Construct 3 any news?

    I kind of assumed they were going to implement a C2 style event sheet in Fusion 3 because it's the next logical step up, but was disappointed after seeing a recent dev shot that it appears to still have the same tired old spreadsheet editor. It would be a big step back returning to that now.

    And the chess pieces for icons.

    I kind of assumed they were going to implement a C2 style event sheet in Fusion 3 because it's the next logical step up, but was disappointed after seeing a recent dev shot that it appears to still have the same tired old spreadsheet editor. It would be a big step back returning to that now.

    I've tried both C2 and F2.5, both are very good and have good and bad things going for them. Without a doubt C2's event sheet is way ahead of F2.5's. however F2.5 can export native windows code and I'm reading more and more how people like the idea of C2 but being forced to use a wrapper just puts them off using it.

    Hopefully C3 will amend this lacking issue.

    editing my previous post but in a new one i still believe that if c3 change the direction from html5 focusing to native giving the oportunity for native exporters pc mac linux etc etc many users of fusion will jump to c3 without a doubt because of the simplicity of visual coding.

    if Ashley tells something about native exporters and dynamic lighting (in parallax effect) and normal mapping even if today is Aprils fools day i will be happy for seconds...

    I'll be interested in seeing where html5 is in a decade, definately.

    I have to agree with Chadorireborn. I have a personal licence for C2 and now I am making a game for mobiles and yes that thing that the C2 doesn't have a one click export for all these platforms (.APK etc) is really bad I am using Intel XDK but there are often many problems (new versions, bugs ...) I would like to have a new C3 with all these functions like native apps one click export, Ads but is it even real for Scirra? Recently I am starting to doubt it. I like C2 but it seems it doesn't develop enough.

    I've been using Fusion for years, and have several releases with it. I switched to Construct a few years ago, mainly for Wii U, and converted and released a few of my older Fusion games for the console. I'm still jumping between Construct and Fusion, and can't really decide on which to use. Fusion is superior when it comes to mobile, but they still don't have mac and linux export options. I actually like Fusions event editor, I use these kinds of editors because I don't wanna program, and the less the event sheet reminds me of code, the better. As such, the visual layout of Fusion is very appealing. On the other hand Cosntruct does things like rezising the screen and objects way easier, and the list can go on.

    I doubt either Fusion of Construct will get it "everything right", you're always gonna have to make a choice between which features you favor. Personally, when both Fusion 3 and C2 is out, I'm gonna go with the one that supports the most platforms (i.e consoles).

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

    im so excited

    jayderyu i agree. I also use unity and they are really good in taking in user inputs. At this phase, they should have at least a check list of things they will be putting in C3. I think the problem is if they overly commit on certain features, they might disappoint most devs. I like C2 for building quick games, will probably support C3.

    I doubt clickteam will copy constructs event editor. They are way too proud with their ancient one. Preview vides showed that the mmf3 prototype uses the same old design.

    Of course that would be disappointing to their users.

    Of course that would be disappointing to their users.

    Long time Fusion user, and I never understood that attitude. I like that event editor, a lot of times it's way easier to use than Constructs, and it provides a clearer overview.

    Would be great if Ashley could create a section in the forum or on his blog with regular updates about C3.

    It's clearly a long way from being ready, but it would be nice to have a list of definitive features and perhaps the ability to vote on some features if they

    seem complicated to develop (as exists for Game Guru, see: https://www.game-guru.com/feature-vote).

    Perhaps some insights regarding pricing would also be useful. Although some people complain about the price of the full version of C2, it's not really expensive

    in view of its capabilities. Perhaps the team at Scirra should reflect on several versions of C3 (basic, professional, enterprise) with different features and

    a higher price tag. This would allow the company to hire more people, as it looks as if Ashley does most of the development work as far as I can see (this may

    help explain why C3 doesn't seem to be making much progress, or at least nothing being really communicated about it).

    We don't want to announce anything that isn't 100% guaranteed yet, and everything is still subject to change.

    I am also very skeptical of users voting on features since we did multiplayer based on that. The multiplayer feature won all feature votes by a significant margin, we spent months implementing it, and then saw pretty low usage of it after that. It's also stayed pretty flat and has not grown much. Its usage is nowhere near as much as the votes would have suggested. So while I think user feedback is essential in general, voting systems aren't always helpful. They represent hype and people's imaginations of what would be good more than how many people will really use it.

    wmsgva I partially agree with your opinion about licenses. From my (the user's) perspective I'd love to have all the features of C3 for a personal license, for a one-time fee, be able to activate it on all my computers, even offline (just like with C2). And teams or companies would require to buy the more expensive ones. On the other hand I'd also like Scirra to make as much money as possible and expand with their awesome engine.

    Xeeko I didn't use CTF enough to form a valid opinion about it's event system, but from what I see (read) most of the users say that their event system is very outdated and somewhat limited. I guess it's just comes down to preference.

    Ashley You're right, but in my opinion the multiplayer feature did good for the marketing of the engine (I'm just guessing, you're the one who sees the numers though).

    I am also very skeptical of users voting on features since we did multiplayer based on that. The multiplayer feature won all feature votes by a significant margin, we spent months implementing it, and then saw pretty low usage of it after that. It's also stayed pretty flat and has not grown much. Its usage is nowhere near as much as the votes would have suggested.

    Ashley without going too much into it, I would like to tell you why it didn't and still doesn't have a lot of people using it.

    Based on the feedback of beginners that are using C2, I read that a lot of people didn't expect it to be this difficult.

    I know from your perspective and from people like me with 100+hours into C2, the multiplayer plugins usage is as easy as a walk in the park but from a perspective of a beginner with next to no experience with ACE's and the basics of "netcoding" the plugin is very complex and difficult to understand at first.

    (Even with the well written tutorials and examples, thanks for that by the way.)

    I think that this is due to the high expectations about the plugin, meaning that people expected something like 1 simple action with dropdown options like "Lag Prediction: On | Off ; Priority: Low | Medium | High" instead of the current method, were a set of actions is required to achieve certain functions.

    Of course the most of us here don't know the struggle of making a plugin like this and assume that you could just implement something like 1 action for doing multiple processes at once, which I guess would be a pain in the ass to program.

    Yeah, that is basically what I and the majority of people think about the multiplayer plugin, it works fine but it is not that beginner friendly.

    Ashley - Well honestly, the multiplayer was my dream plugin and top of my list that I want to add in my games but you have to understand Ashley that not all are as smart as you. There are people like me who are still hesitating about using the multiplayer plugin since we might be going into something that is above our capabilities, making AI acting like players was hard enough to make, how much more adding multiplayer functionality with respect to lag problems. We are still here waiting for a better multiplayer plugin update for C3, something a high schooler who receives F in all his exams can still understand .

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 2 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 2 guests)