Construct 2 - platform poll

This forum is currently in read-only mode.
  • You don't need licensing rights to put a game on XBOX Live Indie Games. All that's required is a membership to the Creators Club, and xna. You would need rights to put a game on XBOX Live Arcade, however (XBLIG and XBLA are two separate channels). But technically, you wouldn't be dealing as just an Indie anymore in that case, because you'd be published by either Microsoft or by another known publishing entity.

  • [quote:2j0wc6oq]Linux is the only other viable platform to run the development tools on... other than Apple.

    That's one of the reasons it should be given higher priority.

    Plus you need to remember the devs are only thinking of having one other non os to export to.

    Bringing in Linux's user base might actually help to get some of the other formats ported.

    that's my point, instead of first focusing on new runtimes the devs should focus on making the software itself crossplatform, so that linux users can join, they could also help in porting it to other platforms. Making software crossplatform has a positive impact on the public, why GameSalad is not that popular?? because it's Mac only.

    [quote:2j0wc6oq]

    The thing that I worry about is that setting up for an export is almost like reinventing the wheel.

    We have two dev's with no pay. Only a pat on the back, and few donations here and there.

    Ash mentioned something about a pay version... perhaps these versions that have export to other platforms should be the ones people pay for.

    That's the biggest factor, maybe making people pay for the Xbox export will be nice, and charging some fee for making a commercial game from Construct.

  • that's my point, instead of first focusing on new runtimes the devs should focus on making the software itself crossplatform, so that linux users can join, they could also help in porting it to other platforms. Making software crossplatform has a positive impact on the public, why GameSalad is not that popular?? because it's Mac only.[quote:1us26xvr]

    While I understand that including Linux compatibility may open up some more development, the idea that there will be a big rush of Linux users jumping into it is purely speculation. Plus, if the devs want to make more money, the runtimes will get them there.

    Indeed, Gamesalad is not that popular because it's Mac only, but not simply because it isn't cross-platform... it's just the platform it's on doesn't have as many users as PC. If it were PC only it would probably be much bigger and not being cross-platform would be irrelevant.

    > That's the biggest factor, maybe making people pay for the Xbox export will be nice, and charging some fee for making a commercial game from Construct.

    >

    I'm all for charging to purchase the export, but they should leave commercial game fees alone. I've always looked at that sort of stuff as bush league and greed. It just flies in the face of the indie spirit and what it means to help people get to the next level. Besides, any indie that brings a game to market is already going to have to endure enough fees from the digital or physical distributor and every other palm that needs to be greased.

  • I think the main factors are 2:

    • optimization of development time
    • audience reached (possibly oriented to buy games/apps)

    So, I'd say the best routes to follow are:

    1) DirectX runtime -> PC and Xbox

    2) Macos runtime -> Mac/iPhone/iPad/iYoursister/ecc.

    Secondarly, i say Android: still far more revenues on Apple Store, but the market share is growing bigger and bigger.

  • First and foremost I think other OS's are the most important. Browser games would be a really nice perk but they're not commercially viable (well, Flash is if you get sponsored or find some kind of kick-ass ad revenue sharing). Plus, there are already sites like Game Jolt where you can launch your games through a web player and such.

    If I had a second choice though I'd go with one of the smart-phone options, either iPhone or Android. PC/Mac and smart-phone sales are where people are going to (potentially) be making money. But that would also mean adding multi-touch and accelerometer functionality to C2.

    As for consoles... I dunno, I see XBLIG as kind of a dead end, honestly. Sure, a few people have made some money here and there, but indie console publishing doesn't have anywhere near the potential of smart phones or PC's.

  • I think if we had to choose between App Store and Android I'd say Construct would rule on Android, simply because there's less competition on Android and 90% of the games are super bad, as opposed to the iphone which has quite a high amount of good games, so I think if you bring out a decent game on Android especially one that looks nice then you're gonna have a bigger voice than you would releasing the same game on the iPhone.

  • Well, if you want to sell your game and you don't have access to Android or iPhone or consoles or whatever, it's not out of the question to try Steam, which already supports Mac as well as Windows. Games like Saira, VVVVV and Eversion (the higher-res version) are on there, it's just a matter of convincing Valve that your game is good enough to put on the store. Though, I wonder how one would integrate Steamworks with Construct-made games, however... Though, if Nifflas could do it with Saira (which I think is an MMF2 game... I'm not sure, though)...

    Though, there's plenty of avenues to sell one's games, the challenge is getting it noticed.

  • First and foremost I think other OS's are the most important. Browser games would be a really nice perk but they're not commercially viable (well, Flash is if you get sponsored or find some kind of kick-ass ad revenue sharing). Plus, there are already sites like Game Jolt where you can launch your games through a web player and such.

    If I had a second choice though I'd go with one of the smart-phone options, either iPhone or Android. PC/Mac and smart-phone sales are where people are going to (potentially) be making money. But that would also mean adding multi-touch and accelerometer functionality to C2.

    As for consoles... I dunno, I see XBLIG as kind of a dead end, honestly. Sure, a few people have made some money here and there, but indie console publishing doesn't have anywhere near the potential of smart phones or PC's.

