Construct 3 - many questions (native exporterts)

  • The only c2 weakness in is performance and not platform direct connection and coding.

    so many c2 users leave c2 just because of this 2 and we all know that

  • console

    I think it is likely that the Xbox One update to Windows 10 will make it possible to publish HTML5 games to Xbox One, but we are holding off on making official announcements about that until we know for sure.

    it could also be described as a top-down FZERO, which the SNES could handle

    Obligitory "my SNES could run this", obligitory reminder that as far as I can find the highest resolution mode of the SNES was 512x239 8bpp which is 122kb per layer vs. a modern 32-bit 1080p game which is 8mb per layer or about 68x more bandwidth. Assuming you have the background and four own-texture layers, that's 340x as much bandwidth, not including higher-resolution textures, plus rotation and scaling, plus no sprites-per-line restrictions, plus transparency and alpha blending, etc.

    Construct 2 games fail hard on Mac OSX and Linux with games over 500MB, and most of that size is soundtracks.

    Maybe that's a NW.js issue, but it's surely solvable. I know that recently there were bugs that combined with the slow NW.js release cycle has made for a lot of waiting, but I think it is pretty clear that NW.js should soon be back to working effectively, and that's a far more sensible option than burdening ourselves with a multi-year fork of our engine.

    it's roughly a 2.4GHz dual-core Intel CPU with Intel HD Graphics 4000 GPU. Do you use a device with these specs when you test the examples people send?

    Yes! And the bottleneck on that kind of device is the fillrate on the weak Intel GPU. Which is a hardware limit. Which means making a native engine will be no faster at all. So that's actually a pretty good example of why making a native exporter is completely futile for improving performance on that kind of device: WebGL is basically already performing identically to a native app in that case. Intel CPUs are pretty strong even on low-end models, meaning the overhead of Javascript is really not an issue. The GPU fillrate is the real issue. Intel GPUs really suck. That's not our fault, or HTML5's fault, or Chrome's fault. It's just crappy hardware.

    I really think some people have the impression that if we write a native exporter, hardware specs will magically increase.

  • here's a link to my alpha version of the game:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13675221/index.html

    try it and see your performance in it. i will post full game once i'm done with it. but i've noticed quite a good improvement in performance while redoing my whole game, because my initial design (this link) was horrible.

    Wow, nice game. How did you do the ship's turning animation? Did you use Q3D?

    I tested your game on 3 computers using Chrome. Here are the results:

    Windows 10

    • i7 with AMD R9 270X: 60FPS (not suprising)
    • i3-3110m with Intel HD 4000 : 60-57 FPS

    Windows 8.1:

    • Core2Duo with Intel 4th series graphics (pretty old CPU/GPU): 26-35 FPS
  • I really think some people have the impression that if we write a native exporter, hardware specs will magically increase.

    Ashley please just make one game with unity and then you see native performance is really different and so much better !

  • But you can play games like grimrock and even gta4 on Intel HD Graphics 4000 GPU.

    saiyadjin I'm on amd E-450 apu 1.65ghz, 4gb ram, win 8 64 bit laptop with radeon hd, right now. Fps was 12-20. Most of the time almost playable.

  • megatronx - try it on your pc that is in your specs (i5 2500.. etc..) but i guess that pc will do it fluently.

    glerikud - thnx, but it took a lot of time, i'll explain it once it's done completely.

    p.s. i'll post my game once it's done, new version should work way better then this alpha version (which has loads of badly optimized events)

  • >

    > I really think some people have the impression that if we write a native exporter, hardware specs will magically increase.

    >

    Ashley please just make one game with unity and then you see native performance is really different and so much better !

    This is just getting stupid...

    Does anyone have a solid example of Unity performance being better? I don't mean just listing complex or successful indie games (because, spoiler alert, complex games are made by talented developers - not tools!) - I mean a side by side, equal quality performance comparison.

    Same assets, same mechanics, right down to the only difference being the engine.

    Clones should be easy enough to compare - otherwise we're not arguing about performance, we're arguing about scalability, and scalability is a problem to which developer talent is just detrimental as the tool.

  • Does anyone have a solid example of Unity performance being better?

    How many times should I repeat?

    I have ALREADY posted the same "game" via Crosswalk (different versions) and native APK in this topic.

    Native APK runs better than even HMTL5 version and of course it runs better than Crosswalk APK.

    I don't mean just listing complex or successful indie games (because, spoiler alert, complex games are made by talented developers - not tools!) - I mean a side by side, equal quality performance comparison.

    And why do you think talented developers create their PC games on Unity?

    Why don't they use C2 to create PC games?

    The answer is clear for everyone - they need native export.

  • >

    > >

    > > I really think some people have the impression that if we write a native exporter, hardware specs will magically increase.

    > >

    > Ashley please just make one game with unity and then you see native performance is really different and so much better !

    >

    This is just getting stupid...

    Does anyone have a solid example of Unity performance being better? I don't mean just listing complex or successful indie games (because, spoiler alert, complex games are made by talented developers - not tools!) - I mean a side by side, equal quality performance comparison.

    Same assets, same mechanics, right down to the only difference being the engine.

    Clones should be easy enough to compare - otherwise we're not arguing about performance, we're arguing about scalability, and scalability is a problem to which developer talent is just detrimental as the tool.

    You are right, this is just getting stupid and we never can compare native mobile//win//mac//ps3//ps4//etc... performance of Unity and Construct... We can compare native performance of chromium and unity or crosswalk and unity, or ludei and unity. And, sorry, i never see an "crosswalk" or "ludei" game runing well in my galaxy tab 3 (i try lots of the "completed creations forum")... unity games runs well... Maybe the good designers make games with unity (in 2d too) and the bad designers with construct and this is the problem... Do you think that?. And... If construct have "equal quality performance"... Why this masters of game design don´t let go unity (or GM or other software) and design the entire games with construct + NW or construct +Ludei... Maybe because with unity you can port to all platforms?... Maybe because with unity the bugs-performance don´t depends from others wrappers?. I don´t know, i´m a bad designer, i want to know...

