Would anyone like a 3d version of construct soon?

Post reply
0 favourites
From the Asset Store
Basket Ball With animated Character
$39 USD
This is the new version of Basketball Practice with animated Character made with C3 Version.
sanjibnanda's avatar
sanjibnanda

  • I was looking into buildbox and saw that they made a 3d version of their game engine. And I wanted to ask if you think a 3d version of construct would be something your interested in? I personally would be interested. (Not saying scrirra wants to create one)

  • To be honest, I wouldn't want Construct 3 to be 3D.

    That means, if it were 3D. The simple drag & drop to layout would be gone. And we'll have instead the XYZ based drag&drop editing, which is kind of counter-intuitive for 2D games.

    Unless, 2 & 3 Dimensional Editors were to be separated.

    Although, that is just the start of the problem. Realistically, maintenance would be way slower given the Construct Team is just a small team and a 3D Editor requires more to maintain and innovate.

    It's easy to think that "Wow. It's easy to use Construct 3. Imagine if it were 3D too, it would be great. " But people sometimes don't understand that the reason it is easy to use is because it is mainly made to be easy-2D in the first place.

    That's just my say on the subject.

  • To be honest, I wouldn't want Construct 3 to be 3D.

    That means, if it were 3D. The simple drag & drop to layout would be gone. And we'll have instead the XYZ based drag&drop editing, which is kind of counter-intuitive for 2D games.

    Unless, 2 & 3 Dimensional Editors were to be separated.

    Although, that is just the start of the problem. Realistically, maintenance would be way slower given the Construct Team is just a small team and a 3D Editor requires more to maintain and innovate.

    It's easy to think that "Wow. It's easy to use Construct 3. Imagine if it were 3D too, it would be great. " But people sometimes don't understand that the reason it is easy to use is because it is mainly made to be easy-2D in the first place.

    I wasn't talking about construct 3 in specific, but thanks for sharing

  • I have not checked out any 3D engines like Unity or Unreal for example, but hey, if it has the ease of use Construct has and you can create 3D games that'd be pretty interesting.

    I've got plenty of ideas for 3D games, but then again if you think about it, you will need to up your own skills as it will require 3D models. Everything will just be way more complicated. Programming too.

  • I have not checked out any 3D engines like Unity or Unreal for example, but hey, if it has the ease of use Construct has and you can create 3D games that'd be pretty interesting.

    I've got plenty of ideas for 3D games, but then again if you think about it, you will need to up your own skills as it will require 3D models. Everything will just be way more complicated. Programming too.

    True but practice makes perfect

  • I'm not convinced the idea of "easy as Construct but with 3D" makes sense. For 2D, most people can draw some basic images and do a bit of simple math to help things interact. With 3D, how many people can quickly throw together a 3D model? How's your math for things like vectors, matrices and quaternions? The bar is higher, and I'm not sure there's much an easy-to-use tool can do to hide that, without turning in to a bit of a disappointing cookie-cutter engine.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • I'm not convinced the idea of "easy as Construct but with 3D" makes sense. For 2D, most people can draw some basic images and do a bit of simple math to help things interact. With 3D, how many people can quickly throw together a 3D model? How's your math for things like vectors, matrices and quaternions? The bar is higher, and I'm not sure there's much an easy-to-use tool can do to hide that, without turning in to a bit of a disappointing cookie-cutter engine.

    I have not seen buildbox's 3d engine but I'm sure they made it a little bit more advanced then 2d. That's why we learn how to code, learn nodes or how to do math. And for the 3d models one person could throw up a 3d model fast if they learn quickly from blender (Just an example). If there new then they can learn how to throw up a 3d model. And if 3d is not for them then they can not use the 3d engine but there are people that love 3d and would like to create a game like that. One more thing a "cookie-cutter engine"? what do you mean :

  • —

    I have not seen buildbox's 3d engine but I'm sure they made it a little bit more advanced then 2d.

    For information's sake. Here's where you are wrong. Buildbox isn't advanced that way. You can only make specific games available on their templates. That's why Buildbox can only make infinity loop games, or hyper-casual games. Hence, a cookie cutter engine, lacks originality or in this case, maybe, Game Engines which can only make pre-defined games / template games. Even then, Buildbox is still way overpriced.

    If you want to make decent 3D games, you have no choice as of now but to use game engines that doesn't rely on easy layout based editing. Like Unity3D or Game Maker Studio 2, with the drawback of losing the easy drag-n-drop, event-sheets, fast prototype benefits and etc., even if we are not talking about Construct 3, it is still the same case. And you really need to consider learning to code to achieve a professional level 3D game.

    I think the better approach to this is to present a case to convince the Construct Team or any 2D Game Engine developers. Because, if it was that easy, why didn't Unity do it already... With all their resources.

    I would recommend anyone trying to pursue 3D, to use Unity 3D instead. Or any Game Engine that doesn't limit you. Construct 3 is already limited as it is with only 2D games.

  • I'm sorry but why do you keep referring to construct 3 I never mentioned it lol and it is not the same case idk where that idea came from

  • I think the better approach to this is to present a case to convince the Construct Team or any 2D Game Engine developers. Because, if it was that easy, why didn't Unity do it already... With all their resources.

    I'm confused what do you mean??

  • —

    I'm sorry but why do you keep referring to construct 3 I never mentioned it lol and it is not the same case idk where that idea came from

    I obviously said this. with the drawback of losing the easy drag-n-drop, event-sheets, fast prototype benefits and etc., even if we are not talking about Construct 3, it is still the same case.

    You obviously can't easily make a 3D game from a layout. It requires 3 dimensions, not 2.

    —

    I think the better approach to this is to present a case to convince the Construct Team or any 2D Game Engine developers. Because, if it was that easy, why didn't Unity do it already... With all their resources.

    —

    I'm confused what do you mean??

    It means, what you are asking for may be too ambitious with nothing to back up the feasibility. And compared 2 very different engines. Because, Buildbox is a template engine and Engines like Construct 3 are generalized engines. You are confused because as you said, you haven't read about Buildbox, you only focused on the part they made a 3D game.

    Here is what you said:

    —

    I was looking into buildbox and saw that they made a 3d version of their game engine.

    I will make it as simple as possible to avoid confusing you. Here is an answer to your original question:

    —

    Would anyone like a 3d version of construct soon?

    Yes. Of course. But it surely wouldn't be happening soon. A Game Engine attempted that before, and it shut downed.

  • 3d is pretty much off the table, but 2.5D(ish) would be a reasonable request.

    I mean editor specific tools for such things as isometric, mode7, and orthogonal.

  • There are currently some attempts being made to add eventsheet style programming to Godot

    github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/17795

    If you are interested in an eventsheet capable 3d engine, I would suggest you go and encourage them on that github issue, and maybe it will help motivate them further. The github post is rather long, but as you can see at the end, there are attempts being made to include an eventsheet style way of programming in Godot.

  • It means, what you are asking for may be too ambitious

    I'm not asking for anything though thats the thing.

  • —

    > It means, what you are asking for may be too ambitious

    I'm not asking for anything though thats the thing.

    There are two meanings to "asking":

    1. 1. say something in order to obtain an answer or some information.
    2. 2. request (someone) to do or give something.

    I obviously meant the 1st one. You don't have to divert the attention from the point.

Post reply
Return to board index
Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)