    But C# is not a deadend. With xna you can put out games for 360, Zune, Windows, and Windows Phone. The key to making money is making a game that gives the market what they want, and you can fail on the Apple store or Android or anywhere else if you make a bad game that doesn't work with the market. The games that made it on XBLIG gave people what they wanted, even simple stuff like the Rumble Massage program.

  • As for consoles... I dunno, I see XBLIG as kind of a dead end, honestly. Sure, a few people have made some money here and there, but indie console publishing doesn't have anywhere near the potential of smart phones or PC's.

    I wonder why you see XBLIG and consoles market a dead end, in comparision to smart phones or PCs.

    Recent few dozen posts were debating on that topic.

    -Consoles are so widespread according to some news, it is a broader market possibility!

    -PCs: why would we need another OS? Being open source already grants many goodies.

  • But C# is not a deadend. With xna you can put out games for 360, Zune, Windows, and Windows Phone.

    True, but I wasn't talking about C# or XNA, but XBLIG specifically. PC's and phones are much more ubiquitous than XBOX, which is the main reason I see them as having priority. Everyone has a computer, so exporting to various OS runtimes should take precedence. And there are a lot more smart-phone owners out there than there are 360 owners, so phone support of some kind would come in second. And don't get me wrong, I think console porting would be a good option, I just don't think the need is anywhere near as big as for OS and phone support.

    Also, for every 360 owner that does buy an XBLIG game, there are even more who don't. People generally get a 360 in order to play triple-A titles. Phones, on the other hand, are a different animal entirely. People are more accepting of smaller, simpler games on their phone. Plus the portable nature means more opportunity to buy and play games. People are much more likely to drop $3 on Generic Stick Figure Zombie Arena Shooter on their phone when they can play it on their lunch breaks or on the toilet or whatever, but not so much when you can only play it on your couch on a system that you could be playing Halo: Reach or Red Dead Redemption on instead.

    But as far as top priority goes, I still think Mac/Linux support is where it's at. The most common complaint I see from the indie community is "well this game looks neat but it's Windows only so I can't play it *frowny face*." More OS support would be a big draw for indie devs.

    -Consoles are so widespread according to some news, it is a broader market possibility!

    I really don't think that's true. If you have a source on this I'd be happy to get schooled though . And anyway, as time goes on smart phones will become even more prevalent, and console owners still won't be able to carry their consoles around and play them.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • But C# is not a deadend. With xna you can put out games for 360, Zune, Windows, and Windows Phone.

    True, but I wasn't talking about C# or XNA, but XBLIG specifically.

    Hmmm, tough to separate them since you can't get on XBLIG without using xna/C#. My point was that using xna doesn't limit you to just XBLIG, since you can make games for Zune, Windows, and Windows Phone aside from 360. Being able to make games for 4 platforms trumps being able to make a game for just one in terms of market reach.

    Everyone has a computer, so exporting to various OS runtimes should take precedence.

    But some of these OS's are unpopular to the point of making it a complete waste of time. Making an export to be able to run our games on Linux would be a waste of development time. However, making the Construct development software compatible with Linux would be a better idea... thing is, doing that and not making the games run wouldn't make sense.If the amount of time necessary to do that would be the same or greater than making exports so our games can run on game platforms that are far more popular (and make no mistake about it, at 0.83% of the personal consumer market Linux is not popular by any stretch of the imagination), then this wouldn't be a good idea. I know the hope is that Linux programmers would jump in and make a bunch of plug-ins but I still see that as nothing more than mere speculation from Linux enthusiasts.

    Doing either for Mac wouldn't be the worst idea, I'd do that before Linux, but the same question comes up again; how popular is this platform for gaming and game-making compared to the MS platforms? I think we all know the answer to that one, PC/MS platforms win that by a landslide. The market is enormous for PC/MS products. Just from a business standpoint, it would make perfect sense to address the sectors that you already know have the most users waiting for your product, start there, and then move down the list. But if money doesn't matter, then it doesn't matter if you go after tiny sectors like Linux and the rest that are all smaller than PC/MS.

    And there are a lot more smart-phone owners out there than there are 360 owners

    But gamer spending on console games far exceeds spending on cellphone games. It's not even close from a revenue standpoint, and you also have to consider that not every smartphone owner plays games. So you have to extract the number of people with cellphones who don't play games on it and I'd imagine that number is probably larger than believed. But with the consoles, you know they play games on them because that's what the consoles were built for.

    Also, for every 360 owner that does buy an XBLIG game, there are even more who don't. People generally get a 360 in order to play triple-A titles. Phones, on the other hand, are a different animal entirely. People are more accepting of smaller, simpler games on their phone. Plus the portable nature means more opportunity to buy and play games. People are much more likely to drop $3 on Generic Stick Figure Zombie Arena Shooter on their phone when they can play it on their lunch breaks or on the toilet or whatever, but not so much when you can only play it on your couch on a system that you could be playing Halo: Reach or Red Dead Redemption on instead.