    (Edit... write at the same time that "paradine"... questions duplicated, sorry)

  • paradine

    nope, they do it in unity because it's a C++ / c# oriented language, and their base is windows which is on most PCs gamers use.

    also the other reason is - they want 3D. if developers did 2D games for PC, we'd be stuck playin' pinballs today instead of battlefields and what not.

    also unity isn't that great despite from you thinking "everyone is using it", and i haven't really played a lot of unity games, most people stick with c++ / and i saw a few c# games / for games.

    also what you're descibing is wierd. you compared Crosswalk and "native APK". not PC game. Native for android is Java, and therefore it's run in java virtual machine. which transforms code to bytecode which is then used on cpu to run your game. HTML & JS have a bit more to do - interpreting -> compiling -> bytecode - > cpu. of course it's slower. adding crosswalk over that slows even more. but even though it's a layer above java it's still fast, and no, doing "native" which is really not native, would be just a pain in the ass for scirra to do. losing 2 years on something that hardware will anyway eat sooner or later + new JS browsers/compilers that are way faster - > no point in it. Everything else that makes your game slow down - is your bad design.

    Also if you didn't know - 3D runs way faster then 2D on all hardware (don't let me get started about this...).

    you should stop complaining and leave if you don't like c2. there's java. learn it and android sdk and build your game in androids native language. good luck with that.

    davarrcal - noone didn't say that native was slower, it's a layer less but not so much faster. also even native depends on loads of factors like - language it was written in. c# / c++ / java / c - they all give native, but different performance. also you've tried games on your galaxy tab - which has a pretty weak graphics and very very slow cpu. also an old android version. i agree that people maybe don't have money to buy newer hardware, but if you buy a bad mobile phone and expect it to do everything, maybe you should reconsider / save more money for something better.

    the easiest is to complain, everything else is hard

  • To many times are post in this formun the words "complain" and "wine" ... Don´t worry, this is my 8 post in this forum, I don´t like complain, don´t need people recomend me to buy new "Tab" or mobile to see well performed construct 2 games...This is not the problem, my new BQ Acuaris runs well crosswalk games... I repeat, this is not the problem... But don´t worry about that, In this moment I stop to "Complain" "Wine" etc...etc...etc...

  • paradine

    Also if you didn't know - 3D runs way faster then 2D on all hardware (don't let me get started about this...).

    you should stop complaining and leave if you don't like c2. there's java. learn it and android sdk and build your game in androids native language. good luck with that.

    That sounds rude, anyway the most of us care about C2 and therefor we ask questions about comparisons, features additions etc. because we want C2 to improve and not to get everyone up to using different game engines.

    I still think native exporter would make a change, HOWEVER Ashley and his team will never be able to push out these updates as fast as many of us think.

    And while they would work on the native exporters, web technology will improve too, so at the end we might just get native exporters with the same strength as the current third party wrapper exporting methods.

    Also comparisons between Unity and C2 are not right, if you compare the team of Ashley (Scirra) and the Unity Team.

    So if we want to compare projects etc. with C2 we should consider that in future.

  • my simple game get 300 mb ram on mobile and in construct it just show 30mb

    let me tell you guys something if you didn't make games with unity dont say it developer or not so different

    make one of your games with unity and dont optimize it

    then you can see you mostly dont need optimize your games in unity

    ashley just bring excuse because he can not make an engine like unity

    thats a true and c3 just an another editor which make you guys buy c2 again !! (one time licence became two time licence !)

    i made games with unity and construct 2

    in construct 2 you can make games fast but you get slow when you want to debug it and optimize it and i spent 2 day to solve intel xdk problem with musics !!!! it's even not my fault !

    this is my unity game :

    https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... .turbotire

    and this is my first game with unity (2 yers ago)

    i first made this game with construct 2 and really had a bad performance so i just change my engine and everything worked fine !

  • Ignoring the native/non-native performance debate for a bit -

    Reading some posts, it seems some users don't see HTML5 as the way forward, want more functionalities or plugins, want 3D, want more control/scripting, want platform-specific exporters - why not use Unity ? Honest question, really. Yes the learning curve is steeper, but that's a necessity of the increased complexity.

    Tools and programming languages, none of them is "better" than the others : they all exist because they serve a purpose ; the moment a tool or language stops being useful, it dies naturally.

    Now for those wanting to stick with HTML5 but complaining about the 3rd party exporters approach - all these exporters/wrappers are developed and maintained by medium to large teams (NW.js has half-a-dozen of regular active contributors, plus the occasional pull request ; Crosswalk has many branches and up to hundreds of contributors, Intel XDK has... well, Intel, etc.). Realistically, are we expecting Scirra's team to do better, in less time, with less resources, then all these people together ? All of that while maintaining a low price-tag for the Construct product ?

    I'm not saying it's all great ; yes there are issues, but every technology has issues and it's about being realistic with expectations.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • [quote:1mg7xub3]ashley just bring excuse because he can not make an engine like unity

    If you seriously believe any single developer in the world can compete with any advanced technology that's been around for a decade and that's been developed and maintained by dozens of specialists, you are badly mistaken -

    There's an order of magnitude of differences, people need to manage their expectations.

    Construct is not about competing with Unity ; it's about providing a more focused solution that fits well certain applications. As more focused solution, it's also simpler to learn, easier to use, more limited, less expensive.

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)