Taking a break from Construct ...

If your goal is to make a complete game by yourself, then Unity will probably get you there faster (not as fast as Construct 2). If your goal is to become a competent game developer with a specific focus, UE4 is probably the most promising tool to learn right now.

Just curious, what makes UE4 take longer? I've watched some tutorials and played with both Unity+Playmaker and UE4, and it seems like UE4 has a lot of tools out of the box that help get things going. I'm still watching the tutorials of course, so I haven't looked at every aspect.

Alternatives

1) Gdevelop

http://compilgames.net/

2)GG Maker

http://store.steampowered.com/app/34740 ... 1_5_9__300

Not sure how easy it is(the visual scripting part)

3)Gameguru (3d -lua script)

https://www.game-guru.com/

4)Buildbox

https://www.buildbox.com/

5)Appgamekit (pure coding -basic or c++)

http://www.appgamekit.com/

6)Paradox3d (desktop games + xamarin for mobile)

7)Wave game engine (desktop games+xamarin) - really clean api...

8)Godot

9)Urho3d or Atomic Game Engine

I would go for unity or ue4 just for employment or career path. Since these two tools are really popular for professional small game studio companies. Never saw a single job ads for construct 2 in my country..

I personally think html5 for games might drop popularity for web assembly. All those C++ game engines might be more popular than html5 game engines in future.

I don't think one can compare a 3D engine and what you can do there with a 2D engine - or rather game creator - like Construct 2.

3D brings it's own set of challenges etc.

The choice is quite easy i think and I agree that you need to decide what game you want to make, look at the game creators and engines and then decide on one best suited.

If you want to make a FPS you are not goign to choose Construct 2 or GameMaker etc. even though technically you can make a Wolfenstein clone etc. Much better to use UE4 or Unity for that.

I think C2's competition is Gamemaker, Stencyl and Fusion 2.5 and much more likely Fusion 3 at the end of the year / early next year when they get a better .

Scirra decided to stick with HTML5. imho the mobile stuff will get sorted, a proper Steamworks plugin will be made one day

The arguments the OP gave for taking a break from Construct 2 is not really related to 3D. One of his points does highlight it but he lists:

Reason 1: C2 uses developing/unfinished technology - Well, tech always continues and its good to get in early sometimes

Reason 2: Limited commercial possibility - I don't think C2 limits the commercial possibility at all. In fact, it makes it more possible due to it being easy to create games.

All systems and game engines has its issues:

C2: Fantastic code system, and great price but performance / export lacking for mobile, No native export.

Stencyl: Great performance and code system, but terrible Ui (imho) and subscription price model.

Fusion 2.5: Great performance and powerful plugins but the click system is a bit weird and the UI feels very old. Lots of built in ceilings from older Multimedia Fusion. (this will be gone in Fusion 3.) Each exporter is paid for and not really cheap.

Gamemaker Studio: Click together scripting and code, but the click system is old and the Ui is not nearly as good as Scirra. Expensive exports, forums disjointed.

Unreal Engine 4: Free but takes 5% royalties after $3000, much more overhead to work on and much higher learning curve. Blueprints powerful but ideally coding will be needed

Unity: same as unreal more or less. Have to learn code to use it properly

So yeah...decide what you can and can't live with and make a choice. The OP did this for his reasons. We all will have our own reasons to stick with C2 or move on. At least we are all making games and thats fantastic.

In my mind Constructs main competition is going to be Fusion3 in terms of similar workflow. I left multimedia Fusion some years ago, not because i didn't like the software but because i felt it never lived up to its potential. They were also poor at communication and slow to update.

If the rumoured Fusion 3 features are to be believed it will have all the features of C2 and non of the problems.

If the rumoured Fusion 3 features are to be believed it will have all the features of C2 and non of the problems.

That remains to be seen

It's not just the lacking in export options or performance on mobiles.

It's the lacking in export for Xbone and PS4, the major gaming market.

Look at all the studios that make cross-platform games, it ends up selling 5-10x better on consoles than PC.

