Concerns from a "Serious" developer

    I agree with everything said for the most part, but I also want to mention that Construct2 is the only tool I've used where I've managed to actually finish a game. I've used countless other engines,editors,libraries, etc and never finished anything with those. Although to be honest, perhaps that is part due to being younger then as well as other influences getting in the way. Anyways- Construct is a tool that I feel allows me to get closer to my goals, compared to other options.

    Now that said, I do feel concerned about how I would expand my goals. The reasons for those concerns are already mentioned by others in this thread. If things don't improve then I'll be forced to look at other tools that may be progressing closer inline with my goals.

    Like said before, there's no console friendly tech. Every engine needs to be adaptable to every console and just to release a game on console is a long pain in the ass for devs.

    Cant say for 2D development but for 3D I often saw this as a norm.

    I think most people are scared of programming hence they choose simpler engines. Heck, I did it for same reasons yet I had some C++ background. But in the end it caused me more troubles than anything. Things that can be done faster in other engines were taking me weeks.

    And lets not forget the past issues with NW which were horrible.

    Every Time there was something. Even now I face issues that seem to be bugs in C2 editor. And so many features that are currently available on other engines but will probably be never done for Construct.

    So in the end I prefer having to transfer everything to a new engine rather than continue this horrible and slow progression.

    Construct is made for simpler projects, but whenever you start adding complexity it falls down.

    There's no such thing as console friendly tech, it's either made to run on proprietary software, and hardware or not.

    It's like that for each console.

    Each requiring licensing to develop for the platform as well as having to pass rigorous quality control just to publish.

    However, they all have a browser that supposedly runs on an open standard.

    To me console friendly tech means an engine that is capable of running on a console (and at full performance capability of the console). If someone makes a game in Unity for desktop and it gets popular, they can port it to console when they have the funds and/or the interest from Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo.

    But that just doesn't happen for Construct 2/3, HTML5 support is barely functional when it is available (with lots of issues in audio, input, framerate, WebGL, etc.) and currently only on about 2 current-gen and one past-gen console (Xbox One, *maybe* PS4, and the Wii U *barely*), so all that work you put into making your game is wasted because you'll be making it all-over-again in another engine.

    That's the issue that every big Construct 2 game has faced, and it will definitely continue until the web browser stops being seen as a bonus feature on consoles (let alone as a security issue eg: browser exploits, DRM / anti-piracy woes of an open interpreted format), which is unlikely to happen any time soon/in the next generation or two of consoles anyway.

    That's the issue that every big Construct 2 game has faced, and it will definitely continue until the web browser stops being seen as a bonus feature on consoles (let alone as a security issue eg: browser exploits, DRM / anti-piracy woes of an open interpreted format), which is unlikely to happen any time soon/in the next generation or two of consoles anyway.

    And that's a shame because it's true. EVERY SINGLE big Construct 2 game has indeed gone through this.

    For people who think that the "serious" dev don't make up much of the community... ask yourself why? How could you build up a serious dev portion of the community when they are missing key features that we are looking for? I'm sure there will always be a bigger hobbyist portion of the community but why hold back the potential? I started off as a hobbyist as I'm sure every serious dev does.

    What makes Construct appealing is the event system. Not HTML5, not having to use wrappers for virtually every platform.

    Insanity's Blade, Super Ubie Island Remix, AirScape, Last Penelope, Sombrero, etc. are great examples of the potential of the engine. We know Construct can make good games... We just need a way for people to experience them! I seriously can't figure out why this is still an issue... Heck, even Konjak (creator of Noitu Love and Iconoclasts) jumped shipped and he was the reason why I looked into Construct in the first place.

    Serious developers really help the brand and generate awareness. Take care of us too.

    It would be different if no one were complaining about this over the years... But we as a community have. And now with the subscription model, I'm going for sure expect more out of the engine to warrant constantly paying for it. Will we ever get what we've been asking for?

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

    Change engine, use Playmaker or whatever. Or code. The event system fails at some point as a realized when going into a too complex project with lots of animations.

    Takes more events to do the same that can be done more easily in Unity par exemple.

