Creating exporters for Unity is completely bonkers. Firstly it's not really technically possible - it faces the same challenges as writing a native engine (for example how do you make it be able to run all the existing Javascript code for plugins and behaviors without just using a browser engine?). Secondly you're tied in to Unity's licensing model, so if you want a pro feature like "Custom splash screen", that's $1500.

A better question is why is it even necessary? What does it do that browsers currently don't? And whatever the answer to that question is, surely the better thing to do is to improve the browsers instead of completely abandoning the entire existing engine?
Scirra Founder
B
402
S
238
G
89
Posts: 24,638
Reputation: 196,083

Post » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:41 pm

Agreed on ashley on that one, wtf, unity is a complete other engine, you might as well use it directly if you want it (no event system?, not a good reason for that topic I think, And, scirra's job is to maintain their products, not extend the one of others.)
Game design is all about decomposing the core of your game so it becomes simple instructions.
B
54
S
22
G
18
Posts: 2,123
Reputation: 17,150

Post » Tue Jan 27, 2015 2:15 pm

As a Unity programmer I can honestly say. It's not worth the effort to convert to. Unity 2D engine in my opinion is sub par to C2. Unity strength lies in it's vastly better work flow features. I may have made the suggestion once, but after getting my hands involved in both engines far more. yeah. C3 Unity, not the way to go.

@Somebody
Thanks for the link. I have Playmaker, but I haven't used it at work. Playmaker is a similar Visual Programming, but I find C2 ES better balanced between coding and visual.
B
92
S
18
G
9
Posts: 2,455
Reputation: 15,113

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests