Timeframe for EXE exporter?

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Tue Nov 01, 2011 1:57 am

I think an official .exe wrapper using Awesomium would be moderately easy. Combined with something like UPX you could support a single exe binary for Linux, Windows, and Mac exports right off the bat.. Plus it is based on Chrome so would have good performance, sound compatibility, etc.

I've been wanted to make a wrapper generator which takes a C2 folder and generates a .exe but just too busy!! :-(
B
8
S
3
G
7
Posts: 835
Reputation: 5,313

Post » Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:29 am

I think asking for EXE exporter it's too early for C2, due c2 still get features from time to time, when C2 got must of features I think Ashley will able to create an official exe exporter easy later than now, which will make update have parallel works one for HTML5 and EXE, not mention fixing bugs for each of them ( double the works and slow C2 updates )

BTW: I still think getting an official EXE, more worth than HTML5 Wrapper one.prinsukun2011-11-01 11:38:57
B
22
S
3
G
5
Posts: 141
Reputation: 5,117

Post » Tue Nov 01, 2011 12:05 pm

>> I think asking for EXE exporter it's too early for C2
Yeah, second this. Would rather see C2 get families, branching, better system expressions (tokenizing strings), etc.

An official exe is clearly superior to a wrapper. The only point of the wrapper to me is the novelty of trying something new, plus it has its places for a stopgap until an official exe exporter arrives. For the wrapper to be done right, would need a way to customize the index.html file before wrapping otherwise you end up with a weird looking game screen (for example space game with white border doesn't look good). Still, I'd rather have more cool features in C2 than a wrapper right now.
B
8
S
3
G
7
Posts: 835
Reputation: 5,313

Post » Tue Nov 01, 2011 12:09 pm

I think a good installer / uninstaller placing the icons on Start Menu, System Variables and with the chance to recognize MAC OS, Linux and make the same things.

The offline button is a nice workaround as instead.
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
B
93
S
20
G
12
Posts: 1,212
Reputation: 18,482

Post » Tue Nov 01, 2011 1:15 pm

[QUOTE=scidave]would need a way to customize the index.html file before wrapping otherwise you end up with a weird looking game screen (for example space game with white border doesn't look good)[/QUOTE]
The best way to do it would be to enable fullscreen-in-browser then just set the window size of the EXE. It should then take up the whole window with no border.

A wrapper might not be that straightforward either: you might have heard browsers block the features necessary for auto-flip/auto-mirror and a few other things on the file:/// protocol. This might mean these features don't work in an EXE wrapper either! To get around that we'd have to build in a local HTTP server, and now a "simple" wrapper is getting a bit complicated...

Plus, the only advantage of an EXE wrapper that I can tell is that you can submit to steam, as @SullyTheStrange pointed out. I am not aware of any advantages, only the disadvantages of discouraging security warnings to download and play the game, and unnecessarily tieing your game to Windows. Please tell me if there are other advantages I'm not aware of! Because right now it seems the disadvantages outweigh the small advantage (I doubt many people will be publishing to steam in these early days).

Please do go and experiment with third party EXE wrappers yourself though - I'd be interested to hear how it goes.Ashley2011-11-01 13:36:54
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,952
Reputation: 178,600

Post » Tue Nov 08, 2011 10:11 am

[QUOTE=scidave] I think an official .exe wrapper using Awesomium would be moderately easy. Combined with something like UPX you could support a single exe binary for Linux, Windows, and Mac exports right off the bat.. Plus it is based on Chrome so would have good performance, sound compatibility, etc.

I've been wanted to make a wrapper generator which takes a C2 folder and generates a .exe but just too busy!! :-([/QUOTE]

This has been on my mind constantly for the last few days.

I've been thinking about what is really important when it comes to the delivery method of the game. And, in the end Ashley's assurance that all the current annoyances and limitations of browsers would eventually be fixed just didn't reassure me. I think maybe the thing that really bothers me is that browsers do other things... many things at once - and almost all of these things conflict with the purpose of playing the game.

It's like the difference between watching a movie on TV, and watching it in the cinema. Control over the environment is an important part of the presentation of any media, and when movies are sliced up by advertising and cropped to fit a small screen... you're essentially fighting for the attention of the viewer, and often losing.