    Some features I've asked several times and it felt on deaf ears. So I doubt there will be any change because the amount of work to make it work for consoles might not be worth anything for them unless games made with it start becoming indeed much more popular.

    Well if they were to try to take the console route, how would they go about it?

    Would they develop for all of them?

    If not all, who would decide which one to develop for?

    Where would the funds needed to hire someone with experience in each specific console come from? Im pretty sure they don't have someone already.

    Would their current income method pay for all that?

    Edit:

    Also, what do they do when the next version of this or that console comes out?

    Pray that the old codebase isn't abandoned?

    Personally, I use C2 for making little HTML5 games (portfolio: http://td2tl.com) for publishers. I build my business from nothing but I bought a small apartment last year and I'm still going to college ( I should be graduated like 2 years ago lol ) . Without C2 I couldn't do anything. I've tried most of the engines, there is nothing like C2's HTML5 export and Event System. I will definitely subscribe to C3.

    But people are right, because of the export options, there isn't a killer game made with C2. We have good games like Airscape, The Next Penelope, There Is No Game etc. but we don't have games like http://www.yoyogames.com/showcase or https://unity3d.com/showcase/gallery. Most of the serious developers that were using C2 change their engines and C2 remains as a prototype tool. For example, Ori and the Blind Forest and Iconoclasts were Construct games once.

    I don't think people's performance problems would be solved by native exporters but the real problem is the 3rd party dependency. HTML5 exporter is awesome however other exporters are complicated and I don't really trust them <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy">

    Well if they were to try to take the console route, how would they go about it?

    Would they develop for all of them?

    If not all, who would decide which one to develop for?

    Where would the funds needed to hire someone with experience in each specific console come from? Im pretty sure they don't have someone already.

    Would their current income method pay for all that?

    Edit:

    Also, what do they do when the next version of this or that console comes out?

    Pray that the old codebase isn't abandoned?

    You are constantly asking us questions that we as game devs don't have to need to be concerned with. They chose to make a commercial engine so as a customer I have expectations, especially when the subscriptions are involved

    I was always wondering why no one did create something like Cordova/XDK/Electron/NW for consoles yet.

    Shoudn't this be possible? I mean you can most likely integrate webkit code and have that run html5.

    Something like https://github.com/gree/unity-webview wrapping HTML5 into Unity and using the native exporters for creating binaries for each platform.

    Woudn't expect it to be really performant though and maybe MS and Sony woudn't want that, but on the technical side, i believe this could be possible.

    However I do not know anything at all about limitations on console APIs, so maybe thats not possible at all <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy">

    This is just my opinion as a C2 hobby user who enjoys the software and has made several small games and am currently 3 years into a major project that is only about half way finished.

    Scirra is in the business of making game engine software, they are not in the business of making games. I truly believe that if they were to take 6 months to a year and use that time exclusively to try to make a really good game using their engines, it would completely change their minds on what is really needed in comparison to what is currently being offered.

    I truly believe that if they were to take 6 months to a year and use that time exclusively to try to make a really good game using their engines, it would completely change their minds on what is really needed in comparison to what is currently being offered.

    Absolutely. I think they'd come to some big realizations if they do that. I get the impression they just don't have that kind of understanding one naturally develops when spending lengthy amounts of time making games.

    That's one reason why I'll be trying Godot 3.0 when it is available- godot was developed by game developers, and it'll also have visual scripting in 3.0

    Godot 3.0 stable version is estimated to be released sometime in July.

    Scirra is in the business of making game engine software, they are not in the business of making games. I truly believe that if they were to take 6 months to a year and use that time exclusively to try to make a really good game using their engines, it would completely change their minds on what is really needed in comparison to what is currently being offered.

    Definitely agree with that, I've often felt this way!

    > Well if they were to try to take the console route, how would they go about it?

    > Would they develop for all of them?

    > If not all, who would decide which one to develop for?

    > Where would the funds needed to hire someone with experience in each specific console come from? Im pretty sure they don't have someone already.

    > Would their current income method pay for all that?

