Disappointed over bad communications!!!

  • Don't forget that C2's engine isn't just Javascript being interpreted by a browser, its events being interpreted into Javascript, that is being interpreted into machine code that uses all kinds of third party code, png, wavs, etc.

    What's amazing is that it works as well as it does.

    To me the only question is what can you do with it?

  • Fimbul

    If only people would publish their games for others like me (or Ashley) to pick apart, we could point out the problem and optimize them. Heck, I might even sell that as a service.

    What is the point of using C2 then, if we need professionals to make our games work well on mobile devices?

    Only to create games that work well on desktop pc's but not on mobile without professional help is not what you expect from an engine that tells us:

    You can now make advanced games without writing a line of code. Construct 2 does the hard work so you don't have to... ...True multiplatform support. Build your game in Construct 2 and publish it to all these platforms...

    .

    I really think that Ashley did a great job making it possible to create games that easily, but if we cannot make "big" games with a lot of sprites, that would mean that C2 just focuses on the most simplistic and smallest game mechanics in order to work well with great performance on mobile devices.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • Performance on the desktop, at least for me, is great. Mobile games have good performance as well, even on my comparatively ancient Galaxy Note 2

    Most mobile games are a joke, the top selling games rarely have more than 50 sprites on-screen at a time, and yet you see people here wanting to create mobile games with 1000 sprites, all with physics enabled and two/three effects

    How do you export your mobile games?

    Cant confirm this. My sample with 2 sprites, 1 has bullet behavior is jerking on PC using chrome and on galaxy s4 exported with intel xdk crosswalk <- prefered method by scirra

    So for me it has nothing to do with 1000 sprites.

    There are 100 of posts where people are wailing about the performace on android....

  • At the risk of sounding like a stupid asshole:

    In my honest opinion, Ashley needs to stop dreaming about new features to add, editor improvements and stop developing Construct 3.

    There I said it. And here's why.

    Construct 2 is nowhere near finished. It's buggy, a lot of things in it don't work like there's supposed to. A lot of users have to set up events that cancel out the engine's own stupidity.

    I say that instead of making Construct 3 an editor improvement, or making it at all he finish Construct 2. GDevelop uses another language for native windows export, why can't Construct 2?

    Why do we need an editor improvement when the engine behind it isn't working like it's supposed to? Especially when the underlying engine is literally Construct 2 and the only change is the editor. Why Ashley isn't just making this into a major update for Construct 2 is beyond me. The only reason I see is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

    I remember when someone was asking Ashley if Construct 2 could do 3D games, and he said that it's be near-impossible with the current engine/framework/editor or whatever. Then all of a sudden Q3D comes out, a frickin plugin that allows C2 to become C2-3D (make your own R2-D2 jokes at your leisure).

    All the earlier adopters here are saying that Construct 2 was planned to have more exporters, not just HTML5. Why didn't they?

    Why isn't there still a global boolean despite it being request back in 2011.

    Construct 2's development timeline is basically a magpie, it sees a shiny new feature and grabs it, forgetting the old buggy stuff it still hasn't fixed.

    God help you if you have a randomly occurring bug, Ashley won't even think about your post let alone try to fix your problem.

    Sometimes even the bug fixes are actually bug implementations, I downloaded r202 and now the "On finished" audio trigger doesn't work.

    For the past year I've been on the scirra forums, and have been using Construct 2. Literally all I've ever hear Ashley say about bugs, performance and the ilk was "Not my fault, Chrome broke, I am not accountable for third-party software, they have to make their software work, not me." Yet you entirely depend on that software.

    Or it was "We just need to be patience and wait, things will get better", I've been hearing this for an entire year, early adopters have been hearing this the entire time, has it gotten better?

    Since the creation of Construct 2, I'd say yes it has gotten better. But it's also gotten worse. We have at least 3 wrappers being utter garbage.

    We have NW.js so broken that I think nearly all users have rolled back to 10.5, Ashley even needed to make a page with a special section showing older builds.

    I don't follow mobile so correct me if I'm wrong, but Crosswalk is super bad, the Ludei wrapper isn't supported by Construct 2 anymore since it's outdated or something.

    In the last 2-3 months, there's been increasing amounts of talk about a LOT of Construct 2 users jumping ship and going to learn other engines, a lot of the people posting here are saying the same thing. I myself have been looking at GameMaker Studio.

    Even the people that Ashley posted on his front page to showcase Construct 2's "capability" have said themselves they will not be using Construct 2 in the future for any more projects and that they are losing money because Construct 2 is incomplete.

    I say Ashley fixes the current engine instead of building more marketing (See: Construct 3) to coax people into buying software that doesn't deliver. I find it very ironic that on the Construct 3 page, there's one of the three developers that swore off Construct 2.

    Fix Construct 2, finally add more exporters not wrappers. How happy would people be if they could export to something other than HTML5?

