Construct 3 - many questions (native exporterts)

s

Ashley

Here is an edited version of your post that is pretty much exactly what people were saying in 2011:

> C3 must have Flash exporters.

>

.

It's 2015 now and I still want to have Flash exporter, because it's much easier to sell flash games than HTML5 games.

It's 2015 now and I still want to have Flash exporter, because it's much easier to sell flash games than HTML5 games.

Since Flash has many issues all the major browsers will try to block it sooner or later. I don't see any future in Flash.

> It's 2015 now and I still want to have Flash exporter, because it's much easier to sell flash games than HTML5 games.

>

Since Flash has many issues all the major browsers will try to block it sooner or later. I don't see any future in Flash.

That's true. To name some problems with Flash:

• There are concerns about its security. Critical vulnerabilities Adobe has to patch pop up every now and then. There's a reason why Firefox blocks Flash by default now (correct me if it no longer does).
• It doesn't get along with mobile devices. While it's possible to get Flash to work on Android, it's no longer officially supported (and it's not adapted for touch input anyway). iOS devices don't support Flash at all and it's very unlikely to ever change.
• Many websites are already adapting HTML5. YouTube pretty much replaced their Flash player with an HTML5 one. Popular browser game websites (such as Newgrounds) are accepting HTML5 games. Plus, HTML5 actually works on mobile devices, unlike Flash.

I no longer have Flash installed on my computer. I also deactivated the Chrome's Flash plugin. And I'm doing perfectly fine.

It's 2015 now and I still want to have Flash exporter, because it's much easier to sell flash games than HTML5 games.

Unless Adobe suddenly has a burst of passion towards bringing the archaic dinosaur that is Flash up to snuff... it is definitely a dead format. Whatever advantage there is to selling Flash games now will be temporary at best I'm afraid.

byondisoft, Harsh or not, you're just speaking the true reality of game design. Any complaints of Construct 2 not having exporters that other engines do come from unsuccessful people complaining that it's not easy enough. That alone makes the person not really on par for the task of game designing. I can't personally say that I wouldn't like other exporters for Construct 2-3 (although, I will definitely honestly say I'd be willing to spend years making my own exporter if it were actually a plausible thing to do), simply because that'd be awesome. Native export would be great. But we have to think in scope, and consider what is actually profitable and time worthy for Scirra, as well as all of those who spend their time making our designing lives easier. If anyone bites from the hand that feeds them, their in the wrong line of business. Harsh or not, that's the fact of it.

you guys should give gdevelop a try:

http://compilgames.net/

It has a similar approach to programming to constructs's and comes with native exporters for windows,linux and mac. It also does html5, but it can compile native code as well. Being based on sfml, it is also going to in a few months support compiling native code to android.

It's free, open source and has some really neat features. <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile">

They recently added admob, so you can embed ads in your game too.

In a perfect world I think it would be nice for Scirra and ClickTeam to merge, Scrirra would make the event editor as the C2 editor is beyond compare and Clickteam could focus on the native exporters. The software could be called ConFusion and it would be awesome xD

No, but on a serious note, for some people the absence of native export is a deal breaker, and after messing around with C2's export options & 3rd party wrappers I have to be honest, I've decided to work in Fusion. I'm unlikely to buy C3 unless it has "one click" export the same as Fusion does. I greatly respect Scirra and their goals, and like I say the C2 event editor is a real dream to work with, it's beyond compare, but for me personally, the ease of exporting with Fusion is something I value extremely highly.

I know native export is not something Ashley wants to do and I respect that, but I have to say, personally I would be happy to pay a *much* higher price for a C3 with native exporters. GMS goes for $799.99 for the full package, and I'd happily pay that (or more) for a stable C3 with native exporters.

On a final note, I don't understand the slight hostility from some people over this, C2 is what it is, if it's not right for your needs and the future of the software is not heading in the direction you desire then just move on to something else that works better for you personally. There's really no need for bad feelings or accusing C2 devs of "laziness" or other such silliness...

On a final note, I don't understand the slight hostility from some people over this, C2 is what it is, if it's not right for your needs and the future of the software is not heading in the direction you desire then just move on to something else that works better for you personally. There's really no need for bad feelings or accusing C2 devs of "laziness" or other such silliness...