Aurel nailed it when he posted awhile ago. C2 limits your options as a gamedev, so if you're not okay with that, then go with Unity/UE4.

host online (html5) -> you got it all

>

> If your goal is to make a complete game by yourself, then Unity will probably get you there faster (not as fast as Construct 2). If your goal is to become a competent game developer with a specific focus, UE4 is probably the most promising tool to learn right now.

>

>

Just curious, what makes UE4 take longer? I've watched some tutorials and played with both Unity+Playmaker and UE4, and it seems like UE4 has a lot of tools out of the box that help get things going. I'm still watching the tutorials of course, so I haven't looked at every aspect.

The sheer size of it. Like you say, there are a LOT of tools. And all of them are pretty complex by themselves, so it's most suitable for cooperation. Projects also tend to be big and heavy, which leads to slow compilation times, downloads, etc. Maintaining builds can be more complicated as well.

There isn't a huge difference between the two (they are still the closest thing to each other), but all in all I would say that UE4 is more user friendly with specific tools or tasks and Unity is more user friendly with regards to setting up and maintaining a complete project by yourself.

Cool, I'm going to be following more tutorials and doing more tests this week in UE4. So far, some things I wanted to do seem easier in UE4. It just seems like it was designed more for the kinds of games I want to make.

By the end of this week, I should know if I will want to work with UE4 or not.

Cool, I'm going to be following more tutorials and doing more tests this week in UE4. So far, some things I wanted to do seem easier in UE4. It just seems like it was designed more for the kinds of games I want to make.

By the end of this week, I should know if I will want to work with UE4 or not.

Let us know the details how c2 compares with it, and is it difficult to switch?

Let us know the details how c2 compares with it, and is it difficult to switch?

So far, Blueprint seems pretty easy to learn. Obviously it will take a little time to master a new program. I mean, I've been using C2 for nearly 2 years, and UE4 with Blueprints for less than a week. But, I'm picking it up pretty quickly.

Since I'm used to working in 3d, I don't think UE4 is that hard to work with. There are a lot of things here, but nothing really seems that hard to understand.

It seems more geared towards making a game. I mean, there are templates for a variety of game types already there to test. Setting up controls and programming them with Blueprints seemed easier than it was in Unity. The AI has more features built in such as a behavior tree. I easily found an animation timeline for triggering sounds or events at specific times during an animation. That feature seemed more hidden in Unity.

I'm not going to jump the gun and say which is better yet. I spent the last week or two with Unity. So, now I want to give UE4 some time. I'll probably be studying it for several hours a day at least. Hopefully, I can get a little prototype going by the end of the week and see if it's right.

I'll be recreating the same game I made here, but probably with manual third person controls instead of point and click. I'd like to make the player controllable this way so I can add in traps or physics puzzles and just make the game world a bit more interactive. Both of these things seemed easier in UE4. I even saw a feature of quickly creating destructible objects. At least to me, this stuff just seems more ready to go in UE4 than with Unity.

Anyway, I'll report back after I've had some more time with it.

Thanks for all the replies. Yes, before making my mind on Unity I also tested UE4. Here are the 2 engines compared:

Unreal Engine 4:

• UE4's lightning and overall visual aspect is better than Unity's
• Blueprints is an official plugin, developed by Epic themselves (unlike Playmaker that is 3rd party)
• Blueprints is free (Playmaker is not)
• Assets Store still has some catch to do

Unity:

• Unity have more export options (supports Blackberry, Tizen, Samsung's Smart TV, even WiiU and the new 3DS)
• Unity (+ Playmaker) has a sh!tload of tutorials (there were a lot of UE3 tutorials and books about UnrealScript, but UE4 uses C++ and Blueprints, rendering previous learning materials useless)
• Assets Store has almost anything you can think of
• Unity projects are easier to manage by a small team/indie
• Unity seems to be easier to port on other platforms compared to UE4 that seems more complex/optimized.

