Time to move forward?

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Wed Feb 24, 2016 3:45 pm

I see @Ashley, I see… What about C2/C3 own exporters? I guess you understand that the problems associated often do just that? What's more third-party variables, the greater the problems. We could have only C2 problems and publishing platform (in this case iOS) problems. Now we have Ludei and Intel problems as well. Don't answer on this. I know your opinion about exporters. You just say that you don't have time for it.

Ashley wrote:We should be growing again soon as well.

I really hope this. Believe me. I'm invested in Scirra software a lot of my time. Will see...
B
4
S
1
Posts: 49
Reputation: 452

Post » Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:11 pm

Honestly, I have been around the web development world a bit, and Construct is, by far, the most expansive, standards-compliant, bug-free, easy-to-use web development platform that I have found. This software trivially easily exceeds GameMaker in HTML5 game development, and has the potential to match Google Web Toolkit pound for pound in critical enterprise applications if developed in that direction.

I, and my team, have nearly two years of time and effort invested into Construct, and we have never looked back. We tried a number of platforms before selecting Construct, including Google Web Toolkit, GameMaker, D3, raw HTML5, and none were as easy to learn or as quick to demonstrably perform our most intensive graphics requirements without overloading our test machines. Our test litmus program involved generating one hundred thousand objects and displaying all of them in screen in a fully zoom/pannable dynamic user interface at once. GameMaker was not able to do this without stalling and freezing our test machine.

No, C2 is one of the most unbelievable pieces of software that I have found in the web development world, and we are very anxiously awaiting C3.
https://www.ravenheart.ca/home
Company name changed to avoid Facebook-type shenanigans

"Someone once told me I bite off more than I can chew...

I told them I would rather choke on greatness than nibble on mediocrity."
B
22
S
6
G
1
Posts: 1,414
Reputation: 4,822

Post » Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:12 pm

Usman Haq wrote:Construct 3 is what we need to have hope for in future terms.
...
Is C2 gonna change into the engine that you envision? Probably not, because Scirra is now more focused on C3 and perhaps that will be the engine that you envision.
...
I think that Construct 3 is what will move Scirra forward.


gumshoe2029 wrote:and we are very anxiously awaiting C3.


You both know that C3 is planning on using the exact same HTML5 export/runtime as C2 right?

Ashley wrote:BTW the stated goal of C3 is to rebuild the editor and keep the same runtime, so this is not really the kind of thing we intend to change anyway in the scope of that project.


Source: will-the-top-level-design-be-removed-in-c3_p980758?#p980758

The only thing you can actually anticipate for is devices, browsers, and NodeJS to all catch up to the "standard" of HTML5...which is also the same dragon C2 users have been chasing since the first betas came out in 2011.

Granted, it's getting better slowly but surely. However, if you're making and releasing games *now* you would hope that your game works the same across all of your customers devices right? And it doesn't, it's all over the map with desktop export, mobile, and even web browsers still have major differences between them (Chrome goes through cycles of breaking-changes and patches, etc).

Don't forget that you are a customer of Construct 2 meaning you are also buying a product which is supposed to do what it says on the box, so when it tells you that you can export to "Windows, Mac, and Linux" using a Node-Webkit wrapper ( https://www.scirra.com/construct2#multi ) and then your game fails to run on the "Mac and Linux" parts, it is not acceptable! and telling us to "just wait for it to improve/get fixed" is also not a valid response!

I don't care if it's Node-Webkit that is broken, I paid Scirra for a tool that they say will work on Mac and Linux, and it doesn't for my (commercial) game. It barely even runs the same/without glitches across my Steam customers' computers too, and they have hardware that might be way better than mine or the exact same specs, it's random and *my* customers do not accept "Please wait for approximately 2 years for NodeJS to improve the export by using the latest Chrome...which will also disable Steam Achievements until Greenworks is updated, and introduce random new bugs because Chrome was updated".

