gles.js - a lightweight WebGL renderer for Android

0 favourites
  • damainman: An error report only helps so much in showing if you have a system or driver problem with the software package, so it sends your hardware specs to the developers and where in the their code the error/crash happened. Ashley wants the capx files for the reason of code optimization and hunting down logic errors in the code. This doesn't work with generated error reports. Like he said, he only wants to help you and everybody to improve C2. Blaming him doesn't help neither you nor the community..more likely Ashley will only get frustrated and abandon C2...

    Anyway, if you can't sent your (art?) files, try using placeholder graphics. I think you don't need to send all your project, just the part that makes problems (if you structure your projects in a kind of modular way this should not be an issue).

  • Maybe they could add a feature that prepares a capx for bug reports by changing all the graphics to placekittehs.

  • newt I did put kittens and hearts in for valentines day I try! I really try LOL!

  • Games

    The problem is that the errors aren't in the game logic. The errors damainman is describing are completely random engine issues across a variety of customers and completely unseen in any of our own desktops. Low spec machines do tend to have more issues, but even high end ones that wipe ours across the floor seem to have problems we've never seen even once in any of our testing.

    Another reason why giving him the entire capx won't work beyond copyright ( we offered for Scirra to sign NDA/etc to access the source with no reply at: ) is because there is just so much going on that it would probably take him the same 1.5+ years we've been working on it to fully map everything out. We worked on this code nearly every day for that whole time and know it best, if there was something more we could do to fix it or debug further we would (and, we are!)

    And if the problem turns out to be Node Webkit or Chromium you know what will happen? We will get told to contact them and pray that they can fix it. That's just plain aggravating considering that this middleware is supposed to be the end-point where we report bugs as customers of Scirra directly.

    I love Scirra, and have since the first time I saw Construct Classic in the real early stages, but in the same way that CC ran into limitations and a total re-write was decided upon, C2 has now done the exact same thing but C3 won't even be a different runtime so the same issues I have now will be there waiting for me.

    I don't want Ashley to abandon C2, that's part of why I want it fixed, in fact I want Scirra to invest in their product and hire the contractors/staff and make something really professional out of it. For big game devs we would certainly be willing to pay at a minimum the cost of Unity pro, because we don't care about 3D (but Quazi's Q3D is looking really good!), we just need 2D to work.

    It's not just art, it's sounds and the event triggers attached to those sounds. Taking out those would probably break the game and between supporting our game, our day jobs, and other commitments there's just not enough time in the day.

  • damainman


    this thread become one of the saddest topics on Scirra's forum. Yet Construct 2 is still advertised with words like "lets YOU make advanced games!", "professional game development software", "true multiplatform support", "Reliable, Stable"...

  • Take it somewhere else then szymek.

    There are as many if not more issues with other engines that can't do half of what C2 did its first year out.

    Seriously see for yourself.

  • newt But there are also other 2D engines that can do tonnes of things C2 still can't right now (without the issues mentioned previously) when it comes to the final exported product. There is no point as a for-profit game dev in having the best 2D game engine/dev tool in the world if your exported game doesn't run on any client's computer with reasonable specs.

    I feel that toning down the hyperbole of the adverts is the first step to improving the situation, rather than encouraging people to leave the community and Construct. This tool is the future, but pretty much all of the runtimes other than the pure HTML5 export (which is at the mercy of whatever browser you use) are certainly not.

  • Take it somewhere else then szymek.

    Something is wrong with C2 or Scirra's approach or there are false promises on C2 page -> "Go somewhere else!!!!1111. Leave Ashley alone!!!11111"


    There is no point as a for-profit game dev in having the best 2D game engine/dev tool in the world if your exported game doesn't run on any client's computer with reasonable specs.


  • szymek Not sure newt was trying to go for that kind of meaning, but sometimes it does feel very defensive rather than progressive in discussions like these with most people of opposing opinion finally deciding to be silent or leave entirely.

  • Im not saying leave. Im saying people need to see how the other engines compare.

  • alspal (comment missing? it said something similar to: it looks like HTML5 is here to stay for Construct though) Agreed, but there are other options within HTML5/JS/WebGL that are worth considering, including the very promising asm.js that Ashley said he'll likely work on implementing further into the engine.

    It's likely that technology will continue to keep improving and "standardizing" according to the W3 HTML5 standard as well, but I'd rather put my money towards Scirra acquiring more control over (or direct dev time and support from) runtimes similar to CocoonJS and Node Webkit (or now: NW.js) than a new editor.

    I feel like C2 can be so much more than just a tool for prototyping, making small games, and education. I don't know many arcade-style platformer games made in C2 that have 3+ hours of game duration so far (eg: not endless runner, but something that's large editor side and runtime side), but having made one with damainman I can say that the editor is still bearable as-is. With a fully compatible and functional runtime C2 would be able to advertise making "advanced games" without exaggerating and then everyone will really win. I'd even love to pay a monthly subscription towards a "future fund" for Scirra which benefits everyone if it lets them get more control over the runtime.

  • newt

    do you know any paid game engine with similar approach i.e. "you can make a great game but we give you 0 guarantee that it will work well. And if you will have any problems / bugs, then well, you can ask some 3rd company for help"? I don't know. That's why I'm using Construct 2 only because I have still hope for ludei team and their work. They got 0 dollars from me, yet they are trying to take some responsability.


    [quote:1qrl3djl]I'd rather put my money towards Scirra acquiring more control over (or direct dev time and support from) runtimes similar to CocoonJS and Node Webkit (or now: NW.js) than a new editor.


  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • All of them. No one is going to guarantee that an engine will work on every system with blazing speed, let alone that you will be successful.

    You're taking what they don't tell you, the stuff you can't do, and trying to blame them for it.

    If you want to accuse them of lying, then by all means start providing the proof.

    Can you make games that work on a large number of platforms, and devices with it? Yes.

    Can you make every thing imaginable? Nope.

    That part is up to you.

  • newt It's not blaming Scirra for things that they didn't say and that I can't do, it's blaming them for literally the games they show on the homepage that are having performance problems, or games like mine which has performance problems on PC's with better specs than mine with the latest graphics drivers and etc.

    It's when my game drops to 59FPS instead of 60FPS and suddenly characters are jumping higher or collisions are not being detected when they were at 60FPS.

    Those are things that we've had customers show us, and we never saw in our own test environments. It's not that there is no proof, it's that I can't just hand a capx to Scirra because they might not even get to see the issue either.

    We are all (mostly all?) game devs here and we know what is "impossible", that's not what we mean when we are upset with C2 advertising that we can make great games. It's that C2 can't make the most basic of arcade games from the 80's (most of my game is "jump and shoot! eg: jump, shoot, jump, climb a wall, jump, climb a ladder"), or a simple clone of Broforce, without extreme lag or random issues out of our control.

    So in effect:

    Can you make games that work on a large number of platforms, and devices with it? Yes, but they won't run properly most of the time once they get bigger than a phone game.

    Can you make every thing imaginable? Nope, you can't even make the real games from the 80's/NES era.

    That's thanks to the engine/runtimes not working properly.

  • And by engine/runtimes you mean Chrome, or C2?

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