    Here's a protip: You're only allowed to make the new iteration of Construct when people who made games you're using to promote your software stop leaving (or come back if they're left).

    I love Construct 2. The editor is great, amazing and the best I've ever seen. The work-flow is orgasmic.

    But it's bloated and broken by bugs and crappy wrappers that don't do what the hell they're supposed to.

    It has a lot of potential, most of all because of the intuitive editor, but it's being squandered.

    So yeah, feel free to call me a dumbass troll for not knowing anything or whatever. But I just want Construct 2 to actually work.

    I had to roll back to r201 from r202 because the audio was broken, despite the changelog specifically saying it was fixed. I mean what the hell was that? Opposite day?

  • At the risk of sounding like a stupid asshole:

    In my honest opinion, Ashley needs to stop dreaming about new features to add, editor improvements and stop developing Construct 3

    ...

    That is exacly what was in my mind, thank you for posting this!

    Now it would be nice if we get a response.

  • > At the risk of sounding like a stupid asshole:

    >

    > In my honest opinion, Ashley needs to stop dreaming about new features to add, editor improvements and stop developing Construct 3

    > ...

    >

    That is exactly what was in my mind, thank you for posting this!

    The part about me being a stupid asshole or the second part?

  • >

    > > At the risk of sounding like a stupid asshole:

    > >

    > > In my honest opinion, Ashley needs to stop dreaming about new features to add, editor improvements and stop developing Construct 3

    > > ...

    > >

    >

    > That is exactly what was in my mind, thank you for posting this!

    >

    The part about me being a stupid asshole or the second part?

    Second part of course

  • I think what is happening to Construct 2 is basically what happened to Construct Classic. It's buggy, unfinished but Ashley has moved on to Construct 3, leaving behind an unfinished product with which only a handful of developers, if even that, made a succeeded game with.

    CC - Iconocaust (or whichever the name was, didn't remember it properly) and Minitroid (non-commercial, apparently was a nightmare to make).

    C2 - The Next Penelope, Cosmochoria, Airscape

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but in both iterations of those Construct programs, haven't the developers of their games left Construct while Ashley moved onto the next iteration?

    At least with the transition from Classic to 2 we were getting a new engine and language. From 2 to 3 we're getting a new editor.

    When the transition from 3 to 4 comes what are we going to get then? An improved toolbar?

  • I never wanted to sound like I'm angry about C2 at itself.

    I just wanted to say that if we pay 100€ (in my case), get a 1st class game editor and tons of possibilties to make games, we expect the game to at least run stable and bugfree on every plattform that is mentioned and promised, not only the PC.

  • I think what is happening to Construct 2 is basically what happened to Construct Classic. It's buggy, unfinished but Ashley has moved on to Construct 3, leaving behind an unfinished product with which only a handful of developers, if even that, made a succeeded game with.

    CC - Iconocaust (or whichever the name was, didn't remember it properly) and Minitroid (non-commercial, apparently was a nightmare to make).

    C2 - The Next Penelope, Cosmochoria, Airscape

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but in both iterations of those Construct programs, haven't the developers of their games left Construct while Ashley moved onto the next iteration?

    At least with the transition from Classic to 2 we were getting a new engine and language. From 2 to 3 we're getting a new editor.

    When the transition from 3 to 4 comes what are we going to get then? An improved toolbar?

    I don't know C1 that well, but I heard it had a lots of crashes and a bad exporters and that was why the development stopped (correct me if I'm wrong).

    And I'm afraid of C2 happening the same...

  • You should not blame beta releases, because that's what they are "beta releases". It's quite normal for them to have bugs.

    As of the rest... I really do not care anymore, after all posts I made and read

    I'm just glad I'm working on a project that don't need high or steady fps to work, but current wrappers situation (that lasts 3 or 4 months already!) is just a big lol.

    Q3D is nice and all, but it's just too damn confusing. I bought it, tried to understand it for whole week and then I gave up. Now if I need some 3d for desktops I'm happily using UE4, where things do work like I want them to work and always at 60 steady frames per second for me and others. So yeah C2 is currently my tool for making small, stupid and slow mobile and web games.

  • I think what is happening to Construct 2 is basically what happened to Construct Classic. It's buggy, unfinished but Ashley has moved on to Construct 3, leaving behind an unfinished product with which only a handful of developers, if even that, made a succeeded game with.

    There's a lovely thread but kind find it now, about Node Webkit working "fine". There's a lot of nice posts in there about C2, exporters, and almost very same thing like in this thread. As far as I can remember, the ultimate answer to everything was something like "it's just a bug, they will fix it (chromium team) eventually". And guess what? They did. They fixed it. Everything was perfect.... for two or maybe three months

  • To be fair, construct 2 works really well in browsers. The major complaints i see are with people using construct 2 for mobile games, a place they will not excel because of hardware constraints that make even java-script itself perform poorly. If you want to make a game for mobile with javascript you absolutely have to scale back and be very frugal with the resources you use.

