Is C2 limiting your work options?

This question is mainly aimed towards C2 users that work primary in licensing(exclusive/non-exclusive) and contract work.

I've been working with C2 and also another engine (Gamemaker) for over a year now making mobile & web games, self publishing my work. Recently I have given licensing a try, contacted a few companies, worked out a deal for one license for a HTML5 game made with C2 and it went really smooth, they even had their own C2 plugin for the API. I was also contacted from a few companies about doing some contract work for HTML5 games with mobile versions as well, but all of them were looking for HTML5 games made with Cocos2d-JS or Phaser specifically. From what I have read on other forums, some(not all) of the bigger sponsors aren't even accepting Construct 2 games.. Technically it really shouldn't be an issue if you use C2 because of the Javascipt SDK, implementing someones API is pretty straight forward if you know Javascript, but still a few sponsors for licenses are not wanting C2 games, and all the contract work I have looked into are looking for Cocos and/or Phaser games.

Anyone that does a lot of licensing games or contract work, what are your thoughts on this? Have you been ok just working with C2 for both licensing and contract games? Have you had to move to another engine? Any input would be appreciated, thanks.

Since I'm planning to get into licensing as well, I'm also interested in this.

Its supply vs. demand.

The supply of games from those engines fills their needs.

The answer is to increase the demand.

Make a game, in C2, they can't live without.

Its supply vs. demand.

The supply of games from those engines fills their needs.

The answer is to increase the demand.

Make a game, in C2, they can't live without.

From the companies I talked to the reason they are requesting games made with Cocos or Phaser is because their in-house devs use these engines, and down the track if they need to make adjustments to their API they don't want to have to go back to the dev that made the game to make changes for them every time they update their API. So even if you make a game they "can't live without" they aren't going to hire a new in-house dev or contract work out for simple API changes for a game made in an engine they don't support, when they could get the game made by another dev using Cocos or Phaser and make integration and changes with their API easier down the track.

TWG is correct. They see C2 as a "lock in" technology. They want something they can either change themselves or find someone reasonably easily who could change it.

I think they are wrong, personally. I suspect there are problems with C2 but they are related to documentation and application construction (put together in an adhoc fashion and not documented). I would have thought in terms of the overall cost a copy of C2 doesn't register.

I guess using proprietary software will always have issues like this, however that doesn't sound like licensing, more like selling the game outright.

Be sure and read all the fine print.

Also, I wonder if you could simply execute javascript from another file (spoiler:you can) which could make API being a extendable javascript file (that I am unsure about)

I guess using proprietary software will always have issues like this, however that doesn't sound like licensing, more like selling the game outright.

Be sure and read all the fine print.

I'm guessing you haven't dealt much with licensing before, even for non-exclusive licenses for games made with C2, sponsors/portals will always ask for the capx along with the exported game files so they can make API changes down the line, with other HTML5 engines they can make changes they need right there in the JS of the game files.

The way around this issue is to make yourself standout so that it isn't an option for them to go to other people. If you are really good at what you do, then people will accommodate your needs because those are what help make you better in the first place. If you're just doing work that anyone else can do, then there's many people who can replace you.

The way around this issue is to make yourself standout so that it isn't an option for them to go to other people. If you are really good at what you do, then people will accommodate your needs because those are what help make you better in the first place. If you're just doing work that anyone else can do, then there's many people who can replace you.

While this advice might be true for many things in life, this is not the case here. In the world of licensing and contract work you can make the best game ever, with some new innovative mechanic, a game like no other that no one else can or has made, many sponsors/portals will tell you they really like the game and are interested in purchasing, but they don't accept C2 games, especially some of the bigger ones. Likewise companies looking for contract games made are looking for devs to use other engines as well.

While I can appreciate good advice, make better games, work harder, stand out from the crowd, have a bigger or better skill set is not the answer or solution to what I am asking.

Now if anyone has any input that is actually working with licenses and contract games using C2 I would love to hear your experiences, both negative and positive.

