I'm reminded of the Python scripting option in Construct Classic. If you'd really like to put some programming in your games, you're probably better off with Construct Classic.

Awh, that's too bad. Thanks for trying anyway :)

There's been this wrapper around that apparently worked for quite some time already.

So it seems. It just doesn't look like a very good implementation. I mean, it's a good effort, that's for sure. But either I'm doing something wrong, or does this implementation not work with relative paths? It seems like you need to define the absolute path to the index.html file in order for it to work, which would make distribution unnecessarily hard.

That, and the performance is rather flaky. Running the Space Blaster example shows that this wrapper has framerate issues.

At least it's a step in the right direction, but I do wonder... Do we really want to publish our games like this? I sure don't. It's like giving someone a website together with a portable browser. How is that even remotely acceptable?

I'll keep my eye out for the Awesomium implementation. From what I've seen it seems rather impressive.

I'll mention again that I'm definitely a critic, but I consider that a necessity.

... and the EXE will not be used alot

Might I point out how incredibly unlikely this is? This may be possible for small casual games, but this simply will never happen for big titles.

Why is there so much talk about EXE's as if they're some archaic and unstable kind of technology? Aren't most of us above-average computer users who should know better than that?

The only use for HTML5 I see is a replacement for Flash. That is something that I would love to see, since Flash is the very bane of the internet. For bigger titles it does not seem even remotely interesting.

Keep in mind the only real commitment that's been made is to finish html5.

That in and of itself is a huge undertaking for one person. Then you have to take into account that html5 is constantly evolving across the browsers, and "finished" is going to be subjective for that reason.

Absolutely. That's also why I find the focus on HTML5 to be a rather strange decision. While the platform is definitely interesting (and at the time in no way, shape or form a replacement of desktop games/apps), it just doesn't seem mature enough at the moment.

Ouch. I can't quote anything, but I remember that quite some time ago (long before the site's new design anyway) it was relatively certain that there was going to be an EXE exporter. This, plus the polish of the product, were the main reasons why I had a great interest in C2. While I understand that HTML5 is a very interesting platform, I don't find it to be interesting at all for developing games other than simple browser based games. Why would you want to play anything but simple games in a browser anyway? I find all arguments involving that using EXE's is difficult to be false. If you can read, you can use EXE's. It is as simple as that. Period.

Maybe I'm a bit harsh on that side, but I have very strong opinions on this. If we're talking about game development, you need an EXE exporter.

Anyway, I will keep following the C2 developtment, but I won't be going for the early-adopter thing if I'm not even sure I will find this tool to be useful for what I'm aiming for.

It's quite alright though. I'll just go back to using Construct Classic and Game Maker 8.1, both very solid products.

Ahh yes :) I expected C2 to be more focused on the 2D aspect, just like C1. I'm not thinking about Unity-like features, but I'm thinking more about 2D gameplay using 3D assets.

What is that "third party side" you mentioned, newt? :)

Hello there folks,

I couldn't quite find what I was searching for with the search feature, so I'll just ask my question here. Is there going to be some sort of (pseudo) 3D support in Construct 2?