Delenne

I personally don't like Godot, I find that I can't do more versatile things compared to using Unity or Game Maker Studio 2. Godot lacks features & documentations compared with Unity's and Game Maker Studio 2's extended documentations.

The reason why I left GM2 is because GM2 lacks almost any GUI support (Godot has truly mature GUI components), lacks an animation timeline option (anything can be key-framed in Godot, and it has built-in bones for characters), the glacial development rate of GM2, limited audio control, no true 3d support, and more.

Feature-wise GM2 is quite behind Godot at the moment, for the most part. Have you actually used Godot for a game project? Just asking, because Godot objectively offers (much) more than GM2 in most areas.

I've used GM2, Construct, Godot, Fusion, and Unity (and others in the past) for a variety of projects, and I can't say Godot is behind GM2, Construct, or Fusion in regards to 2d game features - quite the opposite, really (and of course there is no comparison when 3d support is added into the mix!). Unity is different, of course. It tries to be everything to everyone, and not very friendly for 2d game dev, in my opinion.

Godot's documentation was pretty bad only two years ago, but has improved a lot since they had a documentation sprint last year. Loads of online youtube tutorials too.

The GM2 manual is still somewhat better, you are right.

Also, the fact that they don't have console support yet limits your choices. You'd end up in a same situation as Construct and you'd end up learning a new engine for consoles.

Not entirely true. Godot has support for XBox One via UWP, and Switch, PS4, and XBox One porting is possible through a commercial service.

Anyways, unless you have your own well-recognized game development company, and your game is of a very high quality, console support might as well be a pipedream for most. It costs a good chunk of $$$ change to arrive at a console release.

That's why I like Unity and Game Maker Studio 2 better. Although, not to be bias, Godot is still very competent.

It's just my personal suggestion from experience, anyone reading this can just use this as a guide if they want to choose a native engine. Just wanted to share too.

Yes, I agree: it's like picking a clothing style. I like we have so many choices now. And I switch between engines depending on the project. For example, for click adventures I have used Visionaire in the past, and if I was asked to work on a similar project again, I would choose Visionaire once more.

That's also why I use Construct for small web games for clients: fast and efficient.

My motto: use the right tool for the right job. Don't be afraid to switch to another tool if it will save you time and/or the export platform requirements say so.

If you want native performance, I'd recommend using Game Maker Studio 2, ClickTeam Fusion or Unity. Although, the downside is that you can't make games as fast as you can here in Construct 3. Then again, Construct 3 does take more time to optimize for performance to make playable games, especially in mobile or big games.

However, the greatest benefit with Construct 3 is that you can make great small games fast even with little to no programming knowledge. Having programming knowledge does help a lot though, professionally.

If 2d games and native export are your requirements, Unity is not the most pleasant development platform in my experience. I tried Unity for some time a few years ago, and switched to GameMaker at the time. Now I am using Godot, however. Much nicer than GM, and geared towards 2d games (and quite proper 3d support too!), with a lovely editor and animation timeline. And GM lacks an animation timeline. Godot 3.1 hits all the right notes for me at the moment. The scene system is hard to beat in my opinion. Quite amazing engine for 2d work.

No easy visual scripting like Construct, of course, in Godot. The native export makes it relative 'easier' to deploy, but with all tools I experienced gotchas and workarounds. I feel it depends on your requirements. No game engine is that mythical magical pink unicorn farting rainbows :)

And I do still make use of my Construct 2 license for quick small web games and prototypes to figure out stuff and game ideas. You're right there. Nothing beats Construct for this!

Construct 3 is beginning to lure me back in with its promising animation timeline, though. But for now Godot rocks big time if you're willing to deal with scripting.

Delenne

> Are nested timelines possible?

At the moment this is not possible, I was thinking about it just yesterday though. But I don't think I will be able to start working on it any time soon.

Too bad, but it is encouraging that you have thought about this. Nesting timelines simplifies a lot of animation work.