Ashley has done wonders with CC and C2, and has made an awesome tool for "learning game development" and "making small games for mobile and web" with a great editor and really cool way of visually coding games, but for Construct to really move forward into the status that the "more professional" game development tools have it needs a stronger export option. I don't care if that means exporting to a format that can be imported by other engines, but the native export to console and desktop is looking like the absolute minimum export options that commercial game devs need to grow. (And no, WiiU doesn't count, because it doesn't support WebGL).
"Construct 4 lets YOU make advanced games! (but not play them)" Construct Classic - Examples Kit
B
113
S
39
G
17
Posts: 2,184
Reputation: 19,217

Post » Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:41 pm

Jayjay wrote:Don't forget that you are a customer of Construct 2 meaning you are also buying a product which is supposed to do what it says on the box, so when it tells you that you can export to "Windows, Mac, and Linux" using a Node-Webkit wrapper (scirra.com/construct2#multi ) and then your game fails to run on the "Mac and Linux" parts, it is not acceptable! and telling us to "just wait for it to improve/get fixed" is also not a valid response!
because Chrome was updated".


Exactly! This is what I try to say.
Imagine you buy a bicycle. But it does not have wheels. The seller tells to you: this is not my fault, only the manufacturer. What is your response to it? "Well, here not have any bicycles with wheels.. never mind."??? really...
B
4
S
1
Posts: 49
Reputation: 452

Post » Wed Feb 24, 2016 6:34 pm

OK that's fair. But it is also true that you actually CAN export to every platform and people have done so with finished creations, as advertised. What I think is phenomenal is the support you get when the problem is normally what I would feel is out of the scope of construct to begin with.

Maybe this is an issue of you get what you pay for? It seems you have advanced to the point where you'll need more robust development kit and in that case it really is time to move on, truthfully.

But as an artist first I haven't found anything I can slam a prototype/concept together faster than in c2, and having that experience in hand before putting the game together in another development environment is worth immeasurably more than the cost.

For your analogy....
Think of construct as the tool box needed to build a bike by hand. Intuitive to use. Cheaper than buying machines to manufacture a bike! The method you use to put it together is up to your own creativity. But this way relies on other peoples parts. Some of these parts don't work as well as the others, but construct gives you what you need to put them together anyway. Eventually though, it could make sense to buy a factory to make your own parts and put them together as well. Best be prepared that that comes with it's own set of problems... Otherwise why don't we see every AAA game released on every platform simultaneously bug free?

Basically just wanted to make the point that the ideal all in one software that works flawlessly with every platform is really not the job of one company, and it might never be.

In the end, even if you build a flawlessly working bike, a pothole can wreck you.
Mistakes were made.
B
49
S
24
G
107
Posts: 1,581
Reputation: 60,303

Post » Wed Feb 24, 2016 7:27 pm

oosyrag wrote: Maybe this is an issue of you get what you pay for? It seems you have advanced to the point where you'll need more robust development kit and in that case it really is time to move on, truthfully.


Maybe so, maybe so. But you can imagine my frustration, when you have in your hands almost all but still nothing. Almost perfect software but not quite. It's almost Christmas, but not quite. And only what you hear from Ashley is "this is not my fault," "wait, this will be corrected in the future" "In the future everything is better" "I can not reproduce this bug (after 15+ people saying how its can reproduce)". I've been waiting 2,5 years. Can you feel this frustration? I want to cry.

oosyrag wrote:In the end, even if you build a flawlessly working bike, a pothole can wreck you.


Heh, you're absolutely right.
B
4
S
1
Posts: 49
Reputation: 452

Post » Wed Feb 24, 2016 7:45 pm

Ashley wrote:It's frustrating to be blamed for bugs in other people's software, and that specific iOS audio issue you referenced is the latest and strongest example of this. I am almost certain the bug is in either Safari or the iOS operating system In this case, it doesn't matter what tool you use: anything at all that runs in Safari will be affected by the same bug. So I guess you can choose a different tool if you like, but you could easily run in to the same bug again, because the problem is in Safari or iOS, not Construct 2.