Long story -> short: Unreal engine is better suited for bigger teams where Unity is better suited for smaller teams/indie

To reply to some of the comments

Agree.

i already moved on to unity + playmaker

but i also track scirra for the new engine and i hope it will not disappoint me

Same here

At least for me

UE4 blueprint nodes speaks to me better and they are managed and maintain by people from UE4 who constantly makes them better and faster. They are although 10-12 times slower than pure C+ but I'm just learning and not doing another AAA game (which in most cases they should be called BDB games - Beta Dollars Bugs xD) so i don't mind.

But i hope they will soon figure it out (which are doing all the time) how to remove VM from blueprints and then it will be the same speed as C+

Not to discouraged or anything, you can still make games with it

I didn't knew this. Still, unless you do some really complex AI, I think you will not feel any slowness since is native. From what I can see Playmaker is C# code and the Nodes UI are just shortcuts for that functions/scripts (or something like that).

Interesting discussion.

Wouldn't it be amazing if one could have a 3D Construct? I like Constructs's events system and being able to use that power in 3D.

I know it wont happen but it will be something brand new. never been done as far as i am aware.

3D games...well i come from making Flash Educational games then moved over to some 3D visualization games in Garagegames Torque 3D but we had a small team. So i was mainly level / Environment designer and others coded.

My main job now is Drupal and Sharepoint work so non interactive gaming but always thought to get back into 3D.

Thing is it's tough as well. 3D is not as easy as 2D to make WELL. If you don't make 3D well it looks amateur. An amateur 2D game can have some style or some sort of feel to it that cannot be captured in 3D.

However, with VR and AR i see a big boost in the gaming arena with 3D games and VR tech. Nielsen marketing i think it was, said that it will be a $ 150 billion industry by 2020.

...

Yes, with all the new "toys" (Oculus Rift, Microsoft HoloLens ... etc) the 3D has become more engaging, regardless the engine/technology used.

...

I personally think html5 for games might drop popularity for web assembly. All those C++ game engines might be more popular than html5 game engines in future.

By the time when WebAssembly will be mature enough, HTML5 will be on another level.

host online (html5) -> you got it all

More or less ... And how do you get some profit by doing that ? Only Ads ?

You won't make any profit at all if you don't make anything. It seems more like a what it can't do thread than what can I do thread.

I'm sorry but when I see the complaint about not being able to export to consoles with heavy licensing, and yet no one seems to want to make content on a platform that requires none I get a little annoyed.

This is nothing but excuses, and blame.

Consctruct was useful for me to, but my projects are migrated to GM (one) and GDevelop (the other). GDevelop is great!!! , more "hard" and a less friendly that construct, but, you can write events in C++, is portable (same of construct, you can open without "administrator access" in the computer, no instalation), you can export natively in windows//linux (no chomium) and still exports html5. The entire engine is open source (you can change it) and one of the best things is that your "assets" are compiled (I make some proofs... no "unzippable" archives, realy! in chromium all the assets are in one archive that you can open with 7zip) That´s only in windows, HTLM5 is still HTML5 (crosswalk to APK, and the problems with this, people know)

Gdevelop will be a "first step" to UE4, C++ will be "inevitable" for me, so better start now with this!!!

But still grateful with construct, i don´t regret buy my personal licence. Is great software and their "event" programing is a good start, very educational.

Funny how black and white life seems to some people.

So if you use Unity or Unreal, you cant use C2 anymore?

If you start using another engine you need to burn your bridge on the way out?

If you drink Pepsi, you can not ever drink Coke again?!?!?? (And you must list the top 10 reasons you switched on a public forum?!!?)

I dunno... For 2D games Unity is a pain the the ass.

*You need to make your own Atlas, which C2 does for you automatically.

*Unity you have to specify the image type, the way it renders, and the compression it uses to save it on export, FOR EVERY SINGLE IMAGE!. C2, I just drag and drop.

*Unity you need to buy other core elements like PLaymaker, Shaderforge, and maybe some AI.... C2 has webGL shaders built right in! A* AI, line of sight....etc...

Anyway, even after learning C#, and PLaymaker, I prefer doing my 2d games in Construct 2. I only use Unity for my 3D work.