We need a Nintendo Switch port of Construct>>>We are behind scheduled !!!

    I described in detail the difficulties with implementing console support earlier in the thread. What do you expect us to do about it?

    I described in detail the difficulties with implementing console support earlier in the thread. What do you expect us to do about it?

    I expect that the Construct team understands that this is must-have features.

    So, the team will look for possibilities to do this.

    Maybe in a collaboration with someone, maybe as support in porting some of the projects that are already profitable on Steam, maybe using crowdfunding ...

    Maybe this will happen not in a month, but after a year. step by step.

    I don't know..

    But Without these features, Construct is probably a dying engine.

    A 2D engine for indie with great potential, but not able to use the modern way of 2D animation and not able to release on one of the main platforms for indie.

    Great argument. It's like the one for the Ouya, or the Wii, or Amazon, or FFOS, or Blackberry.

    All of which ran Html5.

    There is another argument to be had here.

    If we had Nintendo Switch support right now, how many games would make any money on that platform. The answer is probably not something people want to hear.

    I am not trying to be an asshole, but simply curious. Does anybody have examples of financially at least moderately successful games made for Nintendo Switch in something like Game Maker, Godot, or any other. ( say games that made over $25,000 and were developed by a one or at most 2 guys )

    I know that Unity accounts for 30% or so of all Switch games, but my guess would be that 95% of them made no real money.

    I would like to be proven wrong.

    My point is simply, that it is very likely, as Ashley stated, that this would take a lot of time for Scirra to develop and in the end would be of very little use for any of us. Most successful games on Switch are games developed by teams of up to 200 people and take 2 years or more to develop. I doubt that describes anybody here.

    Construct is a html5 runtime. All platforms that can support html5 will work with some tweaks. If they not support it, construct stuff will not run.

    If you need to develop c++ stuff you need to choose another engine. Which is fine to do! not all projects fit all softwares/engines/runtimes..

    Or ask third party companies to port your html5 code into c++

    You cannot even ask this company to switch from html to c++ for one platform, they will need to rewrite all stuff.

    There is another argument to be had here.

    If we had Nintendo Switch support right now, how many games would make any money on that platform. The answer is probably not something people want to hear.

    It also works the other way around.

    Experienced developers do not choose an engine that can not support basic features.

    as a result, we do not see many popular games on Construct.

    I am an experienced game developer, working in gamedev for more than 15 years. Mainly as an Artist, 3D artist and Art Director.

    I think there is great potential in the Construct for creating my next project.

    but after a bit of research here, I feel sad.

    Killer features that must be in the engine are not only missing, but it seems developers are not going to make them. Never. This is not on the to-do list.

    So.. maybe I need to look for a programmer and work with Unity.

    You cannot even ask this company to switch from html to c++ for one platform, they will need to rewrite all stuff.

    Wiki says Construct is written in C++, JavaScript

    If this is impossible, it is impossible. end of story.

    but this does not change the result. Other popular engines did it somehow.

    Other popular engines did it somehow.

    Yes, for example Game maker has it, but my question is, is it of any use? has anybody made a game that's actually made a decent profit?

    It costs about $2500 to become a Nintendo Developer using Game maker, then what?

    If I am going to spend 6 months developing a game for Switch, that game should make at least $30,000-$40,000 ( If I have a partner it should be double that, triple if 3 guys working on it and so on ).

    I would like to see some successful examples, but even Unity has practically nothing to show considering how many people use it.

    I bugged Scirra ( unsuccessfuly )about HTML/web ad plugins which probably would not take them more than a week to do, so I doubt you are going to see something like the Switch exporter

    Wow guys, Take it easy. If you use an easy to go Construct 3 (or other HTML5 tech), you can't export your game directly to Switch.

    I've made a quick google session on other html5 gamedev middlewares and it's all the same - Switch won't support it. So it's not Construct developers to blame (or Ashley, who has to read all that ranting here) but Nintendo.

    All the questions were answered in this thread already. And in other threads like that, months ago.

    So you want a direct export to Switch? Use another engine, that has that option. But it will require you to actually code stuff, the hard way.

    You prefer Construct? Than you will have to reach already mentioned third party publishers, who will do some magic and port your Construct made game to whatever console you like, or even all of them.

    But only IF your game is at least average quality and noteworthy, and 100% development complete, and bug free, and uses no text object, and has full controller support, and uses no weird 3d party plugins, and has stable 60 fps even in debugger and a ton of other conditions. And you will have to share the (possible) profit.

    Or you can even throw some (XX XXX numbers) of your free money at another third party publishers to port your game for you, saving you some time.

