Construct 3 any news?

It's still under development with no release date set. It's probably still a long way off.

Unless they have added resources to producing C3 then I believe it will take years to complete.

C2 is an amazing application, but it certainly has a few elements that cause a great deal of frustration. Having just finished my third large c2 project I think my main beef is the primitive IDE.

The main bug bears are Bug Fixing - lack of tools and almost useless breakpoints

Searching through the code is a nightmare.

Also sometimes the code doesn't do what you expect it to do which require strange workarounds.

Anyway I hope they open up C3 to alpha and beta feedback. Soon

Still not actually figured out how break points work or what they do in spite of having read the manual!

Also sometimes the code doesn't do what you expect it to do which require strange workarounds.

Well, if you have concrete examples that may be considered as C2 bugs, please report them, following the bug report guidelines.

If indeed some events are not working as they should because of the way C2 is programmed it first needs to be reported for it to be fixed.

Still not actually figured out how break points work or what they do in spite of having read the manual!

When you set a breakpoint for events in the event sheet and debug your project (not just run the regular preview), the execution of the code/program will stop when the breakpoint is reached and allow you to explore further the objects/values in the debugger.

It would be useful if Debug Pause also highlighted the code in the (and which) event sheet.

I think c2 is great I am a big fan--but most of the time when I try to set a break point it says I can't set one here.

That always seems to be in a function call. I don't want to derail the thread, so I am looking forward to better debugging in C3.

It's years away.. Really?

I thought that it's using the same core - so Ashley would only need to port the GUI of the editor.

If its years away, then it would be worth for me to learn Godot and use that instead in the meantime. It's obviously not as easy as C2, but has native exporters (no need to deal with xdk), can make 3d games and the editor works on linux and mac,as well as windows.

Don't rush the Scirra Team on making Construct 3. If they rush, many unexpected events will happen or it may get incomplete. Besides, it doesn't mean that Construct 3 is finished that it won't have any bugs. Construct 3 will also be like how Construct 2 started, it will certainly have some little problems at first. But if we wait and have patience then Construct 3 will be released properly and tested carefully.

It's years away.. Really?

I thought that it's using the same core - so Ashley would only need to port the GUI of the editor.

If its years away, then it would be worth for me to learn Godot and use that instead in the meantime...

Don't rush the Scirra Team on making Construct 3. If they rush, many unexpected events will happen or it may get incomplete...

(Please note that the following statement is based on facts and my personal opinion!)

I know that rushing is almost never the right way to do something but in this case it really seems like it would only benefit Scirra and their future product.

I don't question their actions nor am I in a position to tell them what they should do but Godot is not something that can just be ignored.

Take it from this point, what could C3 have that Godot doesn't already have or will have?

• Intuitive & Easy Interface (Scene/Layout based): C2/C3 = YES | Godot = YES
• Easy Event Based Editor: C2/C3 = YES | Godot = NO (Promised feature in near, future updates)
• Engine Based Features (Examples): C2/C3 = Basic animation/image editor; "1 click" art and audio import; Web based plugins (Customizable); Runs on Windows (OS X + Linux with C3); Multiple languages (Yes with C3); 2D game development (limited to web standards & changes) and many more features that both engines mostly have in common... Godot = Advanced image & animation editors; "1 click" art and audio import; Native + web based plugins (Promised feature in near, future updates); Runs on Windows + OS X + Linux + FreeBSD + OpenBSD + Haiku; Multiple languages (Yes with future updates); 2D + 3D game development (Native or web based limitations) and many more features that both engines mostly have in common...
• Exporting Options: C2/C3 = Universal (HTML5 + Wrappers) | Godot = Universal (Mostly Native, "1 click deployment")
• Helpful Community & Custom Content: C2/C3 = YES | Godot = YES

To wrap it all up, I think if Godot continues to grow with future updates, C3 won't get a single chance to compete with Godot in terms of uniqueness and features.

As harsh as it sound, about ~20% of Godots current content is already capable of doing the things that C2/C3 are capable of doing.

To go back to C3 itself, how long is C3 already in development 1-2 years, anyway since the last big announcement a lot of time has passed but what does that mean?

For a firstly expected "copy/pasted" engine with a few new features that is a lot of time! I think by now we should be expecting the new "big thing" with cutting-edge features (e.g. improved exporting and other suggested features by the community) because a simple "copy/pasting" process of existing features cannot take this long in my opinion.

As much as I enjoy working with C2 and it's limitations, I'm slowly starting to think about jumping over to other products because of the lack of information and support towards community based feature suggestions.

I know that the most of us here fully support Scirra and their future products but honestly, why would you buy a product when there is another 100% free product which is capable of doing the exact same things but with even more features and helpful tools included?

I mean it is us (the community) that buys and uses the product, without us there wouldn't be C3 and if Godot really stands to their promises... I guess that could mean the end for future products from Scirra.

At last, we can only hope that we get at least a short statement about the current state of C3's development to compensate some of the concerns from the community.

TheRealDannyyy - Now that I read this. I seem to agree that if Scirra doesn't improve then it will be outmatched by Godot. Honestly, the only thing that makes me hesitate in moving to Godot is because of the requirement of knowledge in scripting. But if it is true that Godot will make an easy event based system better than construct 2/3 and a compiler that doesn't make me crazy, then I do not see any reason to move. In my observation Godot seems to be like construct classic when it's easy event system and freeware was still a trend. Scirra is fun and all but we always need to look to something better. Besides Godot is a one click deployment and native, and that seems to solve almost all our problems in C2. Nice sharing TheRealDannyyy

True, if Godot can integrate a visual programming method that can match C2/C3's then Scirra will have a serious competition.

It would be great if we can have a screenshot or something :'( :d

I would prefer to continue with Construct as I have over two years experience in using it. If Scirra bring out a much better IDE, with proper debugging and just improved ease of use then they would be onto an even bigger winner. Looking at godot I suspect that it would have a steeper learning curve than C2 does.

Kyatric I mentioned previously that C2 code doesn't always do what you expect. I wasn't suggesting that they were necessarily bugs more a case of that the flow of code is not always intuitive leading to weird side affects. If I come across a situation again I will see if I can post an example.

Construct will never be outmatched by Godot, because it's a different thing and because of the incredible speed, usability and flow you have in C2. This means everything to me, because I like when I am having flow while working. Godot has no flow what so ever. All this cool features, that godot has means nothing, cause it's not really clear how to use them, you want to make simple tweening and you get lost with all this details in no seconds , how to structure the game in Godot - no idea. Python like scripting language is nice, but again not nearly as usable as c2 event system. Documentation is very sparse, not clear how to do stuf in this engine in general. Godot architecture is 100% aimed at developers, construct is aimed at designers and it's just fun to use.

In C2 everything is so straight forward and clean, even if don't know how to properly do something, you will find it out through categorized event/actions listing, it's a very clever way of mixing documentation with functionality.

I would be super-happy though, if c3 would handle native features like push notifications and animation system. Currnetly I am using it only for rapid prototyping and it's incredible for that. But if you are aiming only for web - it's perfect for 2d web games.

Construct will never be outmatched by Godot, because it's a different thing and because of the incredible speed, usability and flow you have in C2. This means everything to me, because I like when I am having flow while working. Godot has no flow what so ever. All this cool features, that godot has means nothing, cause it's not really...

if Godot really stands to their promises...

That is basically what I meant before.

C2 currently has all those neat features and a good workflow, but obviously Godot gets a lot of attention with monthly updates (not just bugfixes) and by the looks of those it seems like it could outmatch C2/C3 if they stick to their promises and really add those new features.