    Mobile games aren't complicated, and that's because you really need to develop them from the ground up to get any kind of good performance. Making a complicated mobile game in C2 is easy, however it wont work because it's too complicated. The more difficult an engine is to work with, usually the better the performance you can squeeze out of it but the slower your development will be, ESPECIALLY if you are inexperienced.

    You could very easily code a fast HTML5 game for mobile, however you wont have the wonderful abilities like picking which construct allows you to use, you'd have to build the game in an optimized manner. If your game is GPU bottlenecked, then that's going to be a problem no matter what. There's a lot of inexperienced developers using C2 (which is understandable) and they end up complaining that their game is working poorly because it works on desktop "just fine" but dies on a mobile platform. The only answer that can be given is that their game is trying to do too much, regardless of if it's doing "a lot less" than other games they've seen on the platform.

    As an example, anyone familiar with demoscenes will understand that some people can squeeze a ton out of very little. Take for example classic c64 games and their graphics, and compare them to some of the more impressive demos for c64:

    demos:

    Subscribe to Construct videos now

    vs.

    games:

    Subscribe to Construct videos now

    A lot of low level optimizations that have to do with using smart memory structures and reusing data in an intelligent way mean you can get "way more" out of something. This is what mobile developers manage, even if they're using html5+javascript from the ground up, vs construct. Construct 2 will allow you to very easily trim down recursively through lists of objects with picking conditions / actions, however the fact this is used everywhere to make events "easy to use" means the performance suffers, ESPECIALLY on weaker platforms where performance is constrained. Things like "creating" and "destroying" in construct are very high level and generally expensive even with the recycling systems in place. They're general so that when something is gone it's gone and everything knows it's gone, however this is expensive compared to just pretending something is gone and controlling at a low level. In most cases a game with limited actors could much more efficiently be constructed by having a short array of references and never having to really pick anything.

    To top things off, most people abuse the hell out of collision detection in construct since they have a poor understanding of the costs associated with it and the mechanisms behind it's operation. It's very easy to blindly apply collision detection throughout code for repeated conditions, but really most engines have a SINGLE collision detection run per frame because it's so expensive, when in construct you can end up with many many many collision detections per frame, which make things "tighter" at tremendous cost. Behaviors are also a big issue because of how general they are, the expense they incur quickly adds up.

    If you want great performance, you need a powerful platform, or you need to fine tune your game from the ground up, there's no magic bullet and complaints are misdirected for the most part.

    shinkan

    Q3D is confusing because of the limited editor SDK of C2, so if people want powerful plugins with good editor integration, im afraid supporting C3 development is the only way they can do it... Regardless Q3D is constantly improving, and hopefully i'll have time to get some documentation out after the next update which finalizes a lot. I can guarantee using Q3D is way easier than trying to make a 3D WebGL game directly, and it works quite well at achieving that goal. In any case UE4 and Q3D have entirely different purposes, UE4 doesn't really work in browsers, regardless of what their poor HTML5 emscripten demos that barely work try to prove, they really aren't trying to make an engine for WebGL.

  • Q3D is confusing because of the limited editor SDK of C2, so if people want powerful plugins with good editor integration, im afraid supporting C3 development is the only way they can do it... Regardless Q3D is constantly improving, and hopefully i'll have time to get some documentation out after the next update which finalizes a lot. I can guarantee using Q3D is way easier than trying to make a 3D WebGL game directly, and it works quite well at achieving that goal.

    I'm all aware of that my friend. You have put tremendous amount of work to make this plugin happen and it is really great and powerful . But unfortunately, currently C2 is not making it any easier to use. I never found your plugin hard to use - speaking about event logic. But rather what confuses me a lot is C2 editor itself, placing 3d object in 2d inverted space is not fun for me at all. That's why I stopped using it, not because it's bad but because it takes too much time from me to set things right. That's why for time being I choose UE4 to do 3d stuff only cause i can do what I want faster and in full 3d space. I know I could build myself a nice 3d editor in C2 and use it to for my needs, but that's not the point here. I really hope I could use Q3D in a nice environment

    "Mobile games aren't complicated, and that's because you really need to develop them from the ground up to get any kind of good performance."

    And that is true as well, people tends to forget about that. But again current crosswalk do not help making even that easier, while having problems with almost empty projects

  • 3D is by its very nature just confusing in General and building a Realtime Engine that will satisfy People is a whole different story as well so don't just think it's that easily done. I think a new Editor with a better SDK may lead to better Exporters being developed but i'm technically not clever enough to really say this... But one things for sure: a dedicated 3D Engine like Unity with something like Playmaker might be the better Solution. I went to school for 3D Animation and i can tell you that the workload is quite a different story especially for one-man shows so i think Construct should stick to what its best at which is 2D.

    If someone really is unhappy with how things develop though maybe they should look at other Options out there?

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