> The animation interpolation control is quite rudimentary. Are you planning to add a graph editor of sorts?

I am planning to add the option to create custom ease functions. These feature would come with a special editor to build your custom easing curve. You should then be able to assign that custom curve in the same way you assign the built in ones. Is that what you mean?

Sort of. In animation software like Maya and Blender a graph editor allows for full control over the timing and easing of your animation.

For example, here is the one that just got added to Godot 3.1 (beta):

In the top is the keys timeline. Click on the little curve icon, and it opens the graph editor. I am used to 2d and 3d animation graph editors, and it is an essential part to fine-tune your animation. In Toonboom it is handled with an awkward mini dialog.

In Anime Studio it works with an identical graph editor:

> Will bones/segmented characters be implemented? The competition allows for these, and it opens up many possibilities. Construct still relies on Spriter, which is less than ideal.

At the moment there are no plans to support bone structures. That is a completely different feature which just happens to work very well with the concept of a timeline, so they are often assumed to go hand in hand.

Understandable. It is a huge undertaking all by itself. But seeing that you are working on this timeline I see a glimmer of hope at the end of the tunnel that might perhaps hint to having bones implemented sometime in the future.

> Will motion paths be integrated with the timeline?

I Have thought about this too, but I am not too sure when I will be able to start work on this.

Again, great to know you have already been thinking about integrating these.

> Which parts of Construct's functionality can be keyframed/used in a timeline exactly? Everything, including event sheets and functions, and parameters for any object that is inserted in the layout? How far does the integration go?

At the moment you can create keyframes for almost all properties that can belong to an instance. This includes the common properties, instance variables, behavior properties, effect parameters, and plugin properties.

Some properties don't make sense to be interpolated, so those are not available. Ej. Sprite's Initial Frame can not be interpolated.

There are some properties which are missing, because they are not part of Construct at all. For instance at the moment it is no possible to set the current frame of an animation from a timeline. That is a missing feature I would like to add.

Yes, that is what I meant. This opens up a huge number of possibilities!

I have though about the possibility to interpolate Layout and Layer properties, Event Sheet global variables and the ability to trigger an event sheet action from a timeline, but those things are just in my TODO list. There is no estimated time of even when will I start with any of that.

Looking forward to future timeline features in Construct.

One more question: will users have access to properties of plugins? For example, will it be possible to control Spriter object parameters with the timeline? Or will it be limited to the standard Construct objects?

This looks like a major step forward! It's nice to see Construct finally getting a proper timeline function like Godot, Unreal, and Unity. It opens up SO many possibilities!

Couple of questions:

• Are nested timelines possible?
• The animation interpolation control is quite rudimentary. Are you planning to add a graph editor of sorts?
• Will bones/segmented characters be implemented? The competition allows for these, and it opens up many possibilities. Construct still relies on Spriter, which is less than ideal.
• Will motion paths be integrated with the timeline?
• Which parts of Construct's functionality can be keyframed/used in a timeline exactly? Everything, including event sheets and functions, and parameters for any object that is inserted in the layout? How far does the integration go?

Anway, good job so far. One of the primary reasons why I did not consider Construct in the past was the lack of a timeline. I'll be looking forward to see where this goes.

The game is shaping up quite nicely. One bit of criticism is the (lack of) level of animation added to the bosses, adversaries, and other elements. A lot of animation is implied through overall transformation and effects, but it leaves a lot to be desired compared to the quality of your cartoon game art.

Take Dr Terrestrial, for example: it's basically a static head. When hit, it lights up, but that's it. The eyes don't move, the body doesn't respond to the action. If you'd separate all the parts, and animate them separately it would add much more polish to the final result, and make the game characters feel much less static looking.

Or take those blob enemies: merely transforming in the y-axis looks too simplistic. Their eyes and brows could be animated, and the body controlled as a mesh.

Have you considered the use of Spriter? It's a shame Construct doesn't feature its own animation timeline tools, otherwise it would be a doddle to add.

