- What you want in C2 for 2015 -

> So stop developing C2 - it is flawed because it is HTML5.

> Start work on C3, and go back to targeting the OS, Win\Mac\Linux.

>

I think this might be the wrong engine for you if that is how you feel.

Agreed ; the whole idea is to target a technology that is, to some extent, portable. This pushes a lot of the complexity onto external modules. As soon as we start questioning this philosophy, we start talking about a whole different engine and set of tools.

So yes, relying on web-related technologies can be annoying and frustrating at times, but it is still much much much simpler than developing a cross-platform engine using native solutions and/or custom abstraction layers. Unless we drop the multi-platform aspect and focus on one or two desktop solutions ; but that wouldn't be Construct anymore...

Just having some rendering and shaders that work on both OpenGL (for desktop, and ideally on Windows you'd really want DX11, given the state of the OGL plugins...) and OpenGL ES (for mobile) is a significant amount of work and a major pain in the rear as it breaks as easily as HTML5 with OS-updates...

Start work on C3, and go back to targeting the OS, Win\Mac\Linux.

Following on Refeuh , QuaziGNRLnose and Tylermon , I'd like to remind that there is also a heavy, well established concurrence there. I mean, C2 is clearly an impressive tool to develop html5 games. But as far as targeting Desktop platforms (and consoles) is concerned, there are plenty of solid alternatives out there... game maker, unity, clickteam fusion, the unreal engine, to only name a few well-known pieces of software. There's even the open source Godot, which proved to be quite impressive!

Html5 is both a strong bet on the present and the future - don't forget it's a relatively young tech, and it's already pretty reliable!

I've only been using C2 for a few months and am massively impressed by what it has to offer. It's a big improvement over Stencyl, which I used previously. There are however a few things which I find are missing in C2:

1. More collision control

Stencyl has far more control over the collisions. In C2 it's limited to 'Colliding Yes/No?'. Overlap can be used creatively to solve a lot of this simplicity, but it shouldn't take multiple objects and event code to check for a collision specifically on the left side of an object. So more complexity in terms of actions/conditions for collision would strangely make our lives a lot easier. Another thing that Stencyl does well with collisions is that it groups colliders and allows more of them per object. This can be used to for example have a separate collider for the player's interaction with the terrain and one for interaction with enemies. Often you would want those to be different sizes or even shapes. The terrain collider needs to be wide, to for example allow players to easily land on ledges. The enemy collider however is generally made a bit smaller, to give the player a bit more leeway when close to enemies. This is possible in C2, but requires a lot of events, objects and pinning. It could be so much simpler.

2. Easier individual object targeting

If you want ten objects to each target other objects for some sort of action you need to write a targeting event and use number of text variables to set the targets in the level editor. If there was some sort of object variable, the number/text matching for targeting would be unnecessary and would make everything go a lot quicker.

3. A useful lighting/shadow system

The current implementation of lighting and shadows are pretty bad/useless. Light and shadows never stops, which is kind of the only thing that matters for most implementations. The shadows look terrible and if they don't they have terrible performance. A decent light/shadow system could make a lot of games work more intuitively and look much better. Just look at Thomas Was Alone or Monaco what difference the light/shadows make there.

HTML5 + Javascript is really a great choice for a game engine, the performance isn't optimal, but that sacrifice is worth it for the portability

At the beginning of Construct 2 I held a very negative stance towards HTML5. Once C2 developed further and my own experience grew, there was a certain enthusiasm about being able to develop for almost any device. Only owning an older android device, I even went ahead and bought a Nexus tablet.

Unfortunately I was pretty soon disenchanted, because the performance was and still is a very fragile thing if you're trying something remotely advanced. Construct 2 heavily relying on third parties for exporting options to different platforms doesn't help the issue either. If there's a problem with these, it is not only out of your own control, but Scirra can't do anything about it directly either.

Overall it gives more of the impression of a bit of a mess rather than a great breakthrough in portability. To me at least.

Granted, it also depends on what kind of games you want to develop. C2 attracts a whole "new" group of developers, who want to make game apps. Casual games rather than, well, core games. I can see this being a good business decision for Scirra. At the same time I can't deny it makes me feel a bit alienated.

