The sad truth of Construct 2

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:33 am

@Ashley I'm sorry but the issue here is not trying to write World of Warcraft in Construct 2 and exporting it to iOS, even very simple games get low framerates and this is a proven fact. It's not an issue of bottleneck, it's a problem of WebViews not being hardware accelerated, the problem is not yours, it's Apple's, but it reflects on you ultimately.

Yes we have CocoonJS and the likes, but it's another cost to add, meanwhile I could buy a complete Game Engine for the same price and have native exporters. I already converted my main game in one of your competitors' product and I get such an improvement in fps that it's not even funny, I even added a waterfall of particles on top and I still didn't see any drop in framerates, meanwhile in C2 I struggle to get to 40fps and I've optimized for months. And again we are speaking of a very very simple game.

Native games cannot be even remotely compared to HTML5 performance for mobile. Even CocoonJS (which is still a big improvement) has a long way to go before reaching the same performance of a native application. I think I've beaten this horse enough, so I'll stop, but it drives me mad this obsession with HTML5 and ultimately it's a commercial choice.

Construct (the first) had "limited" success due to supporting the wrong technology (DirectX) and to be honest I'm fearing the same will happen here, HTML5 for games is shaping as a failure, proof is that I was posting the same stuff one year ago and NOTHING changed since then, yes we have a couple more wrappers, but WebGL is not even supported by ie10! HTML5 will be relegated into a niche of web games and that will be all, mobile and desktop are out of the equation and most of the developers and interested in those.

Seeing that you are an exceptional programmer with an amazing set of skills I don't see why you couldn't rewrite everything in HAXE, most of your rivals ended up doing that. This in my humble opinion and I strongly feel it makes a lot of sense commercially.
B
29
S
9
G
6
Posts: 525
Reputation: 8,294

Post » Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:47 am

I strongly disagree.

HTML5 is definitely the future. It's not only much more portable than NME/Haxe will ever be*, it also evolves much faster.

It took years until NME/Haxe finally secured a half decent 3D API and that one is pretty much outdated now (the new, integrated OpenGL ES API just isn't there yet). HTML5 got there a tad faster, with WebGL to OpenGL ES wrappers and proof of concepts already floating around the net.

Lastly, I don't see the point of transferring to NME/Haxe.
If there are already multiple easy to use tools in the vain of Construct2, then why even bother? Construct 2 is pretty much known to be the most afforadable, easy to use HTML5 framework. If it made the switch to NME/Haxe, it would be "just another construction kit". They could, perhaps, avoid this by implementing most of NME 3.5.5's HTML5 capabilities. But then again, why even bother?

PS: Would you mind naming one of these "rivals" utilizing Haxe? I'm still a bit frustrated over the HTML5 incompatibilities within WebOS, so NME/Haxe might be the road I'm taking for that particular OS.

*And that's coming from someone who was a proponent of an all-native approach, despising even .Net, before eventually having to recognize the power of a more portable approach (all thanks to HTML5).
B
6
S
2
Posts: 206
Reputation: 1,685

Post » Sun Feb 10, 2013 7:45 pm

I agree, HTML 5 is the future and javascript along with it.

Scirra, from a business point of view have done the right thing to focus it now so they are in a prime spot in years to come - of which they are already for this corner of the market.

A platform itself can still be abused, just like any coding language. There's still optimisation tricks to be had. As time goes by maybe we can have a knowledge base of optimisation tricks for common themes - or even a powerful reSharper (http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/features/code_refactoring.html) type optimisation of javascript for gaming purposes.

I'm still to test the speed on mobile and Android for certain things but I know there's so much you can do in the way you plan events and the mechanics of your game that will greatly improve performance.

Believe in the browser, it is the only thing that interprets a common language across all devices. That's power.
B
5
Posts: 39
Reputation: 678

Post » Sun Feb 10, 2013 7:56 pm

@Ashley

Keep up the AMAZING work that you have done with Construct 2. I'm soon to release 2 games to the Ouya made with Construct 2 using Phonegap 2.4.0. With Phonegap I have seen simple games get any where from 30 - 50 FPS which is good enough for me on the Ouya. I have recently hacked together a simple Javascript HTML5 game engine put together from various code found on the internet. This crazy attempt of mine makes me look back on Construct 2 with amazement. You have a great product here and everyday visit your website wondering if anything new gets released.

