Jayjay's Forum Posts

    Slay, Spider (solitaire), Chess

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • We went the route of recoding the game prototype in C# and Unity. The Steam Pre-Alpha demo had more installs than our C2 game did the first year, of release and less bugs (especially during screen captures)

    Works better, more visual FX with solid frame rate and more compatibility, and our console ports are coming along nicely.

    That said, it is a lot more work using a full 3D engine for 2D. Wouldn't recommend for non-platforming/games that don't need max performance (CPU especially) and console support.

  • I am one of the people who have been very vocal about my dislike of the direction that C2/C3 has been going on (strictly HTML5 and the reliance on third party wrappers), but that doesn't mean I don't recommend Construct 3 for most indie developers.

    There's three situations I can't recommend Construct for right now:

    -If you're not planning on targeting consoles, they don't usually have HTML5 support and the only really "playable" one is Xbox One

    -If you're making a highly performance intensive platformer (we're talking dynamic lighting, shaders/effects all over the place, many enemies also using platforming at the same time, etc.)

    -If you're making something for mobile that a browser just couldn't run well on a phone

    At the same time, there's also four situations I almost always recommend Construct:

    -If you're learning to make games

    -If you're making games for fun, and don't want to get tied up with coding

    -If you're making 2D games for playing in a web browser

    -If you're teaching other people how to make games

    HTML5 support and performance continues to increase over time, it's already much better now than I would have expected when I was dabbling with C2 early betas back in 2011.

    Construct 3 using a subscription was a surprise to me for sure, but if you're planning to/actually do make money on your games it isn't that bad of a price at all.

    I started learning to make games when I was 8 years old using tools like Construct/that came before and had inspired Construct, and if it was a subscription I definitely wouldn't have had access, so although I can't imagine how it would work I do hope for a cheaper one-payment version someday (eg: less of a limit on event count, but more limits on things like no shaders, restrict the size of screen, watermarks for Scirra around the edges/border, only HTML5 export).

  • Sorry to hear I only have a 19" monitor "spare" (use it for testing devices sometimes) and am in Ontario, Canada.

    Amazon has some cheap LED projectors that support 1080p input (actual resolution 800x480) and go up to 100" for about $60 USD. I have one and was surprised at the quality versus the price, so it might tide you over until you are able to get your hands on a monitor again!

  • — Honestly it depends on the genre. Construct's platforming engine/performance woes are still affecting our customers on Steam even when they are way above minimum specifications, while our pre-alpha for our current game that was made in Unity hasn't had any of those issues. We've even crammed more effects and details into the new game and it runs on lower end hardware than our C2 game.

  • You could have a subfolder with the "real" page, then iFrame it from your index.html outside of the folder maybe?

  • Construct 2/3 is excellent (maybe the best?) for in-browser HTML5 apps and 2D games, rapid prototyping, and education.

    I think you'll find many bigger companies using it, even if their final products might be using another framework / engine to port over their ideas and designs for mobile/console/desktop release.

  • Ashley Hmm, I think the alternate exporter Chowdren beat C2 though? Can't remember if someone tested that, or maybe it was just faster than MMF's default exporter in general.

    Bunnymark also isn't a totally fair comparison for speed of an engine, since it's more about the number of sprites / particles it can render depending on the test, while MMF's native code has a big advantage over JavaScript out of the gate that might show up in games needing more CPU (like pixel-perfect platforming).

    You're right that Native alone isn't a good enough reason to switch engine though, it depends on a game's needs (eg: how much it tries to cram in and what platforms it's targeting). Construct's editor is still by far my favorite, even after I've been warming up to Unity in the process of remaking BPM in C# with it.

  • Godot is the best looking free/open source engine I see right now. Otherwise, for commercial (and console) goals I recommend Unity for 2D and Unreal Engine 4 for 3D.

    I say for commercial reasons because if you want something dependable and already exporting to consoles, you're going to have an easier time with Unity/UE4.

    Godot is getting visual scripting soon.

    Unity has some great visual scripting options like PlayMaker and PlyGame/PlyBlox, but honestly C# is not hard to learn at all (easier than Java in my opinion)

    Also a super worthy mention:

    Clickteam MultiMedia Fusion 2.5, it may look like it's still living in the 1990's but it works well (especially the runtime, it's native and runs fast! the editor is sadly more clunky interface than Construct, otherwise I never would have switched away from it haha), isn't a subscription, and is the program that Construct was borrowing from when Ashley left making plugins for MMF to make Scirra. It even has console export through Chowdren plugin.

    MultiMedia Fusion 3 is in development and should work even better.

  • I don't think it's just "Pixel Art vs 3D", because we have great examples of non-realistic 3D / Pixel Art in 3D as well like:

    Minecraft:

    Superpowers example: https://sparklinlabs.itch.io/discover-superpowers

    Craft Studio examples: https://sparklinlabs.itch.io/craftstudio

    or cell shaded 3D:

    Jet Set Radio Future:

    Borderlands:

    And Pixel Art also has many different styles:

    So which one is better is hard to say. I think it depends on the game type, and the level of polish an artist puts in to make it all "seamless" or consistent.

  • Yeah I feared it was 7 or lower, I'd use classic theme if I could too just for the extra performance

  • Prominent Windows version you are running? And for commercial games that isn't a viable fix to tell customers "just remove your Windows theme!!!"

  • Construct 3 will eventually be 100% better than Construct 2.

    At present the two biggest reasons to use Construct 3 are:

    -It works in a web browser (pretty neat!)

    -It has better export methods for mobile (same performance)

    The two biggest reasons to use Construct 3 are:

    -It isn't a subscription

    -It has more plugins available

    (and bonus: C3 can import C2 projects anyway)

  • Right now the only advantage I see in Construct 3 is a better method of building for mobile phones. Everything else is exactly the same at runtime (C2 has more plugins right now too)

  • I'm starting from your "personal license" question:

    1. Yes, you are allowed to use personal for commercial games/earning money as long as you're not a business

    2. Yes, not all projects can be transferred as it depends on plugins being available for Construct 3

    3. There's no difference in the runtime and minimal differences in the editor right now. Learning Construct 2 is fine if you don't want to pay a yearly subscription.

    That said, editing from any browser is pretty sweet.