    Or you can spend a couple of years to code your very own, perfecty working, open source, generating no profit html5 to Nintendo Switch exporter, that you will be constantly bullied for, because it will make poorly developed games to lag like hell on Switch.

    Or you can constantly poke Ashley here, on the forum, to try and force him do something that is not technically possible.

    The latter option requires the least effort, so i'm not surprised it is the most popular.

    If you ask me (and you should not care about my opinion so much, since i'm just a random internet dude) i'll just focus on creating a good (or at least average) game with C3. Then i will release it on Steam myself. IF it will be at least OK accepted by players and make enough money to buy me a coffee and a donut, then i will reach out to one of the mentioned publishers. IF they will get some interest in my game i will discuss a contract with them. IF both the parties are pleased with the contract's details, then i will spend some tiresome months helping the publishers to port my game to consoles. IF all those efforts will not be in vain, the game will release on whatever consoles, including Switch. IF all the listed IFs end in success, then i will probably earn myself X XXX ammount of cash, after the consoles' cut, publisher's cut, taxes and other expences. Then i will make a Visa, buy a ticket to London and shake Ashley's hand (if he'll be willing to meet me ofcourse).

    P.S. sorry for bad english and make good games.

    Nintendo have thousands of employees, already supported HTML5 games on Wii U with the Nintendo Web Framework, and then took that away for the Nintendo Switch. They have vast resources and already did the work to support Wii U.

    Meanwhile we have a handful of employees and have extremely limited resources given what people ask of us (I estimate our feature suggestion platform has about 10 years of work submitted to it given our current size).

    Why put the pressure on us over this? We can barely keep up with everything we have to do already, and even if we took it on, it would have a severe impact to all other Construct features and users (think no more C3 updates for a year while we toiled away on a huge port). Meanwhile Nintendo could easily assign several developers to build a web framework for the Switch if they felt like it, and it would be a negligible cost for them. Why not direct your frustration to them? As I said before, the most likely way to get Switch support for Construct 3, is if Nintendo are persuaded to support it - and the more people contacting them, the more likely they are to do it.

    I have written with nintendo developer support but the answer so far was always the same: There is currently no support for it and we don't plan on adding it.

    Worst part is that the youtube app on the switch literally uses webkit so it's not a question of capabilities.

    My guess is they put some resources in it for the Wii U, had a bad experience (aka no ROI, aka not worth it) and dropped it like a hot potato.

    There is another argument to be had here.

    If we had Nintendo Switch support right now, how many games would make any money on that platform. The answer is probably not something people want to hear.

    I am not trying to be an asshole, but simply curious. Does anybody have examples of financially at least moderately successful games made for Nintendo Switch in something like Game Maker, Godot, or any other. ( say games that made over $25,000 and were developed by a one or at most 2 guys )

    I know that Unity accounts for 30% or so of all Switch games, but my guess would be that 95% of them made no real money.

    I would like to be proven wrong.

    My point is simply, that it is very likely, as Ashley stated, that this would take a lot of time for Scirra to develop and in the end would be of very little use for any of us. Most successful games on Switch are games developed by teams of up to 200 people and take 2 years or more to develop. I doubt that describes anybody here.

    Nah, I mean, if your game is good/really good, and it's on the Switch, it's way more guaranteed to be successful than on a platform like Steam. Anyway, everybody who's taking issue with the problems of construct, just get Game Maker Studio, seriously. Game Maker can do way more than construct, it's a lot looser in how you design games, hell I figured out how to mimic Skyrim's saving system in the engine to a T. And plus, you can ACTUALLY export your games to console, especially the Switch.

    So yeah, take the time to learn Game Maker, and you'll be rewarded greatly for it. Oh, and be sure to keep an eye out for their humble bundle deals. You can get the engine cheap af when you keep an eye out for their sales.

    Seriously, don't be forced to limit yourself because of stuff like this, y'all have games you wanna make and share with people, don't wait on staff who aren't gonna be helpful, even if Nintendo somehow allowed Construct games to be ported onto the Switch, Construct is a jank ass engine that's gonna have a lot of dumb problems.

    Believe me, you'll thank me later, y'all'll be more happy if you make that change.

    OH, and while I'm at it. With Game Maker, you don't have to pay a monthly/annual fee :)

    except with like, console, but if your game's on the Switch, good chance it'll do well enough to be able to pay for it anyway

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

    I figured out how to mimic Skyrim's saving system in the engine to a T

    Good idea, lets copy a saving system that is known to bloat the savefiles over time until they eventually get corrupted. Also you really need to chill more.

    User banned for same reason as other thread, including directly offensive language that has been deleted.

    This thread has resulted in two bans now, so closing.

    Please remember we are a small company with limited options when it comes to console support. I already spent some time explaining that earlier in the thread.

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