    >

    > Edit:

    > Also, what do they do when the next version of this or that console comes out?

    > Pray that the old codebase isn't abandoned?

    >

    You are constantly asking us questions that we as game devs don't have to need to be concerned with. They chose to make a commercial engine so as a customer I have expectations, especially when the subscriptions are involved

    Sorry, but Im just being realistic.

    Those questions are rhetorical. I expect most people to already know what the likely answers are.

    A least Im pretty sure what they are, and that's why I look for alternatives to what the answer has been for the past 8 years.

    Nothings changed, with the exception that perhaps subscriptions might allow some of the issues of funding, and manpower to be overcome.

    The solution to this problem is simple. Don't give Construct anymore of your money. That is what I am doing. If enough people turn away from this awful "Construct 3" model then maybe they will start listening to us--THE PAYING CUSTOMERS when they're aren't making any profit.

    I've moved away from here to learn new engines and don't plan on coming back and wasting anymore of my time or money here since I don't feel like our needs have been taken seriously and nothing is really being done to improve upon the features we users actually want or we're looking forward to.

    I used to believe strongly in Construct... but with Construct 3, I've lost all hope. It's not worth the money they are asking for (when you can't do nothing at a professional level to make a professional game.)--I'm speaking of getting your game to consoles and mobile without headaches and issues that make no one--AND I MEAN NO ONE--want to play or pay for your game. I'm speaking of trying to make a masterpiece only to find out it runs like a turd on a few devices and doesn't run at all on the rest. I agree completely with everything NotionGames has said.

    Does anyone else felt like they've been bent over and $&*$#?? I know I do.

    It's up to all of us--as a community--to help Construct become what it needs to become. Don't pay anything until our needs as professional designers as well as paying customers are being met. We need to go on strike here. We as paying customers deserve better.

    Well if they were to try to take the console route, how would they go about it?

    Would they develop for all of them?

    If not all, who would decide which one to develop for?

    Where would the funds needed to hire someone with experience in each specific console come from? Im pretty sure they don't have someone already.

    Would their current income method pay for all that?

    Edit:

    Also, what do they do when the next version of this or that console comes out?

    Pray that the old codebase isn't abandoned?

    ....

    Sorry, but Im just being realistic.

    Those questions are rhetorical. I expect most people to already know what the likely answers are.

    A least Im pretty sure what they are, and that's why I look for alternatives to what the answer has been for the past 8 years.

    Nothings changed, with the exception that perhaps subscriptions might allow some of the issues of funding, and manpower to be overcome.

    You're right, those questions are probably rhetorical, as the only sensible answer (aka the answer to: "With such a small team, why is Scirra bothering with any runtimes at all when they seem to only care about the editor?") is that they should really just make Construct as a plugin for another game engine. One with hundreds of team members and a very open free edition, perhaps Unity or Unreal Engine 4?

    If Scirra went that route (and it might be even easier to do now that they can just make the Construct editor a browser tab within Unity) then they have a legitimate reason to off-load the complaints about runtime to the engine they used, as they only handle the editing. It'd be a win-win, and it means Scirra gets the jump on making a complete editing environment in the other engines before they eventually do it (Blueprints is probably just the first stage of visual coding in UE4, and PlayMaker is indeed very powerful but just doesn't work/feel quite the same as event sheets).

    But, all of this is written with me assuming that Scirra wants to compete with GameMaker:Studio, Unity, Clickteam (exports to console via Chowdren), and more.

    Because if they don't, then I and every other serious commercial game developer here (who are exporting for desktop + console + mobile) is in the wrong place, and I would be happy to accept that!

    Yet, when they advertise their tool as being for a "professional game developer" (Construct 2 features page), "fast as native" (Construct 2 blog post), and "publish everywhere" (as we can see they still say on Construct3.com ) that is not the message they are sending out to the world.

    It's hopeful future optimism at best and full-on misinformation at worst, and it leads to more developers like us arriving, investing our time and money (and if we run a Kickstarter, our fanbase's money) into a dead-end solution that later leads to cancelled ports and frustration all around.

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