Anyway, I feel adding more animation to your world and characters would make it look much more polished.

Keep up the good work!

Going open source may be a solution too? Godot Engine is a self-contained 40mb executable (no installation) for Windows, Mac, and Linux, is easy to learn, (much) more powerful than either Gamemaker or Construct, and completely free. No hidden costs, and there's even a "kids can code" YouTube channel to help the students along.

And it's a lot of fun to learn and use. For example, Godot has a built-in animate everything you want animation editor, which is super fun and liberating in your game creation process: even cut-out animated 2d characters may be constructed and animated right in Godot.

On top of all this, your students have access to the full version at home or anywhere, really.

I mean, your Construct 2 access and use is going to end at some point in the near future, and Godot seems to have all the advantages you want in a classroom environment: free, student accessible, no installation required, great support and community, a wealth of online tutorials and resources, 2d and 3d, native exporters, web export, animation timeline, simple to learn Python-based GD script (and Python is proven to be a perfect introductory language for young learners).

The only drawback would be the lack of visual programming - although Godot does have a visual programming option, it's not that great compared to Construct's event sheets. However, it seems plans and ideas are going around to fix this in the future. On the other hand, your students would be introduced to Python syntax, and learn "proper" programming, and Python is a very popular language nowadays - so you'd be teaching them a real-world language too.

Anyway, just throwing it out there. Schools have small budgets to work with as it is. You may have to wait for Godot 3.1 (out later this Summer) for lower-spec Opengl v2 support to be implemented again.

[quote:33ppmv4v]The WebASM export is really nice now

The export is around 20Mb for an empty project.

Construct 2 empty project non-native export

Mac: 177mb, Windows 64bit: 140mb, Linux 64 164mb

Godot empty project native export

Mac & Linux ~28mb, Windows ~26mb.

Different engines, different approach. Obviously Construct is going to win with its javascript-based export. Godot's WebASM export includes the entire game engine (plus Godot includes a powerful 3d engine, and other goodies not available in Construct).

Apples and pears!

I am utterly and devastatingly in love with Godot. Have been since last year, and Godot 3 is just... so lovely to work with. The WebASM export is really nice now. The new particles, the new sound mixing, the animation system, the nodes (Oh! the Nodes!) based system, the scripting, the new next gen 3d support, and a true poweful 2d editor.

Combining timelines, IK support, WOW!

Tried Unity, tried Construct (both 2 and 3), tried Clickteam Fusion, Gamemaker, and even Phaser.

Godot is my only love right now. So easy to script things, and while I do mainly 2d stuff, the other day I implemented 3d backgrounds into my 2d game without a hitch.

And native export. Someone made a Switch exporter too.

The Godot devs have decided to implement Vulcan now, by the way and replace opengl 3.

Sorry to be swooning over a game engine ;P

Hey, I just built an APK with it! It works. It's pretty simple, but it takes time to install all the tools. I'll make that tutorial as soon as I can.

Irbis

No, there is no programming involved. The tools must be installed, and the export platforms chosen.

The nice thing is that you will not need to rely on an external service.

I will see if I can try this myself, and create a quick tutorial tomorrow.

I really feel for you - it is a terrible situation to find yourself in. Your story also confirms that my decision to choose Godot instead of Construct for my current game (which is a semi-large project) was the correct one.

I had a developer friend of mine read your first post, and he came up with a potential solution for the Android APK build: install a local version of Cordova, and you do not have to rely on an external third-party service like IntelXDK. You remain in control.

Linkies for step by step installation and APK building:

evothings.com/doc/build/cordova ... indows.htm tinyurl.com/j6y75kt

evothings.com/doc/build/cordova-guide.html tinyurl.com/klzx9tu

These links are for a different html app builder, but the workflow should be identical for Construct, I was told.

He told me that it can be finicky to setup and get your first builds, but it shouldn't take more than a day to get up and running.

I hope this info helps you a bit. Very sorry to hear about your predicament; I have had my fair share of client-related panic button situations too, so I empathize.