The sad truth of Construct 2

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 4:33 am

@Ashley You say a lot of reasonable stuff, but I still have my doubts that HTML5 will ever perform at the level of native apps on mobile devices.

1. Running a game through a browser just eats up more resources than it needs to. Does it not? If I'm running mobile safari on an iPad, is it not having to process the game PLUS the browser? It's eating up processing power that could be used by the game. The browser is the middle man.

2. Apple may *never* fully support HTML5, because Apple likes to dominate their corner of the market. Do you really think that Apple will enable webGL and continue improving HTML5 support if it could mean losing a ton of money from app developers going the HTML5 route and circumventing the app store?

I very much wish to eat my words and be totally wrong about everything, but it isn't looking good to me. I know you had to choose a direction and run with it, but I feel like you're defending HTML5 partly because it's what you went with. You even said yourself that there are lots of problems with browser support, etc... yet Scirra boasts that Construct 2 is a direct competitor to other game development tools that export natively. This just isn't true.

I don't think I'd have so much of a problem with Construct 2 if it was just advertised as an HTML5 game maker with a warning that it's not really meant for top end mobile games. Instead it's marketed as a replacement to native apps. Also I just think Construct 2 is so damn good... and I just want to create native games with it and get maximum potential from it. :( There's no possibility of hiring someone to work on the exporters on the side somehow? Not even if we kickstart it?
B
7
S
2
G
3
Posts: 28
Reputation: 2,260

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:53 am

HTML 5 (and web technologies in general) is definitely the right strategy. May be we have to wait a couple of years until it reaches its full potential on mobile devices, but for desktop browsers it just works very well, even more powerful than flash. xoros2013-02-13 08:53:39
B
42
S
11
G
4
Posts: 505
Reputation: 7,267

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 9:24 am

sigh. lost my long winded post. I'm not writing it again :( instead just enjoy the sample of rendering performance done in this link.

http://muizelaar.blogspot.ca/2011/02/drawing-sprites-canvas-2d-vs-webgl.html

summary: WebGL for mobile has been waiting since late 2010. Apple has used it since IOS 4x for the last 2 and a half years. Android and Chrome are not the same team and don't really work together. It is unlikely we wil see WebGL implemented in the next 2 to 3 years on mobile.

too much speculation, but food for thought
http://techcrunch.com/2011/05/17/google-chrome-android/


thread on the apple forums
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3609881?start=0&tstart=0

both from 2011 and both seem to lead that neither Google and Apple are going to push WebGL our high render performance out very quickly.

anyways been a great discussion thread :) when CocoonJS comes out wit WebGL maybe we can finally get somewhere... it's just the painful wait.
B
87
S
18
G
9
Posts: 2,455
Reputation: 14,834

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 9:36 am

Here's an interesting presentation to add to the topic:
Trends in interactive design 2013xoros2013-02-13 09:37:13
B
42
S
11
G
4
Posts: 505
Reputation: 7,267

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 9:47 am

a bit off topic, why it's called html5? I mean html was always html, no html 2, 3 or 4... why suddenly html5? due to this "revolution" ?
ImageImageImageImage
B
140
S
58
G
36
Posts: 2,547
Reputation: 31,170

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:20 pm

It's called HTML5 because the previous specification was HTML4. The reason it's getting so much attention now is because the step from 4 to 5 is bigger than the previous specification steps have been. At least IIRC.

To chime in on this whole discussion. Meh.

Ashley has been right so far about C2 and HTML5. We've seen huge increases in performance since the C2 beta stages. Would a completely native solution be nice? Yes. Do I think it's fully necessary? Possibly not.

Personally I don't care about iOS at all. So that point for me is moot. The only platform other than web/windows I'm interested in is Ouya, and it's far too early to say anything conclusively on that yet (which is why I'm, begrudgingly, looking at Game Maker again. Just in case.).

As the saying goes. The right tools for the right job.inkBot2013-02-13 14:09:48
B
73
S
20
G
10
Posts: 524
Reputation: 9,896

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:38 pm

Flash is the past, HTML5 is the future!

JeZ+Lee
B
11
S
3
G
4
Posts: 105
Reputation: 2,950

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 3:02 pm

@sqiddster - in terms of file I/O, there are some HTML5 technologies that can effectively do that but sandboxed to a domain. Basically there are several features you'd think would be specific to node-webkit, but actually can be interoperated with a web browser in a useful way - and that makes porting much, much easier. Having platform specific plugins generally goes against the purpose of HTML5 being portable everywhere.

@True Valhalla - I think you missed the point of my post - it's more about where things are going, than where they are now.

@Konidias - running a game through a browser probably does need more resources, but often it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter for desktop games. One day it won't matter for mobile games. Also Apple are one of the strongest supporters of HTML5 on mobile; for a long time Safari has been the best mobile browser by miles. I think if they wanted to hold it back, they could have done a lot worse and still been better than everyone else. WebGL is technologically complex and has a few issues mainly around driver compliance, which could be a contributing factor to Apple's decision to hold off for now. We'll just have to wait and see though - I have a feeling Chrome for Android could put pressure on Apple to compete and match it for features, which might influence WebGL support.

@jayderyu - I think you're behind the times. Did I mention you can already enable WebGL on Chrome Beta for Android? I think this is good evidence they intend to have it enabled by default in the stable release. BB10 and Firefox OS will be shipping with WebGL-supporting browsers too. So WebGL is already here on mobile in some ways, and it's improving.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,946
Reputation: 178,478

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 9:00 pm

"@jayderyu - I think you're behind the times. Did I mention you can already enable WebGL on Chrome Beta for Android? I think this is good evidence they intend to have it enabled by default in the stable release. BB10 and Firefox OS will be shipping with WebGL-supporting browsers too. So WebGL is already here on mobile in some ways, and it's improving."

yes I did :) "chrome://flags/" and turned it on. Also reported the results which weren't very good, but at least steady in the mid range(low end Tegra 2). It's in beta for a reason obviously :)

Also Chrome is not Android Browser and neither team(and indeed they are TWO separate and distinct teams) really work all that close together. While I'm sure Android team will eventually do WebGL, it is clear they are not working on it at the same rate as Chrome team. Also even when Chrome WebGL is fixed and fast getting over the hurdle. Chrome is not the internal webkit that any packaged game will run on. Which again is dependent on the Android Team.

My posts were meant to be behind the times to show that it has been 2 years since articles last talked about the subject yet we are still waiting. You mentioned that it took 2 years for WebGL to mature for desktop. Well we are pretty much at 3 years and counting for for full acceleration and the tricks that OpenGL can offer. Phoboslab got around it by creating Ejecta which they have already started using various OGL ES2 render tricks to improve performance. As I understand it. All that does is wrap up webgames into another wrapper. I would love to see performance difference between Ejecta and CocoonJS some time :D

I have no doubt it's coming, but where as there was a push to get it out on the desktop. On mobile it has been an entirely different situation.

But in the end. I managed to find a fantastic little tweak and maybe with a few other tricks can get the visual and logic performance anyways. If anything this thread has offered a lot of insight and inspiration to think out side of the box. Plus working with C2 has been a joy :)jayderyu2013-02-13 21:02:52
B
87
S
18
G
9
Posts: 2,455
Reputation: 14,834

Post » Wed Feb 13, 2013 9:06 pm

WebGL only recently came to maturity on desktop. Mobile devices are a year or two behind in software and hardware maturity. That's part of the reason I say it should all be mature and working well within 2 years.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,946
Reputation: 178,478

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: NetOne, nimos100 and 6 guests