All I really want in C2 is a better editor sdk for plugin devs, and all the other features would then come from it eventually.

In a podcast interview not too long ago Ashley stated this would be one of the major things for Construct 3. I also got the impression that C3 might come earlier than expected and C2 will then stop being extended, but still maintained. Don't kill me please if I'm incorrect here.

In my personal opinion (as a non programmer), C2 has the best visual and intuitive interface/coding system for creating a game. THE BEST.

I tried to move to unity or gamemaker or whaterver. But the result is the same: I'm not a coder and only C2 gives me "Magical powers".

So I would love to keep C2 as my main game creation tool but it has a weak point and a serious one if you want to do cormmercial products : the exporters. (with all the issues we can read for months)

I don't know if we can imagine 'solid native exporters' for every platforms (even consoles). I would be ok to buy the option for each exporter even hundred dollars (like the other engines do).

But Ashley said it would be too difficult to maintain.

"I WANT TO BELIEVE" anyway.

I would like to see some more store improvements;-) cause of my good sales, this was my favourite feature in 2014

> HTML5 + Javascript is really a great choice for a game engine, the performance isn't optimal, but that sacrifice is worth it for the portability

>

At the beginning of Construct 2 I held a very negative stance towards HTML5. Once C2 developed further and my own experience grew, there was a certain enthusiasm about being able to develop for almost any device. Only owning an older android device, I even went ahead and bought a Nexus tablet.

Unfortunately I was pretty soon disenchanted, because the performance was and still is a very fragile thing if you're trying something remotely advanced. Construct 2 heavily relying on third parties for exporting options to different platforms doesn't help the issue either. If there's a problem with these, it is not only out of your own control, but Scirra can't do anything about it directly either.

Overall it gives more of the impression of a bit of a mess rather than a great breakthrough in portability. To me at least.

Granted, it also depends on what kind of games you want to develop. C2 attracts a whole "new" group of developers, who want to make game apps. Casual games rather than, well, core games. I can see this being a good business decision for Scirra. At the same time I can't deny it makes me feel a bit alienated.

> All I really want in C2 is a better editor sdk for plugin devs, and all the other features would then come from it eventually.

>

In a podcast interview not too long ago Ashley stated this would be one of the major things for Construct 3. I also got the impression that C3 might come earlier than expected and C2 will then stop being extended, but still maintained. Don't kill me please if I'm incorrect here.

I feel somewhat the same way about being alienated. My imagination doesn't really consider casual games. I'd really really like to actually want c2 to work as it should, so that license I've payed for would not be a waste, but also so I can finish my game.

I kind of fail to see why there is still those "get rid of html5", no, it is not "fairly new technology" the thing, but relying on 3rd party was one of the most important aspects, and I could be wrong but everyone should have already known that fact at the time they bought it (if not, it is not my problem but either scirra's or yours so I feel like I can say that without too much trouble), not that it does not bother me, but I knew it could have been an issue. And also I would bet if scirra did not had gone for html5, there would not have been C2, but nothing at all, not like it was a choice, but that is not even the issue.

The same way I would not use a screwdriver to pin a nail on the wall, C2's problem is not html5, it is not relying on 3rd parties either, that is what made it altogether, C2's issue might be trying to go outside of its realm while not doing it completely: you either go full and rely only on the operating system itself (natively), or stay in the browser realm, by taking simply the browser out of the customer equation (as you choose it for him, which is not your job at all), you break that chain and become responsible for no good reason.

When I saw first time the awesomium export (which was the first exe exporter), I liked the concept but feared 2 things, and who would have known, both happened:

-html5 is still an unviable target for multiplatform games (not because of performances obviously, but because it is easier to go squatting other platforms rather than using this one), C2 can handle really nice games on desktops and mobiles and tablets (won't run on iphone4? only useful if you target it), yet most of non wrapped games are simple templates it seems.

