Why is GameMaker Studio so much more popular than Construct?

  • I think that the fact that Construct 2/3 does not generate an exe (it does not do it without NWjs) and has to rely on external technologies has some importance.

    Actually, I think this is part of the reason we've been successful. It's hard to tell but I'd guess YoYo Games have about 10x as many staff/developers as we do - but we are perfectly capable of keeping up, or even overtaking them (we're shipping timelines before their equivalent, for example). A huge part of the reason we can keep up while being far smaller is because we have a single codebase, and use HTML5 for everything. Also while the technology has certainly had its quirks in the past (especially when we started in 2011 and it was seen as a big gamble), these days the tech is working fantastically. People publish NW.js games to Steam and I don't think any players notice the difference.

  • Gamemaker does export to Switch, for 800$ per year. I mean, we´re talking about 8 years C3 subscription money.

    True but, try launching a game on switch ( or any console ) with Construct... xbox aside

    This is why. Regardless of price to export or even a 'hefty' subscription price - the fact that you can target consoles is a huge plus. Tried GM - wasn't pleased to have to learn a proprietary language, and so I left it by the wayside. Don't get me wrong, I love Construct 2/3 and I use it as much as I can to make games, etc. but, having the ability to deploy outside of steam, PC/MAC, and the web is a major advantage for most devs trying to make returns on their games.

    I am being optimistically hopeful here... I hope that the HTML5 market is mature enough to be taken seriously enough to become a norm on console. Would love to see the consoles become HTML5 game compatible without having to use a limited built in browser. Like perhaps built in NWjs - specifically for running HTML5 type games.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • As far as we can tell, only a tiny fraction of Construct users are actually publishing to Xbox, which Construct does support (at no extra cost, I'd add). That's not to say it's not important - often those that do have the best games - but I think that actually this idea that most devs publish to consoles is not accurate (at least when talking relative to the entire userbase of Construct). I get the impression most devs aren't actually actively publishing to console, just they want the option. They're essentially asking themselves "what if my game does turn in to a success? Will it then be easy to take it further?" This is a reasonable question to ask - it's essentially planning for success, which is a good business consideration.

    However this then ends up with a slightly odd situation that everyone wants console exports, but very few people actually use them. It's a difficult situation to do something about because it seems likely that actually making console exports is uneconomical. Consider just how expensive the console exports are for YoYo Games, even with a much bigger staff, more funding and presumably more customers...

    Meanwhile there are third-party porting companies out there like Chowdren who are already successfully porting Construct games to consoles. I also think one of the reasons we don't see much usage of Construct's own Xbox export option is because people who go to third parties to cover consoles tend to throw in an Xbox port while they're at it. This also suggests that unless we cover all console export options - the most difficult and expensive option of all - then in practice a lot of people still won't use them, reducing a small userbase even further.

    So I think the main impact of the console export aspect comes down largely to perception. Also trying to solve it ourselves could prove very costly, especially as a small company playing the single-codebase card to great effect - and then there may well end up being very few people who use it. I think the best thing we could do about that is find a way to partner more closely with third-parties who can port Construct games to console. That's something we're thinking some more about and we've already had some conversations about it. It could be that there's little awareness that option even exists for Construct, and more people would choose us if they knew about it.

  • Would love to see the consoles become HTML5 game compatible without having to use a limited built in browser. Like perhaps built in NWjs - specifically for running HTML5 type games.

    Isn´t the switch the only one that doesn´t? And it´s only because Nintendo doesn´t want to? Because the Switch Youtube app actually runs with node webkit iirc.

  • I also bought GMS2 but I used construct

  • Even if they pull it off and make whole editor for coders. Users can write pure Js into all events etc, people won't flock in with masses, because there are already so many alternatives. But able to write Code could be only thing that could increase Construct usage(even if it's only for marketing). GmS has much bigger community, even in my own counthry there is GmS forum where people share their creation etc, haven't seen that for Construct past facebook or discord.

    I think why Construct is less popular even tought it offers a lot, is same as if I am great Explorer who uses Google maps(street View) to discover places Vs Real Explorer/Travelers. I mean Google maps offers almost everything better if you think about it, but it's still not the same(Events vs Code). Like PC Vs Mac memes.

    If Construct somehow could break out of this image or make their unique idea well known somehow(something like fortnite made in Construct) etc, it would be awsome for them.

  • My reasons for liking Construct over other IDE's is pretty simple. How many dev's from GM would respond to a thread on their forums with an honest reply asking why Construct is cheaper than GM?

    I like it when I experience turbulence and I can open the cabin door and ask the pilot, WTF, and get an answer.

  • I think one big factor might be the community itself and especially the marketplace for plugins assets effects and such. People are generally lazy, and don't want to reinvent the wheel.

    When I started using Construct 2, the forum section for those kind of things were the way to go. With the transition to C3 I noticed that there is still very few plugins ported. Many are unsupported, many broken links.

    A lot of Non-Coders are heavily dependant on good plugins for making life easier, or just because some things cant be done out of the box, or can be done with poor performing or complex workarounds.

    If I were Scirra, instead of trying to cater for all various needs and requestsfocus on the plugin developers. for example:

    ** Create an easy tool for non coders to build plugins, behaviours and effects, for sharing with the community.

    ** Make it easier and more profitable to share and monetize plugins... Not everyone want's to share their hard work for free.

    ** Add an in-app plugin marketplace. For ease of use. Just directly browse available plugins and assets from within Construct and click install/add/purchase.

    ** Better marketplace in general for everything from Assets, Plugins, Templates.

    I think those are the main pain points for me at the moment. I wouldn't mind using my own money hiring devs to create and maintain plugins if Scirra made it easy for me to monetise them, and for people to find them.

    So in short.

    Steps for creating and sharing plugins and behaviours or even events/code for non coders is a hurdle, and even if you are good at it, it's hard to get exposure and hard to monetise your creations. Plugins are hidden away somewhere in a website section where you have to browse, search, download, install, restart construct, open again... Way way way too many steps as a user to find and use plugins... can't even imagine the hurdles of creating one.

  • Game maker 8 was actually my first game engine I remember very fondly trying to figure out the basics they had there own language back then GML game maker language I'm not sure if they still do. Then they started to move away from the drag and drop development and into a more code forward environment. I can without a doubt say I would have never learned to develop a game without construct. This engine is so much easier to use and it amazes me how much I've learned the amount of times I've re written code because I find a more efficent way to achieve an end goal. I know that's a bit off the topic but any one who tries both engines will see construct is the better of both. Game maker is more known as said earlier because if you want to make a game and you have no knowledge of game making

    Your search will include both words 80% of the time driving thier SEO out the roof.

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