Who would pay Construct plugin for Unity - Kickstarter?

Ashley announced that C3 would have no 3D Engine. Construct 2 is my first engine i can handle. I wanna work with it further (not only for fast prototyping), because it is easy to use but 3D is that what i really want. Unity 5 seems to be very interesting

.

I know that playMaker is a Best Seller (Unity Asset) but if Construct is easier why Scirra not offer a plugin or/and applink? People could use unity then for export. If it is too expensive they could use Kickstarter or?

Who would support Kickstarter and/or buy it/these?

C3 may not offer a 3D Engine by default, but the ability to make 3D games will be made possible not far from it's release because of the fan base who use it. Are you sure though, that it is completely unsupported? That'd be a major let down.

JamesXXXYZ

I get your situation. however Unity developers mostly(all that I've com across) view C2 as a joke or quaint. PM is a state machine so they get around that situation. But you are where you are with the tools. No Unity developers sees value in duplicating the EventSheet programming model. Scirra is invested in their platform, not Unity's.

Finally and I know I mentioned this elsewhere. Even if someone did ES programming(i'm looking into it). All the Plugins won't be going with it. So you will still be need to create your own plugins or the system will use Reflection to access class names.

But as KTML5 points out. If C3 supports the right tools. Some form of 3D will come shortly after.

Well, it may be a third party plugin -- and a commercial one at that -- but I've heard good things about Quazi's Q3d plug:

—

Ashley: "3D - I've said it before and I'll say it again! It's a whole different product idea IMO, and we're going to stick to a 2D tool for now."

jayderyu

YouTube comment:

Dont take this the wrong way but isnt C2a NO PROGRAMMING approach type product???

IF so then comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. This is for people who want more control over what they do. 

Coding isnt for everyone. I own Clickteam fusion and they have a great way of doing things for people less inclined to code, but you will hit "limitations" were you have to go through very convoluted ways to do something you could do easily with code.

Why are you unhappy about AGKv2, when your so happy about C2. Just stick with C2 if its good for what you need it 

TiAm

Comparing unity5 with Q3D is like apples and oranges.

JamesXXXYZ

Nope. C2 requires tons of PROGRAMMING. The selling point is that developers don't need to CODE. There are two levels to C2. The easy level where you want to only be and that's fine as I'll get to that in a second. And then there is the advanced level where traditional coding occurs.

With sufficient tools you will never need to code. Including guys like Quazi who can make a 3D plugin for developers like you who don't want to pull up the text editor and starting coding. And that's fine. I like C2 because of ES Programming already.

And what Scirra's path with the tool does not stop what others want to enhance it with. That's the entire point of Plugins for C2 and C3 more enhanced IDE for better SDK developer features.

Nope. Totally not worth making a unity plugin.

It can't be done easily so it probably wont.

If you want to have this sort of coding in unity there are some plugins you can buy. I think the best one now is PLaymaker. It is heavily supported, and is getting simpler every day. It uses a node based system that is even easier to read than most game engines.

I think they have a lifetime licence as well. I got mine on sale for around $15. I think it retails for $90. Right now it is $45 on sale.

http://www.hutonggames.com/

They have a few other ones as well that are block based and text based. You just need to shop around the unity store.

Since Construct3 will allow plugins to change the actual editor's GUI, that means that the developer of the Q3D plugin

Should be theoretically able to add the ability to construct's editor to manipulate 3d assets in 3d space.

So in that regard c3 is very much a step in the right direction in terms of allowing the community to evolve both the engine and the editor as they wish.

jayderyu

You mean me with nope? It was Matthew Arnold comment. I don't know what i should answer. AGK2 is for me <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":-)" title="Smile">

Nesteris

I knew that C2 has no 3D engine before i bought it. For me it was better than nothing because i can't script, but my first prototype i changed to isometric view (sprites with dynamic shading and shadows on the ground) until now i have some problems with this view <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_sad.gif" alt=":-(" title="Sad">

3D engine for Construct would maybe work over crowdfunding. I know that a high quality engine is very expensive.

jojoe

I bought playmaker, hope that it was not a mistake because of Uscript. I can't check it out, because unity runs not on vista <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_sad.gif" alt=":-(" title="Sad">

I'm waiting for windows 10 then i wanna buy a new computer.

What is better Playmaker or Uscript?

[attachment=0:1yfmqd59]Something.jpg[/attachment:1yfmqd59]

Edit: THX jojoe