I don´t see "hostility"... Maybe languaje problems? Many of us are not english speakers, is dificult speak/write in other languaje that your own.

In the other things i´m agree with you. I´m Construct "paid" user, and Game Maker "paid" user, and many other app´s "paid" user. I would pay the same of you for an "full-native-export-version" of construct, because I think is the best editor. But In the "present", I only use that to prototipe (...the sprite works well!!!.. ok, put that in GM) , I´m sure that other people is in the same situation. Only wants a "robust" export option. If it don´t happen there is no problem, do the job in other platform and go ahead....

If anyone bites from the hand that feeds them, their in the wrong line of business. Harsh or not, that's the fact of it.

Sorry, I will never agree with that. Construct 2 is what it is - a HTML5 game maker. And probably the best at that. Some people just need to understand that that's what they're buying. Besides that, some of us need to understand that there are no right tools for everything. Every project may demand a different tool and/or skill. What I meant by my post is: it's silly to ask for a product to be a clone of the product from the competition. Personally, I like having different tools for each project. I can agree with users suggesting native exporters though.

That all being said, I haven't faced any problems exporting to Android or Windows. I have a project that has a 4096x4096 scrollable map with many input events and I don't see any slowdown using Cordova ou NW.js. I was testing in my MotoG and I found the game to actually faster than when played in a browser (I just had to workaround some effects slowness and stop usng them though). Maybe those who're having issues with exporters could post their issues here so we can see if they're doing things wrong or if it's really the engine's fault.

i agree completely. people whine too much and learn/work too little. it's a time consuming job, but once done right - gg

I guess we should all be thankful that creating a good, optimized game is so much work or else there'd be 10 million apps in the app stores. I saw something not long ago that there is now software that is for one-click game publishing. I guess the idea is that the game has already been made for you, you just have to click "publish."

Some people just need to understand that that's what they're buying.

Ok, it´s a post called CONSTRUCT 3 - MANY QUESTIONS in a forum of this program and people "ask" for features in construct 3, I´m very confused with this kind of opinion (not confused with construct 2 is), People can´t ask for features?...

[quote=]Any complaints of Construct 2 not having exporters that other engines do come from unsuccessful people complaining that it's not easy enough. That alone makes the person not really on par for the task of game designing. I can't personally say that I wouldn't like other exporters for Construct 2-3

This opinion is make me crazy... my english in very bad: It´s like a criticism to the people that ask for a native exporters in construct with a "native ask" inside?

I don´t understand. Is not necesary to have a forum to a program, and webmaster can delete de mensages. If the webmaster let´s a post go, a post called "CONSTRUCT 3 - many questions", people can give an opinion/ask to construct3. I´m wrong?

I don't understand people who say "Construct 2 is only HTML5 tool".

The main page on http://www.scirra.com contains this phrase "True multiplatform support. Build your game in Construct 2 and publish it to all these platforms."

Also I don't understand people who say "Construct 2 is only for simple games".

The main page on http://www.scirra.com contains "Construct 2 lets YOU make advanced games!"

Sorry, but the only way to have "True multiplatform support" is to create native exporters.

I understand that very simple games can run fast also if they are made via XDK or NW, but "advanced games" can't run well.

And, please, don't tell me that I don't understand anything in game optimisation - in this topic I had already posted the same game via native export and via different versions of XDK - the difference is great.

Construct 2 is the greatest game editor ever. Event-action system is perfect.

I think, In a few years there will appear game engine with perfect event-action system like C2 has and one-click native export like Unity has at the same time.

This future engine will make it's developers VERY RICH.

If Ashley will try his best, this engine will be Construct 3 and Ashley will be very rich.

Otherwise, this engine will be Unity 3 and Ashley will not be very rich.

P.S. Unity is taken just for example. Any other team who will understand that "perfect editor+perfect engine=rich developers" will succeed.

davarrcal: I don't mean to bash anyone's suggestions and I'm aware this is a topic for the next version. I just find it silly to ask for C3 to have the exact same features as the competition. Native exporters are definitely a good idea though. But if that makes the software much more expensive or with subscription fees I'd rather for it to be just an improved version of C2. I'll use Unreal Engine (which is free) if I want to make the next Mass Effect type game. Sorry if my comments sounded a little too harsh.