It is good time to make the Construct great again

That's kind of expected. But on the other hand, if I were in just for the money I'd stop using Construct and start a dropshipping company. Also, there are other ways to make money apart from directly monetizing youtube.

Yes, of course. I never planned to be rich just making Construct tutorials, and even adding other form of monetisation on YouTube is not worth. I'll be back to go back to make tutorials as soon I'll be free again, lately I'm quite busy.

My goal is to use Construct to make a living with my childhood dream job, and I can't complain about it since I'm actually living only thanks to game development at the moment.

Аlso a big problem that can arise in my opinion is the dependency on the Cordova that is used less and less every year and I don't know if this even solvable...

Could move over to capacitor instead of cordova, also accepts cordova plugins.

So - as I make a game... I reach a point where events can't keep up, either because they don't scale, or they lack key functionality. I now have the option to use sdk, or JS directly in construct.

So NOW, it isn't even a competition between construct and unity(or whatever else). Its a competition between the best coding environments... in my case, c# with visual studio support, or javascript without good intelesense/scope with construct. This isn't even a competition. Construct cannot compete in performance or features in this arena. As construct already can't compete feature wise with the big engines, it makes a space for itself by being clean and fast without touching code. WITHOUT TOUCHING CODE.

If construct is to ever be a widely accepted tool for creating anything more than little games, The focus has to be to improve construct's ability to create scalable events, across multiple projects, and include more OOP/features that enable more complex/abstract designs. It needs to implement common design patterns (like observer, decorator, etc) behind the scenes to allow users to use events without performance degradation (as creating these patterns with events impose heavy overheads). The functions need to be rebuilt - no matter how much Scrirra likes them, the user base pretty much is clear on this - they suck. Construct also needs scope. It is monumentally annoying to be working on a behavior for a single object type, but every condition/event have to keep clicking that single type out of a list of 1000 types (folders always default to top, so if you have lots of folders, you get to enjoy drilling down every event you create).

So much of what construct does is great... in small projects. But projects with 1000s of assets get unwieldy in every aspect. You can't even write safe systems to prevent yourself from breaking things. In unity, I mark classes sealed, private, protected, and so on. I can force objects are used in only the ways I intend, but in construct, I can do anything to anything from anywhere. I can call any function from anywhere. Now bring in a collaborator and cry. Static Singletons are okay patterns for a few things, but not for EVERYTHING.

IMO, construct is sitting in a niche, and that is okay. But to really compete, and why it hasn't become a popular tool for console/PC games, is because despite its ease and ALL the THINGS construct does RIGHT - it just doesn't scale.

The moment I hit the code, construct isn't easier than unity - its harder. and I started coded for construct before I ever touched unity.

If there was 1 thing I could change, I think it would be some new idea to sorta have Scirra interact with the community in terms of suggestions.

Like perhaps every month or so, Scirra could run a poll for subscribers, where there's maybe 2,3,or 4 features within the poll, and we can vote on what we wish to see next. How these are chosen, I'm not sure, maybe highly voted ideas from suggestions platform that are rather lengthy to develop.

This would both give Scirra the choice to pick whatever they are happy with developing, and also gives the community a sense of influence over what will come next.

Could stick the poll directly into the start page of C3!

I am a fan of all the unexpected new features that appear, but would definitely feel cool if we can sorta influence C3 regularly, especially since we pay regularly.

Scirra isn't going to steal users away from Unity and Godot easily -- but they can get the RPG maker community easily. There are very few RPG maker based games out there and yet they have a great many users who only ask for a non programming environment -- with with with ... a decent set of starter graphics and sounds.

If you say your strength is to make games without having to program then spending lots of time on tweaks to the JS script is a poor use of time compared to getting people who want to make games without programming with some packaged assets and solid expandable examples that do the dungeon crawl or space opera.

It would take a month, some portraits and some tiles.

yours

winkr7

While I agree that Construct can be improved in many things, I really can't complain about it, because honestly, without it, I would be still dreaming about making a game, or trying to do something with old Basic.

Scirra is a small company, well, that's not something bad. I mean, that could just employ 50+ more people and bankrupt straight away, because before getting the monetary benefit to pay someone fulltime, you need to sell a lot.

I have find many time situations where trying to do something with events is not working and is more complicated than a single code line, but hey, overall I still save lots of time. Yes, improving those inefficiency or weird cases would be of course beneficial for everyone, Scirra, developers and even players.

I have been using C2 and C3 for a total of 10 years now. Yes, I haven't developed great games, but I still don't get the point where some users says that C3 is not scalable. Since "scalable" is a term that can be used in many situations, could you provide me some examples so it's easier to understand what's wrong?

Again, I know some issues are annoying, but once you know the engine you can still work around those with events. I never used JS, aside for a big project in collaboration with someone working in the backend that supervise that, but I don't need so far JS, aside for a couple of experiment I tried with C2.

One example of annoying thing is that once you create an object, you need to wait one tick before being able to treat it as family. Yes it's annoying, but once you know you can make it work. I have some cases where I uses those problems as not intended way to obtain what I need.

About multiplayer, for the little things I made, it works. It might be tricky sometimes, but so far works.

I agree very much on the fact that letting choose to the community what develop next, would help users to get gratified, especially since it's a subscription program and people wants to feel part of it. Maybe 1 out of 5 new things could come from users' suggestions. If we want to avoid new joining users to make unreasonable requests, the vote/suggestion could be limited to users that own construct for at least 1-2+ years.

Scirra isn't going to steal users away from Unity and Godot easily -- but they can get the RPG maker community easily. There are very few RPG maker based games out there and yet they have a great many users who only ask for a non programming environment -- with with with ... a decent set of starter graphics and sounds.

If you say your strength is to make games without having to program then spending lots of time on tweaks to the JS script is a poor use of time compared to getting people who want to make games without programming with some packaged assets and solid expandable examples that do the dungeon crawl or space opera.

It would take a month, some portraits and some tiles.

yours

winkr7

I'm developing an RPG for a client, working part time. It's not really a simple task, especially starting from zero. It has been 10 months so far and we are getting something out now. I think that RPG maker still has an advantage on Construct, being focused only on that part and having loads of things ready.

Yes, you can have a template, but from a template to customise it to make it your RPG it takes time, in addition to experience. No much a novice can do, unless we are just talking about replacing art and text and keep game mechanics as they are.

Biim;

The main point about RPG maker is their users don't ever finish any games and put them on Steam. They might fantasize about making a living writing games but they pay for a platform that doesn't require programming and has a very poor success rate at making you a game published star.

yours

winkr7

Biim;

The main point about RPG maker is their users don't ever finish any games and put them on Steam. They might fantasize about making a living writing games but they pay for a platform that doesn't require programming and has a very poor success rate at making you a game published star.

yours

winkr7

Then it ends on the usual way. It's not an engine problem, it's a skill problem.

If you are skilled and dedicated enough, you can even create an RPG in Basic.

The benefit of the engine is what brings outside of the box, for sure RPG Maker give you a great base for that, on the other hand, Constructs has lots of native movement plugins that are great for other type of games without being able to code much.

Do you want to create a shoot'em up? That's super easy with Construct. You just need Bullet and 8-direction behavior and you have already a great % of the game done even before starting.