Timeframe for EXE exporter?

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:58 am

I know this isn't something you guys at Scirra like to be badgered about often, but... I'm sort of at a crossroads right now, and to put it simply, the answer to this just might impact what I devote the next year of my life to. Not that that affects any of you much, but it's worth noting.

I guess to reword it, my question is: if all goes as planned, will it be implemented within one year from now?
B
20
S
9
G
6
Posts: 607
Reputation: 6,112

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:07 am

We don't have a plan extending as far as a year, so I just can't say.

However, if WebGL becomes widely supported and the Web Apps standard keeps progressing, I'm wondering if we'll need an EXE exporter at all. If C2 games are running with a hardware accelerated WebGL view complete with shaders, using javascript engines that are compiled to machine code and using the new Web Audio API for reliable audio with effects... what need is there for an EXE exporter?
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,948
Reputation: 178,532

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:17 am

I'm still looking into all of the details of it, but I'd be most interested in getting my game onto Steam. I could be wrong, but the things I'm seeing so far seem to say that your game needs to be an executable file for you to do anything with the Steamworks API. Again, I could be wrong, and I'm still actively reading through more information in hopes that I am.

Steam is nearly synonymous with PC games, especially indie PC games -- if executables are necessary to get a game onto it, that's a great reason in my opinion to get that option out there.
B
20
S
9
G
6
Posts: 607
Reputation: 6,112

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:00 pm

I don't actually want to join in on the constant demand for an EXE exporter. If I really do need to make a standalone windows game, Construct Classic does a fine job for now.

Still Ashley's statement has me slightly worried. While it may be true that WebGL will eventually be widely adopted and browser games will improve massively in graphical quality and performance, a standalone executable game is still a whole different story.

For the foreseeable future there will still be a demand for native win/mac/linux titles. I don't see massive fullhd 2d titles with tons of content running in your browser any time soon.

Browser games are still best suited for smaller, more casual titles or ones that are directly integrated with some social network. While standalone games can be anything really and don't need to deal with the problems different browsers might pose and also can take much better advantage of the actual pc power.

So what I'm saying is basically: one can't really replace the other, the scope is just different. And since I was under the impression Scirra was out to make Construct 2 the ultimate game development tool, not just the ultimate web game development tool, I'm very positive there should be an OpenGL exporter somewhere not too far down the road.

Relying on a third party to do so would be a mistake in my opinion. I bet that the exporter would sell pretty well too.
B
21
S
6
G
10
Posts: 1,024
Reputation: 7,445

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:17 pm

I'm not committing to anything just yet, I'm just talking about my ideas. For example, if HTML5 performance gets good enough that an EXE exporter can only get a 10% performance edge, then an EXE wrapper around the HTML5 runtime should be perfectly adequate (possibly with a plugin to access Steam API features). Writing a new exporter is a massive amount of work which will tie us up for months and require a lot of continuous maintenance work, which is a difficult decision when you're a small team with limited resources. So the EXE exporter would have to be significantly better to justify the effort, which is why if it's at all possible I'd prefer to recycle the HTML5 engine.

Still, I think it's unlikely HTML5 will get that fast - I do think an EXE exporter for super-hi-performance games would still be a good feature.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,948
Reputation: 178,532

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:22 pm

I'm with PixelRebirth on this. Bandwith issues aside (speed, capping etc), just the simple fact that some users bought a license on the understanding that an exe exporter would be available at some time. The fact that you seem to be now moving away from this is not a good thing.

Disappointing, if true.
If your vision so exceeds your ability, then look to something closer.
Moderator
B
120
S
28
G
68
Posts: 4,842
Reputation: 48,285

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:26 pm

Again, I'm not committing to anything, I am not saying there will not be an EXE exporter. My main point is if HTML5 has the same performance and features as the EXE exporter, why is it necessary? The Steam API is a good point and I'm sure something can be figured out there. I've been trying to think aloud to share my ideas with you. As I said, it's unlikely HTML5 performance will get that good, so there's still a good case to make an EXE exporter.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,948
Reputation: 178,532

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 1:20 pm

No stress Ash, I don't they are head hunting mate :)

You guys best know what your priorities are, so stick to your guns.

I have to now take this time to say, I would also like to see an EXE exporter in some form or another for C2 ;)

~Sol
Tired of crappy file hosts that are crappy? Get DROPBOX - https://db.tt/uwjysXJF
Moderator
B
45
S
17
G
37
Posts: 2,853
Reputation: 25,966

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 2:49 pm

[QUOTE=zenox98] I'm with PixelRebirth on this. Bandwith issues aside (speed, capping etc), just the simple fact that some users bought a license on the understanding that an exe exporter would be available at some time.[/QUOTE]

I bought the license on that understanding. I am not for all the hype of web games. I'm not the kind of person for that either. I think an EXE exporter is something no game making suite should be missing, for many reasons. for the web to get as good as an EXE, could take years, and the reason why I like software like C2 is for speedy development. I cannot make my game as a web game, it simply will not work, not as of now or in the near future. My computer is not that powerful, when I run simple HTML5 games, they lag, and that just makes it not enjoyable, I don't even want to go near bigger web games, it would be a nightmare. On the other hand, my computer has no issues running EXE game at all, for example, PES 10 runs just fine and 2D games are no problem at all. Like me, there are many, whose computers simply do not live up to the expectations of today's standards, yet, EXEs have given me a chance to enjoy these games, that if they were web games, it would be an impossible task.

EXE people and web games people, are very different. I'm the kind that casual gaming bores me to death. I would think attracting all kinds of audience it's a better deal than just one kind.

I would wait a year for the exporter, but dropping it would be like a kick where it hurts. Also, I wish there was some third party individuals willing to do the exporter.

EXE Gaming != Web Gaming, it's just as simple as that.VampyricalCurse2011-10-29 14:59:09
B
47
S
10
G
6
Posts: 455
Reputation: 8,326

Post » Sat Oct 29, 2011 3:31 pm

I can understand why some of you are a little upset by the fact that an EXE exporter is still under consideration, but I think I can speak for most here when I say:

If you want to make EXE games, then you should be using Construct Classic, especially at this point in time.

CC is free, and works just fine.

If you feel bad about buying C2 on the premise it might, one day have an EXE exporter, then consider it a donation toward the development of both CC and C2.... and keep your hopes up. Ashley has not completely out-ruled an EXE exporter, so it's too early to be getting up in arms about it.

~Sol
Tired of crappy file hosts that are crappy? Get DROPBOX - https://db.tt/uwjysXJF
Moderator
B
45
S
17
G
37
Posts: 2,853
Reputation: 25,966

Next

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TRMG, zenox98 and 9 guests