I didn't even fix the bug, so I can't even take credit for that. It's impossible for us to fix problems in Apple's own software. All I did was found a crazy hack that seemed to work around the bug. So the bug is still there and Apple still need to fix it. Personally I regard this kind of hacking-around-bugs as beyond the call of duty - I'm sure there are companies out there who'd just say "we've reported it to Apple, hopefully iOS 10 fixes it" - but we go beyond that and try to work around (emphasis on work around - not fix) defects in other software we rely on where it's feasible to do so. Note it is not always feasible to do so. The fact this particular iOS bug is worked around pretty much amounts to luck.

Usually someone then blames us for relying on certain tools or libraries which have bugs, but all software has bugs. It's naive to think that if we switch to some other library or framework, everything will suddenly work perfectly. Common suggestions are things like: why not use Haxe? It could have bugs, and we could equally be screwed by its bugs. Why not use {insert library here}? If it's not developed by companies as large as Apple, Google, and Microsoft, it's probably even less reliable. Why not write native code? Operating systems have bugs, and graphics drivers have severe bugs - we have direct experience of that, and they are often far worse than the kind of issue we just dealt with on iOS. They tend to be of the class "all devices with this GPU crash on startup", and there is no diagnostic information whatsoever. In the past we've literally resorted to desperately guessing solutions over a period of days, then ultimately given up. That actually happened with the Construct 2 editor in the early days (it uses OpenGL to render the layout view). Eventually months later we got a tip out of the blue, and we finally managed to work around it. Hardly a reliable approach, but there's little else we can do when it's not our code that's broken.

I know this is super frustrating and when your games aren't working, you naturally look to us for support. However the nature of software development is everything - all platforms, frameworks, libraries - depend on a huge amount of third party code, and that code is as imperfect as everything else. It's implausible to expect any software company at all to magically fix everyone else's code. It affects everyone, regardless of their technology choices.

FWIW Scirra has been larger than just me for a while now. Check the team page. We should be growing again soon as well.

its not other people software it's your engine which is not fully capable , so face it and admit it
c2 worst problem is html5, if it was native there was no problem ! or if there was then we could fix it.
but , i like c2 :mrgreen:
B
16
S
6
Posts: 243
Reputation: 1,755

Post » Thu Feb 25, 2016 1:05 am

People do complain about products their bought: sometimes their complains are legit, and sometimes they are not. But I have to agree with others, that while promoting c2 having exporters options is cool and all, having them constantly producing issues is not. It is a gray zone somewhat in terms of legality, since you technically can do all those things, means, export. From customers point of vie tough, having issues caused by those 3rd party programs is really a massive bummer. Development is hard process of balancing between pleasure and frustration, but from personal standpoint, issues that are caused by 3rd party stuff are simultaneously enraging and disheartening. And if I'd be a company who's making software, I'd look for solution to it myself, to give customers best ux possible. Got to note Im not implying that Ashley is not working hard, because he is and is doing great job. But sometimes I can see that sometimes choices he's making don't seam like they are in best interest of the end product, by which I mean a finished game, not a prototype of something. And I'm not accusing him of any bad intentions, however me and may others just'd like to show things in a bit different light then to how things are now. For us the end product, our end product is most important of all, and we can ignore some minor inconveniences in the editor etc, but game's got to work 100% fine, especially that none of us is making The Witcher or Elder Scrolls here, or even Doom. And to finish this, my current problem with nwjs, and early on in development, is that at some resolutions ( or in other words window size ) some objects (sprites) are displaying with a glitch that looks like there is extra pixel or two bar to the side or top, while not on others, even thought they might be same objects.
My professional Royalty Free Music at Scirra Assets Store
--------------------------------
Specs: i5 2500, 16gb of ram, gtx 770, win 7, Focusrite Scarlett 8i6, Mackie mr8mk2, Alesis 320, browsing the net on chrome.
B
85
S
27
G
20
Posts: 1,963
Reputation: 18,653

Post » Thu Feb 25, 2016 1:53 am

Jayjay wrote:
Usman Haq wrote:Construct 3 is what we need to have hope for in future terms.
...
Is C2 gonna change into the engine that you envision? Probably not, because Scirra is now more focused on C3 and perhaps that will be the engine that you envision.
...
I think that Construct 3 is what will move Scirra forward.


gumshoe2029 wrote:and we are very anxiously awaiting C3.