I only wish that the Ouya Web Browser would support requestAnimFrame, because in my attempts it did not work.

Thank Yourfisher2013-02-11 00:22:34
B
17
S
9
G
7
Posts: 249
Reputation: 6,922

Post » Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:51 pm

I feel like there's just too much trust being put into too many hands.

1. Scirra, obviously you trust in them to keep updating and fix any issue that arise... this *should* be the one and only group you need to worry about

2. CocoonJS/AppMobi/3rd party exporting tools. If you need to get your games exported to specific platforms instead of HTML5, you'll need to trust in one of these companies to keep working on their exporter.

3. Browser companies. You need to put faith in these companies to keep updating their browsers to improve HTML5 compatibility. If just one major browser decides to shun HTML5, that's a huge audience being lost for your game. At the current time, Safari and IE both either have the worst support for HTML5, or virtually no support at all. Two of the biggest browsers, no good.

4. Mobile hardware improvements. You have to trust that mobile hardware will continue to improve each year. Well this one is pretty easy and Moore's Law would suggest that mobile hardware will be on par with current desktop performance in a matter of a couple years or less.

Ashley also keeps defending not building exporters because they will cause issues with third party plugins... This is the absolute least of my concerns. First of all, this is a problem with EVERY game development tool that has third party plugins and multiple exporters. You just work with the third party plugins that work. As long as all default plugins inside of Construct 2 work across all exporters, then it's fine. I avoid using third party plugins as much as I can because I understand that if something goes wrong with them, I'm relying on yet another person/group to get my game completed.

Another huge issue with all these third party exporters... I'm building Construct 2 games at my job, and I work for a pretty big company and they have lots of security concerns, etc... With most of these exporters, we have to upload our entire game to their servers for compiling/exporting... This means I have to get clearance to upload our project to foreign servers, and as of right now, I have yet to get clearance to do so... Meaning some exporters are already not even available for me to use.

I would think if we pitched in money to hire outside help, then it wouldn't pull Ashley and team away from their current work as he keeps saying. "it will take 6-12 months" but I really feel like that's an exaggeration. Either way, it COULD be done, it just seems like Ashley has made his decision already. Which is the whole point of my thread. C2 is a fantastic game maker... it's just too bad Ashley has this mindset that native exporting won't be an improvement and isn't worth the time.

Also I don't like the straw man arguments popping up about "oh you just need experience making games" or "you aren't designing the game well enough" or (insert "it's your fault somehow, and not the fault of HTML5 being poorly supported and underpowered")

All of these arguments just pull away from the actual debate here. I'm debating that HTML5 games are not as great performance wise as native. Nobody here is proving me wrong about this, instead they tell me I should design better, etc. Yes, I realize CS2 is made for HTML5 games, but the potential is there for it to export natively, and it is just disappointing that it won't happen.
B
7
S
2
G
3
Posts: 28
Reputation: 2,260

Post » Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:02 pm

maybe a kickstarter campaign?? [<:o)]
B
32
S
9
G
6
Posts: 1,467
Reputation: 7,951

Post » Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:55 pm

[QUOTE=imothep85] maybe a kickstarter campaign?? [<:o)] [/QUOTE]
I would totally be up for contributing to that.
B
7
S
2
G
3
Posts: 28
Reputation: 2,260

Post » Mon Feb 11, 2013 1:01 am

Kickstarter would be possible, but would have to come from Scirra (correct me if I am wrong). I would totally back this up.

I am thinking if it would be possible to make a bounty system, where people would pledge money to features, and developer who would create the plugin would take the money?
Would others be interested in that type of crowdfunding?
B
16
S
3
G
5
Posts: 44
Reputation: 3,231

Post » Mon Feb 11, 2013 1:17 am

[QUOTE=imothep85] maybe a kickstarter campaign?? [<:o)] [/QUOTE]

Yes, i support this idea! Let's start a campaign on Scirra forum to donate for this cause!
B
10
S
4
G
3
Posts: 46
Reputation: 3,036

Post » Mon Feb 11, 2013 1:33 am

Hey, someone should start a Kickstarter thread with a poll. This definitely sounds like something that can help C2 in the long run.
B
10
S
4
G
3
Posts: 46
Reputation: 3,036

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arima and 3 guests