Why is Stencyl doing better?

Chat about anything not covered in these forums, but keep it civil!

Post » Mon Mar 19, 2012 9:01 pm

Of course Stencyl is doing better. It came first. Flash, even now in it's sunset is a robust technology, widely supported by all browsers with no kind of difference, has integrated support in gaming portals and every kind of social networks.

Stencyl took advantage of that and used it the best it could. It used everything existing and provided support for it. Users knew exactly what to expect, and flash was dominant.

You can take flash wherever you want, and run it. Support still exists and Flash will still last. In my mind, Flash IS integral to the web experience.

Construct is yet the new kid on the block and the only constraints it has are those present in HTML5. For a while, if not always, Construct will be shadowed by Stencyl.

Should we as users care? I think not.
B
25
S
8
G
7
Posts: 184
Reputation: 6,040

Post » Mon Mar 19, 2012 10:41 pm

[QUOTE=eyeliner]You can take flash wherever you want, and run it.[/QUOTE]

Except iOS devices. The iPad has been selling like hot cakes last year and continues doing so this year. Moot point, I know, since Stencyl has an iOS exporter. :)

I still think Scirra's focus on HTML5 is a smart move. By the time HTML5 has gained more momentum, C2 will be among the top tools for HTML5 game creation, if not the tool. While Heinlein once wrote that specialization is for insects, I do believe that in this case it's the right choice (besides, there is nothing besides resources preventing Scirra from developing additional exporters, so this is always an option for later, too).
B
17
S
4
G
4
Posts: 64
Reputation: 3,396

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:20 am

Don't get me wrong, but I think Stencyl is way ahead in this "race".
I've been using construct classic for years now, and I was planning to move to C2, but "Html5 only" is a very limited thing.
Stencyl exports to all kinds all platforms, exe, app, flash, ios, and in the future android and html5.
That makes all the difference. What do gamedevs want? To reach the larger audience they can.

Even Classic is becoming obsolete because Game Maker and MMF have several different export options.

B
4
S
3
G
3
Posts: 125
Reputation: 1,450

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:20 am

I personally chose C2 because this interface is more friendly than Stencyl.

I do not believe in native apps because they can be pirated. Joannesalfa2012-04-24 04:20:37
B
95
S
25
G
20
Posts: 3,052
Reputation: 22,613

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:00 am

Web games are great ! All my favorite games are native, ops!
I don't really like the current feeling of playing games in a browser. This could change though.
About Stencyl yeah reach wise they're way ahead of C2. Exporting HTML5 games unfortunatelly right now doesn't translate to covering all platforms. By covering i mean don't only reaching but running well. So if they've got the resources to trully exporting to all platforms they have the advantage in that aspect. However , their IDE falls short compared with C2's.
Kiyoshi2012-04-24 06:05:47
B
58
S
13
G
10
Posts: 632
Reputation: 12,505

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:27 am

saw this news recently about stencyl on Indie Games:

http://indiegames.com/2012/04/stencyl_20_goes_pro.html

http://community.stencyl.com/index.php/topic,6869.0.html

looks like lately IndieGames writes article about game making tools,
maybe a good chance to request article about Construct 2 in there ?


Speaking about Stencyl, damn they move so fast...
they already have option to publish on desktop (Win & Mac),
iOS & Chrome Web Store & Web (with Flash), also HTML5 & Android soon.
plus already full support for iAds, In-App Purchasing (IAP), Mochi, CPMStar, Newgrounds and Kongregate.


While we're still waiting for Awesomium, AppMobi/Phonegap plus any browser support to get their part/tech done.
...sounds like we're relying too much on external power...


still loving C2 though,
plus I hate stencyl subscription model.
(however i wonder if appmobi also require subscription when we're using their direct canvas thingie,
because if it is then it's pretty much the same as stencyl then.. )Potato2012-04-24 06:33:53
B
34
S
13
G
8
Posts: 134
Reputation: 8,118

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:51 pm

Since I purchased a Commercial License for Construct2 on January 7th 2012 I have had continuous work in gamification of non-traditional web processes and have work booked up for at least another 12 months.

I looked at about 20 different ways during the prevous month including appraising stencyl. I wished this forum topic existed then as I would have purchased Construct2 a lot sooner.

To me, there are two simple requirements from any software:
1. worth investing my time to learn (roadmap, extensibility etc)
2. does what my clients never expected would be possible
Construct2 exceeds both!
B
16
S
4
G
1
Posts: 18
Reputation: 2,568

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:21 pm

For the hobbyist/amateur game designer there is one argument that beats all: the price.

If you want to make a desktop game, grab CC for free.
If you want to make a browser game, buy C2 for $79

Stencyl also offers both for $79 - but that's an annual fee. As soon as the 13th month starts, C2 has the better value/price ratio.

I'd say that counts at least as much as any integration of web services.
Image
B
23
S
8
G
10
Posts: 1,820
Reputation: 8,242

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:37 pm

Now that I've spent more time doing native mobile development I actually understand the need for subscription based software: things change too fast. It isn't the good old days of write for DirectX once then let the money roll-in. You have to constantly update your software. Furthermore, your software has to work on every phone! As far as online programming goes - I hate it! All those ridiculous, subtle cross-browser differences. I don't care which browser it is, but I wish we just had one browser (okay, maybe not IE due to no JS strict mode). I suspect Ashley and Tom are being underpaid, but they must be a tough-as-nails programmers to want to do online (shudder). When C2 is finished I would support switching to subscription based sales as HTML5 is probably moving faster than mobile and thus requires constant updating.

EDIT: Finished isn't the word (it might not ever be 'finished' as the standards keep growing), but there are a few important features missing that keep C2 just shy of being subscription ready.Trevor102012-04-24 16:05:30
B
17
S
6
G
6
Posts: 113
Reputation: 4,161

Post » Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:10 pm

HTML5 is still a bit of a work in progress... but I anticipate by the end of the year we'll have all platforms covered really well by just HTML5 alone. In the long run, this is a much better solution than trying to support/maintain different codebases.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,946
Reputation: 178,478

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gfisher2003, glamdring777 and 0 guests