You both know that C3 is planning on using the exact same HTML5 export/runtime as C2 right?

Ashley wrote:BTW the stated goal of C3 is to rebuild the editor and keep the same runtime, so this is not really the kind of thing we intend to change anyway in the scope of that project.


Source: will-the-top-level-design-be-removed-in-c3_p980758?#p980758

The only thing you can actually anticipate for is devices, browsers, and NodeJS to all catch up to the "standard" of HTML5...which is also the same dragon C2 users have been chasing since the first betas came out in 2011.

Granted, it's getting better slowly but surely. However, if you're making and releasing games *now* you would hope that your game works the same across all of your customers devices right? And it doesn't, it's all over the map with desktop export, mobile, and even web browsers still have major differences between them (Chrome goes through cycles of breaking-changes and patches, etc).

Don't forget that you are a customer of Construct 2 meaning you are also buying a product which is supposed to do what it says on the box, so when it tells you that you can export to "Windows, Mac, and Linux" using a Node-Webkit wrapper ( https://www.scirra.com/construct2#multi ) and then your game fails to run on the "Mac and Linux" parts, it is not acceptable! and telling us to "just wait for it to improve/get fixed" is also not a valid response!

I don't care if it's Node-Webkit that is broken, I paid Scirra for a tool that they say will work on Mac and Linux, and it doesn't for my (commercial) game. It barely even runs the same/without glitches across my Steam customers' computers too, and they have hardware that might be way better than mine or the exact same specs, it's random and *my* customers do not accept "Please wait for approximately 2 years for NodeJS to improve the export by using the latest Chrome...which will also disable Steam Achievements until Greenworks is updated, and introduce random new bugs because Chrome was updated".

Ashley has done wonders with CC and C2, and has made an awesome tool for "learning game development" and "making small games for mobile and web" with a great editor and really cool way of visually coding games, but for Construct to really move forward into the status that the "more professional" game development tools have it needs a stronger export option. I don't care if that means exporting to a format that can be imported by other engines, but the native export to console and desktop is looking like the absolute minimum export options that commercial game devs need to grow. (And no, WiiU doesn't count, because it doesn't support WebGL).


Yeah, I kinda forgot about that. Thank you for reminding me.

With that reminder. Then what's wrong with adding in Native Exportation options? If it's a change of the editor, and not the entire, then shouldn't they be also working on Native Exports? I know it's a long process, since @ashley has stated it many times but if C3 is gonna take a long time to release, do you guys think that that's what they're working on?
Risk Rocket now available on Google Play
Image
B
35
S
15
G
6
Posts: 337
Reputation: 6,275

Post » Thu Feb 25, 2016 3:06 am

To add some clarity. iOS9 introduced some major audio bugs that caused games from 2K to be removed from the store, games like Bioshock, which are huge AAA titles.

Many other games were affected, such as Telltale games!

iOS iterations are to be frank, utterly stupid, in how their updates will BREAK functionality and BREAK compatibility with coding that worked fine.

Now, this affects other games and engines.

But C2 is particularly vulnerable to these changes because it relies on browsers on top of the usual OS/drivers. There's an additional layer of "stupid", if you will, basically increasing the odds of something breaking.

As long as it remains a HTML5 engine, this will always be the major negative of C2 and C3. So use it, but you have to accept that it's going to remain on the fringe or "beta" mode for awhile yet.

This is the price we pay for having a great and intuitive game engine. If you aren't happy with that, then move on.
B
70
S
24
G
19
Posts: 1,757
Reputation: 17,614

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests