Construct 3 - many questions (native exporterts)

It's quite interesting to see people complain about plugs, and say they are migrating to platforms that require coding.

It's quite interesting to see people complain about plugs, and say they are migrating to platforms that require coding.

Im complaining raising awareness of different problems, because I want C2/C3 to be better, and in general I love it, but as with any program you use you notice things that you ought should be fixed or better. So even though people are complaining, its good information for Scirra to get if they react on it.

But you can't really argue against people looking for other programs, even if that requires them to learn something new. I mean you would do the same with Word, Open office etc. if they didn't work as you wanted them to. So at least for me I fully understand people that want to give some of the others kits a try.

nimos100 thanks.

Nesteris I was asking because just looking is not enough as in a lot of cases it seems to be a misunderstood of the feature, not it not working correctly, the platform behavior slope by itself is not a bug, just something not wanted , the not being able to fall however is one (if it could be redone however I would not mind, I remember it breaks the point of having a platform you can fall from with the jumpthru behavior, as you can climb back on it too, being able to keep slopes while correcting that would be far better), the on key pressed is a trigger and so is meant to happen before anything else (it happens at the exact time you pressed it, where key is down waits the next check), however being able to choose when to refresh behaviors would prevent that issue I agree (That would also fix the pin issue).

That's because Ashley's too lazy to fix present features, instead he's overdosing on bleeding edge features that break a lot of everything.

I don't think "Lazy" is the right term here. With the amount of updates that come out for C2 I don't think you can call anyone working on Construct lazy. That being said, as a (Mostly silent) observer throughout all the threads talking about all the exporter issues/bugs, I think this comes down to a rather large divide in the direction the developers are going and where customers want the product to go. The developers seem to want to focus on HTML5 and providing constant updates. People want to be able to release their games in several different formats and having it work correctly, not just on browsers.

Some are saying this is just because those complaining are not good enough at coding. But to those people, I ask you: Wasn't the whole point of using Construct to make the process of programming simplified? What's the point if you have to jump through hoops anyway? I think that having to use wrappers complicates things a lot as well. It causes the size of your game to balloon and a lot of bugs pop up that wouldn't normally be there. Is that really a regular part of programming? I am no programmer so this is a serious question.

Just my 2 cents, though it may not be worth much. It's just frustrating how there's always a catch. Construct Classic made it so that I could actually create games without programming knowledge, but it had too many fundamental issues to release a full game on it (eg. Can't do full screen without sacrificing paralax. Ouch!). Construct 2's event sheet system is unparalleled, in my opinion. It destroys GMS and Stencyl as far as I'm concerned. However, the lack of native export will end up hurting my game if I try to release it as a download or mobile. So I am limited to browser for now. And I think that a lot of people feel the same way, hence all the complaints lately.

It's quite interesting to see people complain about plugs, and say they are migrating to platforms that require coding.

Especially when it's GMS, because I don't think people realize that you can't do anything remotely complex in that program without learning their language, which once again, completely defeats the purpose anyway. Might as well get Unity at that point.

a while ago there was a voting for most wanted features, multiplayer and Modularity where toprequests, i still think multiplayer came to soon, or rather modularity should been done before multiplayer, thing was, multiplayer could be done in current engine/editor and modularity not, then multiplayer was done, the only choice left was starting on a updated version of the engine, that can bring improvements to modularity, better search, , and pretty much everything that current editor was limiting, and also, c2 c3 its just a number... its just a bigger update than anything before, lots of software do it.

Regardless of what will happen, i'm still having my fingers crossed that something drastic will happen/change with C3.

I haven't lost complete faith in Scirra! I know you guys can do it, but it requires taking some risks. And most companies will have to take risks to get to the next level!

"Our goal is to make Construct 3 the best game making editor ever" - it's cool, but what about the best game making engine ever?

I think, best game making editor + best game making engine = best game making kit.

If constuct 3 has native exportes, it will become the most popular kit ever, and Scirra will become the most rich devkit making company ever.

Will it have texture distortion and visual editors for it, as well for other plugins/behaviours that need it?

Sometimes you have to think....

Be glad you do not have to buy machine embroidery digitizing software! Embird is a good example.

They update once a year, and every other year they call it a major upgrade that we have to pay for. The changelog is like 5 to max 10 items per update and mostly bug fixes. So basically what Ashley cover in a minor update is same amount as for Embird in their paid upgrade!

The software itself looks like it is firmly stuck in the mid of 90's too with useability in similar level. But I have to use because I paid thousands of SEK for that software + plugins (that should be part of software itself like importers and true type font) and that there's not too many to choose between...

This put things in perspective.

But with that said, of course we want the best.

For even more perspective.

Originally there was to be an sdk for third parties to create their own exporters.

Instead we have third party wrappers that barely work.

People asked for monetisation features, and they got them, for the wrappers that don't really work.

None for html5, the only thing that actually works.

Moral of the story:

You can piss off some of the people some of the time, or

You can piss off all off the people all of the time when you try to make all of the people happy all of the time.

Sometimes you have to think....

Be glad you do not have to buy machine embroidery digitizing software! Embird is a good example.

They update once a year, and every other year they call it a major upgrade that we have to pay for. The changelog is like 5 to max 10 items per update and mostly bug fixes. So basically what Ashley cover in a minor update is same amount as for Embird in their paid upgrade!

The software itself looks like it is firmly stuck in the mid of 90's too with useability in similar level. But I have to use because I paid thousands of SEK for that software + plugins (that should be part of software itself like importers and true type font) and that there's not too many to choose between...

This put things in perspective.

But with that said, of course we want the best.

With respect, i'm pretty sure there are more game making software then embroidery digitizing software. If Scirra were to do this people would simply use something else. The software development market has become very competitive. Not that i don't appreciate Scirras update policy.

newt also the only one that is barely used for something considered "serious" for some reason, I did hope that when the arcade would be there, the html5 export would get the love it desirve for, you know, being the only exporter that actually is maintained entirely by scirra as is (a user can understand some browsers issues and expect them, for an exe though or an apk, that is pretty hard to swallow, "you chose the wrapper you should have known!"), I do not mind the absence of native exporter at all (even though some people seems to have missed that part when buying it, entirely their fault of course but it could maybe have been clearer), but the html5 exporter could have some features that are currently only for wrappers for no good reasons, or a better connectivity with social network, whoch would also be there for the html5 of C3, just my two cents.

As for the paid update, does not seem that bad in all honesty, if it becomes what they said it will be (more opened to third party plugins, the editor working on more OSes, better stability and most of all maintainability of official plugins) I would say it is fair, but for now, C2 should be fixed a little more so we can call it a finished product (once again my two cents, I now my opinion is not much as scirra obviously can do everything they want, the market shares will decide).

...I do not mind the absence of native exporter at all (even though some people seems to have missed that part when buying it, entirely their fault of course but it could maybe have been clearer)...

I'm not sure i can agree with you on that "entirely their fault of course" part cause it kind insults me

I bought a licence somewhere in the middle of 2011, just because I loved using Construct and I knew that by supporting the team they will make C2 far more superior (with all of the features yet to be added to the engine and idiotic things and bugs from Construct fixed).

Then few months later Construct 2 r62 comes out with a blog post saying:

"As I mentioned, we're hard at work on our HTML5 features right now. However, one of our long term plans is the possibility of releasing an Exporter Development Kit (EDK) in the long term future. (I must emphasise that's the long term future - please don't get too excited just yet!)"

I did not mind that and probably no one did at the time, because C2 was still in early stage and we were all busy with Construct projects. So I waited, doing my stuff and playing/learning with new C2 releases.

10 months lates C2 r100 introduced Windows exe export by using Awesomium, which was total crap saying it lightly. 5 months later (C2 r115) Awesomium was dropped and node-webkit was introduced as a replacement. We all know the rest.

Sometime later EDK died completely with a brief post "...we're most likely not going to provide an EDK".

You might be the one who actually bought C2 just for its html5 capabilities and can't blame you for that. C2 was and still is the best and easiest tool for making web games and probably only C3 will surpass it. But don't forget there are people like me who bought it very early not only for html5 but also for other export options (especially native exe was always in high demand) we were told we will get after some time

All we get after 4 years is Node-we...sorry "NW.js" which still works like a cra...chromium

shinkan by " their fault" it is obviously about those who bought it after this decision, and even then it is their fault the same way if someone recieve spam in his e-mail adress it is his fault for putting it somewhere, they are responsible but lets face it, when that much people do that mistake, something is just wrong elsewhere and blaming the user only goes that far but will not correct the issue, which was the point of the end of the parenthesis (in the case of spam: spams should not exist and just putting your email should not be that dramatic of a decision but in the end it can be a big issue, in the case of C2, people expect it to have native, why I do not know and that is not my job but scirra's one to figure that out)

I like C2 and I hope that it becomes better than what is already is. I haven't used it as much as other people in the thread as far as publishing.

But the comment on not needing to program and people isn't 'coding' correctly is true to some level. Regardless of people not having to code (As advertised) C2 structure is still on some level of coding just like Scratch is used when teaching students at Harvard in computer science the basics and logic because it is an easy stepping stone. I think when they refer to 'not coding' they are referring to the more traditional way that is offer with GameMaker studio. which is one thing that I like is to have the option inside the kit to actually script if I want to or if I want to click blocks together. A lot of the users have this mindset that since they don't have to code that they can make these logical errors and the software should fix it for them when that is not the case. So some issues are C2 fault and some are greatly user error because of this misconception.

Like a while ago I had pointed a person eventsheet that was full of redundancy. A person responded after me and said it wasn't a problem but was ignorant to the fact that if they do redundant activities in that part they will do it else where in the program which would cause it to use more processing work then actually needed that could then lead to slow down as their project got bigger. Which I also stated that such logical behavior shouldn't be encourage and that is the key difference between knowing how to code and not. A Coder would know better. So maybe not having to code is its plus but there is a requirement to understand logical programming. Maybe they should just drop the 'Needing to Code' aspect of the advertising because it is still some level of coding it is just in a way that is easier to understand by a non-coder. But this in no way say some of the issues isn't on C2 functionality but alot of it is greatly on the user.

Now my grip with the NW export for desktop is that there is no option to change the icon and you have to find a hack to actually change the icon to something of your own. But i was disappointed because it wasn't clear how the exporters worked and it wasn't how I expected but again I don't use it extensively as some for publishing.

Also the Manual could be clearly up a little more. A few areas are quite vague. It took me a moment to figure out how the function features worked and once I figured it out I was like why they didn't just say that.

Also it would be nice to have a Live2D integration in the future.