    That's why I brought up the fact that xna's versatility allows you to create games for Mobile platforms as well (Zune, Windows Phone). That goes beyond XBLIG.

    But as far as top priority goes, I still think Mac/Linux support is where it's at. The most common complaint I see from the indie community is "well this game looks neat but it's Windows only so I can't play it *frowny face*." More OS support would be a big draw for indie devs.

    Mostly for Mac. Linux support isn't going to draw enough Linux gamers to make a difference because, well, the Linux market is a speck at 0.83% of personal computer users as quoted by a Linux source (and they were probably being generous with that number, too, lol), and the number of people playing games on Linux is obviously even smaller than that. And again, this rush of lInux devs jumping on Construct is wishful thinking and speculation.

    I really don't think that's true. If you have a source on this I'd be happy to get schooled though . And anyway, as time goes on smart phones will become even more prevalent, and console owners still won't be able to carry their consoles around and play them.

    You're far more likely to walk into a home and find a Wii, 360, PS3 or PS2 (PS2 especially) before you find an Android or an Iphone, and even if you did find one of the phones it's highly unlikely that person is using it as their primary gaming device which makes sense since gaming consoles and PC's are still the best option for serious gaming. There is a reason why single console games still sell in the millions of copies and phone games generally don't do anything close to that number even while being priced as low as 50x less than the average console game.

  • Demand for Unix games is really, really low. When you ask for games in linux forums most people will usually point you to the bundled board games and say "they're pretty good". Linux has never been for the gaming oriented. That said, that minority is very vocal, as Linux has always been comunity oriented.

    Mac on the other hand... too small an install base. I'd rather have consoles or mobile, where you can rest assured your indie games will be looked at (I mean, look at some of the top sellers there!). Then again mobile means like a jillion different platforms. iPhone right now is the biggest (I think) platform with the least variation. Only 3G, 3GS and 4. You aim for 3G which has decent hardware and you get it all, including iPod Touch. Android might be big one day, but it is not yet.

    So.... in order of preference, merely for user base

    console (any) > mobile (iPhone or MAYBE Android) > Mac > Linux.

  • gonna chime in again.

    yeah, i think iphone has the larger share, but it's inevitable they'll be overtaken in the near future by android, and probably windows mobile 7 as well.

    also, I'm not much for license knowhow, but I've seen more than one multiplatform game or app editor, that requires a mac to export to iphone. Something about special mac files needed to compile to iphone, and typical steve jobs bullshiz. Might be something to look into

  • Ray:

    As far as Mac/Linux prevalence goes, sure I guess I'll concede on that point. Though if there were a Linux port you'd be about five inches away from an Android port as well, so two birds down with one stone there. And I'd wager that the percentage of Mac and Linux users in the indie community is much higher than average, again judging from aforementioned Windows-only complaints.

    At any rate, OS support would still be more inclusive imo because as I said before, everyone has a computer, with one OS or another. Not everyone has an iPhone or console.

    >

    > I really don't think that's true. If you have a source on this I'd be happy to get schooled though . And anyway, as time goes on smart phones will become even more prevalent, and console owners still won't be able to carry their consoles around and play them.

    >

    You're far more likely to walk into a home and find a Wii, 360, PS3 or PS2 (PS2 especially) before you find an Android or an Iphone, and even if you did find one of the phones it's highly unlikely that person is using it as their primary gaming device which makes sense since gaming consoles and PC's are still the best option for serious gaming. There is a reason why single console games still sell in the millions of copies and phone games generally don't do anything close to that number even while being priced as low as 50x less than the average console game.

    Sure, you can walk into just about any home in the country and find one of any number of different consoles. Maybe even two. Rarely will you find all three current-gen consoles, though.

    Anyway, let's leave Wii out, since you can't make and sell a game without a publisher, or at least a license and a dev kit, all of which are well out of reach for most indies. And PS2 may still be quite popular, but... well, you can't sell games on there either so it's a rather moot point. Likewise with the PS3... there is no XNA or XBLIG equivalent. You need to get a license and devkit in order to develop there as well. At least, as far as I know. I don't know much about the PS3, but I couldn't find anything out there like that. Sooo... that leaves the 360.

    And yes, if you total up all the Wiis, PS2s and 3s, and 360s in American households, the number probably outshines the number of smart phones out there. But we're not totaling up all those consoles because the only viable dev platform for indies out of the lot is the 360, you can sure as hell bet that game sales on the iPhone are a hell of a lot more common than game sales on XBLIG.

    And the point is rather moot but I was under the impression that there are 3rd party programs like Torque and such that can publish on XBLIG too...?

    Also I don't mean to be rude but being able to publish to Zune and Windows Phone is... well, it's kind of like saying you can publish your game on a unicorn's butt because really who the hell owns a Zune or a Windows phone? So in that regard "Being able to make games for 4 platforms" is really just two platforms, and since Windows is one of those platforms in Construct already then that leaves 360 as your second and I've already put too fine a point on why I don't think that's really a priority.

  • ...who the hell owns a Zune....

    I own a Zune. ;-;

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