-rely on 3rd parties when it should not be the case: browser gaming (or browser activities in general) rely on the browser interpreting correctly everything in a fast way, that is completely fine for reasons I should not have to describe on an html5 game engine forum, however, wrapping your games just does not cut it, the performance improvement do not exist (or is very low), you still rely on an interpreter to do the job correctly (and it can fail pretty miserably), even if they are working correctly:What is the point? distribution and selling? Seems more like a shortcut to NOT correct that issue in the html5 platform. Functionnalities? Makes sense, but most of what I saw were just adding advertisements to android games, which is doable in an html5 game (even on a webpage), and if that is not the case, that is not the technology that is limiting us, again.

The same way emulators are not affiliated with the consoles manufacturers (apart from SEGA and their genesises emulators), wrappers (which emulates a web environnement) should be the responsability of the end user of C2/or the end user of the game itself, and not something that is a "feature".

however if they go into C3, they can do whatever they want, since it would be a new program subject to another license, other objectives, etc.. but for C2, deleting html5 would be not only sad, but would also counter what they are saying they are selling (which is an html5 engine).

The longer i've worked with Construct 2, the more i've realised that it's rather impossible to create an advanced mobile game without having major performance issues.

So i've started to develope a PC game instead.

So for me as well, rather than trying to improve something that's relying more on mobile hardware than HTML5 / Javascript capabilities to achieve better results on mobile. I would suggest to look forward to the real an original gamers. (PC, Mac, Linux, Consoles)

Just look at The Next Penelope, Cosmochoria or Airscape.

It would be great to see more original C2 games getting available on steam, and on consoles in near future!

No one talks about mobile games after 1 year of it's release...

Looking forward to:

1. Expanded solid behavior so we can turn solid objects in relations to other selected objects.

2. Menu and inventory object. Of course we can program it ourselfs, but it would be great to have BASIC tools we can work fast with, removing mundane tasks. An decreasing the amount of events. I would say that the most games are using these objects.

3. A stable and well performing DESKTOP EXPORTER pc/mac/lnx and next-gen Consoles!

4. A useful lighting/shadow system to immerse players into visualy and atmospheric better games

5. Isometric tools!

Construct 2 is a 2D game engine... some of the best games in the past, and still today, rely on an isometric layout! Currently working with C2 it's a pain in the *** to work on anything that's isometric. Giving us helpfull tools would be a relief for everyone working with it. And maybe attract others to give it a try.

6. MYSQL connection tools. Give us the possibilites to set up a secure connection to a SQL database and let us use it as a library and saving option.

7. Dedicated Servers!

Looking forward to the next generation of Constructers

Everade Thx for taking some of my point on board. I agree with rest of your aditional points, but I think you agree with me too that online must wait till we have a stable and streamlined local environment.

michael

I agree with everything that you said ...

I also know that none of these thing are going to happen.

I remember bringing up points like this before, especially the 3D part ...

and I also remember being shot down by Ashley for bringing up these points.

So I simply stopped asking about new features.

Ashley,

i've a question about C2 internal design.

Actually C2 is using layer and Z-order priority for the draw.

Did you thing you could add/implant a global scene graph / node graph for add more global and usefull feature like timeline or other one listed ?

How does a timeline work with events?

Also, if you want to look at the future, look at the past.

We haven't had any new official plugs/ behaviors in a long time, most of the recent updates have all been for performance, and mobile performance.

If you look at the forum, those are the majority of complaints. Squeaky wheels, and all.

That pretty much means we are at the plateau of what the current editor can do, and improvements beyond that will probably fall to C3.

That probably also means a new licence as well.

Well if C3 is the plan Ashley better start quick...Fusion 3 is on the horizon and sounds very promising and every other engine is well ahead already. I don't really get the hype for C3 anyway tbh..sure an improved editor is great but the real problem is html5 and 3rd party dependencies and that is not changing.

Well if C3 is the plan Ashley better start quick...Fusion 3 is on the horizon and sounds very promising and every other engine is well ahead already. I don't really get the hype for C3 anyway tbh..sure an improved editor is great but the real problem is html5 and 3rd party dependencies and that is not changing.

What worries me is that c2 never got to a state where a game can actually perform well, so moving on to c3 would mean that money i spent on the license were wasted.

EDOIT@ Also, yes, isometric editor would be neat. But at the same time, I'm not sure if it's that hard to do it trough events. All you need is to have a thin sprite that will work as a collision mask for bottom of characters, and z-ordering.