While all of the annoyances that I previously mentioned are part of this, the biggest is essentially that a browser is the TV, an EXE is the cinema, and an HTML5 EXE wrapper is a DVD/BluRay... so to speak.

They can all present the media to the viewer, and they all have different advantages/disadvantages... it would be a sad day if the film industry were to decide, since the future is in digital media, to stop screening films in cinemas.

I would build an Awesomium wrapper myself if I wasn't such a dunce when it comes to setting up Visual Studio (it's almost like they designed it to be a pain in the arse) and had more spare time to learn the basics. Surely, building an application that does nothing but load a single web page (ie, your index.html) would be fairly easy (any takers?).

It would be a start, at least until an official exporter is (or isn't) added.
B
28
S
7
G
7
Posts: 102
Reputation: 6,483

Post » Tue Nov 08, 2011 12:54 pm

I didn't realize that about the local HTTP server requirement. That complicates things a bit. Unfortunately, the problem isn't quite as simple as loading an index.html file. Need to build in an exe compressor (like UPX), the local HTTP server, and ideally allow for export to different OS's. Other problem with a wrapper is you now rely on another Chromium code base...if the Awesomium guys fall behind and don't fix bugs/update source tree, now the wrapper becomes unstable and everybody complains to the devs. So I can understand the hesitance to official support a wrapper at this point.

After looking at the SDK, I think there would have to be three separate wrappers built (independent of the IDE). Need to make one each for Linux, Windows, and Mac. So that entails three different types of compressors/web servers. I don't have a Mac so if I try this out it would have to be just Linux and Windows.

Still, I don't think there should be much of a rush asking for wrapper as we are all kinda in test mode anyway...MAYBE this weekend I'll throw together a Windows wrapper and see how it looks. :-)scidave2011-11-08 12:59:26
B
8
S
3
G
7
Posts: 835
Reputation: 5,313

Post » Wed Nov 09, 2011 9:19 pm

Interesting thread. After reading it through, i must concur on having the EXE or APP wrapper. HTML 5 is great and all for developing playable game on any platform, granted if the browser supports it. But not entirely sure how this would benefit game developers who would want to market and distribute their games if was only in the HTML 5 format. On the Chrome App store? Or an HTML 5 game portal like Ninja Kiwi?

[QUOTE=Ashley]
Plus, the only advantage of an EXE wrapper that I can tell is that you can submit to steam, as @SullyTheStrange pointed out. I am not aware of any advantages, only the disadvantages of discouraging security warnings to download and play the game, and unnecessarily tieing your game to Windows. Please tell me if there are other advantages I'm not aware of! Because right now it seems the disadvantages outweigh the small advantage (I doubt many people will be publishing to steam in these early days).
[/QUOTE]

Well, not necessarily publishing just to Steam, but how about other game potential areas such as Gamehouse, Big Fish Games, Mac App Store...etc? Or perhaps even publishing and selling your own games? This wouldn't be an issue if CC and C2 were actually interchangeable, them we'd have the best of both worlds already.

There are other dev tools out there that can do this already. The HTML5 version of GameMaker not only creates HTML 5, also an Windows executable version of your game. And the Monkey coding language can spit out HTML5, Flash, Windows, Mac, IOS, Android, and apparently XNA. And of course, there's Gamesalad. But IMHO *none of these* are preferable to C2's ease of use and rapid development.

Anyways, i'm still excited to see where C2 will be in the future :).
B
37
S
9
G
5
Posts: 147
Reputation: 5,615

Post » Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:10 am

I do understand that they wanna concentrate on the HTML 5 features first, and it's fine. But completely ruling out the EXE exporter is a bad idea.

If people are scared of EXEs downloaded from the net, then they shouldn't be near a computer. Sooner or later, one way or another, you will end up with a virus. EXEs aren't the only way to infect a computer. It's quite simple, Don't play EXEs if you are scared of them. I do not plan on releasing games for the audience that scare away from EXEs. EXEs have been around for decades, if you dunno what you are doing with a computer, then sure, stick to web games, no big deal. VampyricalCurse2011-11-11 00:16:43
B
47
S
10
G
6
Posts: 455
Reputation: 8,326

Post » Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:06 pm

A question to this post here. So, for (the less technical) people to play offline, and not know how to go into the folder to access index.html, just give them the files and a shortcut and call it a day?
B
5
S
1
G
1
Posts: 157
Reputation: 1,219

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests