Construct Classic is "officially" dead?

Hello guys.

Recently, I started to think that Scirra Construct (I still remember those good days when it was so named) as the Open Source ptoject does not interest anyone.

So, I would like to ask a very important question "why is this happening?"

Why is nobody interested in further development of Construct (Classic)? Why no one wants to work just for the great idea?

I mean the idea of creating a High Quality Open Source Game Maker for everyone. This is just because some people are only interested in making a profit? Or maybe we just don't have people who can do this?

Personally, I think that Scirra Construct needs to be "reborn" in new form. For example, it may even be a new game maker, new community, etc.

What are your views and suggestions on this?

<font size="1">Or maybe no one cares about this situation?</font>

It's far from dead, it's just that the people working on it are pretty busy. Still, I think an update will be coming in the next month or so (to r2 from current r1.2).

The main reason no updates are coming through as fast as they used to is because it's now in a condition where it can be used to make fully featured games. Sure there's some bugs and workarounds that are needed, but Construct Classic is ready for making almost any (2D) game you want with it.

If you look at all the plugins and effects members have contributed on the forums you'd find that there really is a lot of content that's been made, and it might be that people are busy using Construct Classic instead of improving it so they can.

Don't worry about Construct Classic, it will never die out because it's still the most powerful 2D game creation tool around, and it's still free and open source.

*sigh*

this is like the 80th thread/post like this

not your fault, I know.

no, it's not dead. I and others have completed the next version. here's the changelog:

<img src="http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1013446/forumhelp/Capture5.PNG" border="0">

Ashley is the only who can build CC, and he's very busy with C2, being the sole developer for that.

there was a problem with the original attempt at building the next version, and after the rebuild, I requested a second rebuild when I found a problem with one of the new features. Ashley had just reformatted his machine, so this required him to setup all the CC building software/configurations.   I suppose that Ashley has been busy since then. I would say to expect it any day now, but in previous threads, the word "soon" or the words "any day now" have received a less than favorable response, as they have been tossed around since late november.

So in all honesty, I have no idea when it will be released.   However, Ashley has repeatedly assured me that as soon as he has the time he will release it, most recently on January 23rd. Also, on the "not dead" front, I've already begun the changelog for R3(still very tiny).

I don't require money to continue developing or wanting to develop construct classic, however there is a fundry account for construct classic to request new features/fixes, that would definitely be a good motivator to add or fix things. As I've recently switched over to full time development, so, like Ashley, I need to focus on work that has the potential for profit, though I still try to make time to do the CC thing regardless. If anyone decides to go the fundry route, I will say that while all of the(3 or so) people still developing CC, only one of us(rojohound) owns the Prof-UIS library required to make changes to the IDE(the editor) itself. The rest of us can make changes to the runtime, and to plugins.   

There's been one fundry request thus far, and a single contribution to an animator I was working on, but it's planned as a commercial project, so I can't use the fundry for it.

so.. just wanted to reiterate - CC is NOT DEAD.

the R2 changelog is comparable in size to the R1 changelog, and work has begun on the version after that.

thanks for your interest!

Sure there's some bugs and workarounds that are needed, but Construct Classic is ready for making almost any (2D) game you want with it.

Current functions is enough to create a simple games, but not enough to create a serious, complex in structure 2D games.

lucid

I understand what you mean. It's so obvious. But the project is being developed too slowly. And in any case this is not the best way of development. Therefore, it's could be described as a kind of "death".

It's still (technically) in development, people still care about its development, it's still capable of making "serious", complex 2D games, it's still the same old Construct. Yeesh.

What is it you want to see in CC anyway? Maybe instead of that ^ you could elaborate on features and/or changes you and your project may benefit from? There's probably a chance some of your suggestions may make it into the next build.

"Personally, I think that Scirra Construct needs to be "reborn" in new form. For example, it may even be a new game maker, new community, etc."

It was.

>

> Sure there's some bugs and workarounds that are needed, but Construct Classic is ready for making almost any (2D) game you want with it.

Current functions is enough to create a simple games, but not enough to create a serious, complex in structure 2D games.

while some of the most exciting projects are still in development, I'd say you're completely wrong on this point. Cc is more than functional and powerful enough to make any 2d game. loot pursuit, yokai, my mantis demo, zotged/daiz's unnamed(?) title, minitroid, towerclimb, and many others look as good as if not better than alot of(most) toptier 2d games, definitely good enough to compete with steam's indie 2d offerings. It does all the dx boiler plate code for you, as fast as can be expected. Over 1000 sprites on screen each moving and detecting collisions without slowdown, pixel shaders, distort maps....I completely disagree with you on this point. I can't think of a single 2d title that couldn't be done in cc, aside from multisprites as seen in Shank and CastleCrashers and skinned bone multisprites as seen only in Rayman Origins, though both of these features will be available soon(the former sooner than the latter) upon release of/eventual update to (shameless plug) Spriter.

lucid

I understand what you mean. It's so obvious. But the project is being developed too slowly. And in any case this is not the best way of development. Therefore, it's could be described as a kind of "death".

I think as Ashley gets further into c2, and more used to CC releases, it would only speed the process.   In any case, anyone who wants to join up and help is free to.   If you know c++, its very easy to work with the sdk, and make changes. I disagree with you on this deadness as well. A completed release awaiting building, and another begun before it's even released is far from death. Also, shameless plug here, but when spriter 1.0 releases, it'll be coming to CC first, and I think that will breathe new life into it, let alone when the c2 plugin comes out, and people can create assets that load in html5 and cc exe's, opening the possibility to have an experience shared between the web and desktop.

Not to beat a dead pony, but I just want to reiterate the first point again. Cc is THE most powerful 2d game creator, and the easiest to use, a too-good-to-be-true combination. Mess around with it, ask around in the forums, and save frequently, then see if you can find a single limitation keeping you from making the game you want.

Current functions is enough to create a simple games, but not enough to create a serious, complex in structure 2D games.

I disagree with that. All the features you get with CC are particularly suited for serious, complex structured games. The powerful and fast ACE, the groups, the includable event sheets, the function object, arrays, hash tables, pixel shaders, the fabulous workhorse 's', and hardware accelerated DirectX 9 graphics, that beat any flash game in terms of speed.

I will soon post an example cap that features a music sequencer (well, the code for it and the functionality, no fancy graphics) - completely driven by 's' and the function object and even running autonomous. Yes, it is not a game. But it is highly complex.

Also, I'd call something like thumbwars (was it the correct title?) a complex structured game, as well as some of the games already posted on these forums. Just open your eyes, you'll find enough evidences to proof CC's capability to do complex structured games.

Maybe you mean you can't do complex games right out of the box? Then you're right. But there's no tool in this world, that can do this for you. You need time, you need to manage everything smart, you need to fight against your weaker self from time to time - but CC is always with you.

It was.

What do you mean? HTML 5 games, new design of forum with achievements, etc. That's not what I expected.

Over 1000 sprites on screen each moving and detecting collisions without slowdown, pixel shaders, distort maps

Everything is relative.

Over 1000 sprites (512x512) on layer with 5 shader effects, and you'll see a drop in performance. About the numerous bugs of physics behavior, I generally keep quiet.

When I see 60 fps in big 3D games with large (high resolution) textures, DX11 and 10-15 fps with DX9 and 5-6 shader effects in 2D Construct applications, it makes me laugh.

loot pursuit, yokai, my mantis demo, zotged/daiz's unnamed(?) title, minitroid, towerclimb

I've seen it all. It did not impress me. Too corny.

Maybe you mean you can't do complex games right out of the box? Then you're right. But there's no tool in this world, that can do this for you.

I'm talking about simplifying creation of more complex processes. Construct has already taken the first steps in this direction. I mean the idea of visual programming. There's so much that can still be done.

When I see 60 fps in big 3D games with large (high resolution) textures, DX11 and 10-15 fps with DX9 and 5-6 shader effects in 2D Construct applications, it makes me laugh.

What makes me laugh is how comparing two technologies of 10 years of age difference is relevant ?

How come you can't do everything in windows XP like you can in win7 ?

That's the same kind of question/remark/comparison and heresy.

=> 10 years of development, 10 years of technology, 10 years of improvement of the computer gear and the worldwide spread of those.

There's so much that can still be done.

That's true. As Lucid said feel free to pick up your C++ compiler and help the CC community out.

> loot pursuit, yokai, my mantis demo, zotged/daiz's unnamed(?) title, minitroid, towerclimb

I've seen it all. It did not impress me. Too corny.

Harsh Qwary, some of those games are absolutely impressive! I havent seen them all but look at the yokai vids on you tube of the movement - or loot persuits take on the turn based combat.

Im not sure who made this: youtube.com/watch

Lol, take back that comment sir! :)

When I see 60 fps in big 3D games with large (high resolution) textures, DX11 and 10-15 fps with DX9 and 5-6 shader effects in 2D Construct applications, it makes me laugh.

It makes me laugh, too. Why do you think that comparing the almost two times faster DX11 to DX9 and comparing the completely C++ written engines of "big 3D games" with an event system of a 2D game maker could make any sense? If you need that 3D speed, then write your game in C++ using one of the many C++ engines out there. If you need comfort in 2D, stick to CC. You won't find a faster 2D game maker (even Torque2D included).

I've seen it all. It did not impress me. Too corny.

What is corny about a realtime calculated mantis movement with smooth movement transitions? I wonder what you expect of a 2D game?

I'm talking about simplifying creation of more complex processes. Construct has already taken the first steps in this direction. I mean the idea of visual programming. There's so much that can still be done.

But simplifying the creation of more complex processes is exactly what I meant. You won't get it, unless you use a game maker that is specialized on one type of game (e.g. an rpg maker, or an adventure maker, etc.).

Visual programming? Like placing your sprite on the layout, load its animations and put on a movement behavior? I think it already is very visual. Or do you hope for some kind of visual scripting? That won't happen, because Ashley decided to go with ACE. But there are a few other engines that support visual scripting. Have a look at UDK or Unity. While they are 3D engines, you can also do 2D by just ignoring the 3rd axis.

I downloaded both, but decided to stay with CC, just because of the ease of use. But then again, I also do not make games with 1024? textures or a dozen of complex pixel shaders. I would really like to know, what you use that huge textures for? Until today, I did not see any 2D game making use of them, so maybe you've come up with a totally new idea, that might be worth being used with a 3D engine under C++ and DX11 instead?

I admire all of your debating skills, guys, but I doubt if they will alter Qwary's opinion - it's obviously deeply rooted.

But he is entitled to his own opinion, so I say leave him with it.

Personally, I am happy to wait for the next release, and hang my head because I am too damn lazy to teach myself C++ in order to help :(

My continuing thanks to you all.

Martin

...let alone when the c2 plugin comes out, and people can create assets that load in html5 and cc exe's, opening the possibility to have an experience shared between the web and desktop.

Wow... for real? That sounds awesome!

> ...let alone when the c2 plugin comes out, and people can create assets that load in html5 and cc exe's, opening the possibility to have an experience shared between the web and desktop.

Wow... for real? That sounds awesome!

yes, I meant spriter assets in particular, and an eventual level editor, but that's even further down the line. I think a good usage would be to allow people to create characters and play mini games with them online, and link them to the full paid exe game where they can download those same characters and use them in a full game

In regards to the op, more for the sake of any other new users that stumble upon this thread, since op's most recent post is beginning to sound a bit trollish in tone. Right, I said 2d games. I've never seen a 2d game with 5 shaders and thousands of 512x512 objects on the screen. Just for the sake of expirementing I just made a cap with 1000 objects randomly selected from a pool of 256 different 512x512 textures all rotating moving and detecting collisions, and all on screen at the same time, and it was still running at well over 100 fps.   Granted it didn't have shaders, but seeing as how you can only actually fit 8 or 9 on a very hi res screen, not to mention how quick you'll run out of vram doing frame by frame animation at that size(not because it's cc, but because of how vram and frame based animation works), I don't see what you'd need more power than that for, and we're talking 2d games here. That amount of power is beyond overkill, and well into ridiculous.   That means you have more than enough power to make something like castle crashers but where you could zoom in until individual characters are half a screen tall with no pixellation or blurriness. I've never seen anything even close to this in a 2d game.

And regardless of what you call corny, the aforementioned games taken as a whole all demonstrate that it's possible to use construct to create hi quality games, including games with features well outside cc's core feature set, using no scripting at all. It sounds like what you need is a 'make my game for me' button, and unfortunately for you, cc is probably the closest thing you're going to get to that, at least as far as anything that has any real power or flexibility.

Also, if you have any links to any of your own noncorny creations, im curious to see some of the awesome work you've done.

How come you can't do everything in windows XP like you can in win7 ?

That's the same kind of question/remark/comparison and heresy.

=> 10 years of development, 10 years of technology, 10 years of improvement of the computer gear and the worldwide spread of those

Why do you say about the age of technology? 2D graphic has been around for a long time. There are many libraries and other 2D engines. Another thing is that there are people who cannot use them properly. You know, sometimes code optimization can do wonders. More sophisticated algorithms are used for this purpose.

Harsh Qwary, some of those games are absolutely impressive!

I don?t think so. It may be impressive for showing the Construct's features, but not for major indie projects.

It makes me laugh, too. Why do you think that comparing the almost two times faster DX11 to DX9 and comparing the completely C++ written engines of "big 3D games" with an event system of a 2D game maker could make any sense? If you need that 3D speed, then write your game in C++ using one of the many C++ engines out there. If you need comfort in 2D, stick to CC. You won't find a faster 2D game maker (even Torque2D included).

I understand the difference between programming 3D and 2D graphics. But that is just avoiding the obvious question. Why cannot optimize the 2D graphic even better? Just like 3D graphic. Why not?

what you expect of a 2D game?

Innovative, intelligent and exciting gameplay.

I would really like to know, what you use that huge textures for?

For example, to create a very detailed background on one large texture.

When creating huge levels that would be very helpful.

it sounds like what you need is a 'make my game for me' button

I mean need more plugins, behaviors, objects, context menus, a more comfortable level editor, etc.

In other words, everything that contributes to the simplification of routine work.