A question about android exports

0 favourites
  • 14 posts
  • Why can't anyone create an android export that just produces an *apk file?

    Is there something code-wise or legally prohibitive about doing so --like it is a protected format or something?

    If not, then why not make one? I'd pay extra just to be able to save to apk and i'm sure lots of other people would too. What's standing in the way such that we have to go through all these third party work-arounds?

  • Manpower to make and maintain as C2 changes. I think Scirra is all of like 2 or 3 people. You could probably hire a consultant dev to make one if you have the money or make one yourself. It's a pretty large project.

  • I was just wondering if there was something besides the effort involved that was stopping it from happening. Maybe it's not a good idea because the format might change and the exporter would require maintenance or something.

    I can't get an apk out of Phone gap to work.. but if I point my phone browser at my game hosted on google drive it seems to work as though it was installed.

  • It can be done. In the tools and resources section. Some one did a super simple way to pack an a C2 game into an APK. Scirra could implement a similar model, but I don't know why it's not done. It would be better than XWalk.

  • It's a little tricky but could be done, but it would be doing exactly the same as what the XDK does for you already for free. Is it that big of a problem?

  • Ashley,

    I think it would just be awesome if the same company handled both, instead of the back and forth we seem to get. Now I haven't tried Crosswalk, I'm still using CocoonJS as it just works for me and what I need. Having scirra at the helm of the droid exporter just seems like a big headache gone. You know what needs to be done, you know how to achieve it and you can quickly get in support for things like OUYA, Google Plays Games, Facebook Integration, Ads (big ones like adMob), etc.

    That's just my opinion of course, I have no idea what this would entail. Part of me wishes mobile was addressed more before jumping into Multiplayer, but that ship has kind of sailed

  • Well the best is to streamline everything in Construct 2, so that it has the essential function people all need when they develop mobile games. Currently lots of plugins here and there, and many don't even function in CocoonJS or Intel XDK.

    But it would require a bigger development team I think.

    Crosswalk is very good now, it needs a few additional features and its A+ for Android. If only we had a great compiler for iOS... CocoonJS still has massive flaws.

  • IMO there's a completely sufficient number of third party export options available:

    PhoneGap - free, supports Android 2.1+, cloud compilation, but no hardware acceleration

    CocoonJS - free (with premium features), supports Android 2.2+ (or 2,3+?), cloud compilation, links sent by e-mail, hardware acceleration

    Intel XDK - free, supports Android ?, hardware acceleration, but has some object limitations

    Intel Crosswalk - free, supports Android 4.0+, hardware acceleration, possibly the best performance of the bunch

  • It's a little tricky but could be done, but it would be doing exactly the same as what the XDK does for you already for free. Is it that big of a problem?

    C2 is the most powerful HTML5 game making tool. With C2, making game is so easy. However, exporting is a little bit hard task. I've been using C2 for a year but it was always painful. As I know, one of the powerful points of HTML5 is "You can export it in every platform", but not all of the features and plugins works on every way of exporting(like CocoonJS doesn't support this and Crosswalk doesn't support that). C2 keeps updating and third party plugins also does, and we says "Does it work with new version of CJS/Crosswalk/blabla". Playing games in web browser is pretty nice but mainstream is to publish application file on mobile appstores. And we don't have even basic features like Google Play Service.

    I believe C2 is a tool for the professionals. But we are unstable with these things.

    • Performance(or Guide to get good performance)
    • Stable way to Monetize(Ads, IAPs)
    • the Way of Exporting that works with every features of C2

    That's why. I think it would be so nice to get the way of exporting Scirra Team could guarantee. Multiplayer things are not that important.

  • If the crosswalk export could be handled in C2 itself, it would be great, I couldn't make the Intel XDK work well personnally, Because my PC isn't that great (not talking about builds themselves, the entire XDK, the building still didn't work though, but I think it has been corrected), also calling it Android and seeing a html at the end can be confusing, also being able to export it directly would also help timewise I think, but it is still a personnal opinion.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • Sounds like I'm not alone. Deployment has always been the thing holding me back because no matter what options I try I always run into some or other issue. Pushing a button and getting an apk would be absolutely ideal. I don't think anyone would say "no" to that option.

    In the mean time I should learn more, I think about "the hard way" of using the android sdk and compiling myself.

  • IMHO the key question is.. How much extra are people willing to pay for these exporters? Programming, testing and maintaining those will take a considerable work (and ***load of hardware), especially with all these new 'like-androids' around.

    For example Nokia just recently released new set of X phones that have forked android and "75% compatibility", Mozilla announced they are aiming for 25usd Firefox-phone etc.

    Even though in theory most of these new (and even existing) systems support html-5 there will be differences, both on hw and sw level and it's quite a complex mess.

  • When deploying software to multiple platforms, there is no easy one button solution. Each platform you are targeting is going to require a few unique steps no matter what, like signing etc, once you do them a few times it becomes easy. A few mouse clicks and waiting a couple of minutes is not a big deal for me, I think there are more important areas for Scirra to focus on like multiplayer

  • ...Actually that is an excellent point. However, one could with just as much conviction ask how much extra time we all should be spending trying to fuss with deployment instead of working on more important things like polishing our own applications. Some of us have solved multiplayer issues on our own with just as much facility as "a few mouse clicks" as well, but if we can't deploy the darn thing to a mobile platform, what use is any of it?

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