You don't need a license to make a plug, so its not really locked, just an extra hurdle.

One possibility is to provide a way to update a plug in an exported game, without having to use C2 perhaps.

The plugin sdk should allow for any needed api changes.

There have been discussions on this in the past. Kinda hard to find them though (most licensing searches bring up C2 licenses). The consensus was the majority of these "publishers" don't want games built in engines like C2 because they can't easily modify them or integrate their APIs. They'd have to write numerous plugins and such specifically for you game, and they aren't going to bother with that. Pretty ironic considering this is apparently where HTML5 games shine.

Thing is, you'll hear about GM:S HTML5 games being licensed left and right. There's even...that one guy...who claims to make tens of thousands a month licensing HTML5 games made in GM:S...though personally I think it's all bullsh*t to help push his book filled with common sense marketing stuff. Anyway, what makes that so different?

> The way around this issue is to make yourself standout so that it isn't an option for them to go to other people. If you are really good at what you do, then people will accommodate your needs because those are what help make you better in the first place. If you're just doing work that anyone else can do, then there's many people who can replace you.

>

While this advice might be true for many things in life, this is not the case here. In the world of licensing and contract work you can make the best game ever, with some new innovative mechanic, a game like no other that no one else can or has made, many sponsors/portals will tell you they really like the game and are interested in purchasing, but they don't accept C2 games, especially some of the bigger ones. Likewise companies looking for contract games made are looking for devs to use other engines as well.

While I can appreciate good advice, make better games, work harder, stand out from the crowd, have a bigger or better skill set is not the answer or solution to what I am asking.

Now if anyone has any input that is actually working with licenses and contract games using C2 I would love to hear your experiences, both negative and positive.

I don't understand what you're looking for then. If what you say is true, then it seems like your only option is not to use C2.. or find more that accept C2.

How many have actually told you they don't accept C2? How many games have you made?

Prominent HTML5 game licensing is actually a pretty weird field, I recall sole topic where people said they won't upgrade to a newer C2 in the past because the fullscreen was not working on an iPhone5 (I think) and so nobody wanted to buy anyone anymore.Basically, it seems to be like there are a set list of discutable requirements that cannot be bypassed, if your game is not exactly on those lines they won't bother and simply throw it away or ask you to fix it before watching it seriously.

Kind of like "My solution can cure cancer!"

"Well yeah but you are killing people to extract it, we can't do that"

But more like:"My game is a 100+hour game which is fine for a nice demographic!"

"Well yeah but we cannot modify it in the future ourselves you know... You do know that we simply won't even bother if it does not"

Tokinsom I would not say it shines there, it kind of tries to potentially work in a clumsy way, but I would not say it is a good thing, seems more like a workaround to market to me.

Thing is, you'll hear about GM:S HTML5 games being licensed left and right. There's even...that one guy...who claims to make tens of thousands a month licensing HTML5 games made in GM:S...though personally I think it's all bullsh*t to help push his book filled with common sense marketing stuff. Anyway, what makes that so different?

I reasonably certain that I've worked with a few of the publishers TrueVallaha has - the claims aren't that outlandish, my revenue on licensing alone is comparable.

Does C2 limit publishers?

Yes, absolutely.

Straight out the door you've lost access to what I like to call flip-publishers, these guys take your game, whack their "propriety software" on it (usually cramming as many interstitials as possible) and throw it on their portal. These guys have no time for C2, they're after the fast buck. They buy in bulk and it shows in their pricing - you're not getting more than a few hundred dollars for this.

The bigger players actually care about your games, and many of them are well aware of C2. Even a cursory look of popular portals and source-flipping sites will show you that ".capx" is quickly entering common HTML5 parlance.

Does C2 limit you?

Not so much, but always establish up front, before any work is done, that the source will be .capx - after that, you'll have a great time.

...Until next year when the source flippers and reskinners have well and truly ran the market into the ground - time to start to learning casual-style vector art folks, that's where the money's going to be....