Hotfix for r402.
Ad Networks already support zip format. However they want a zipped single file or a HTML file and a .js file. Majority do not support multi file zips.
The industry standard is single fill w/ Data URI base 64 for images. Regardless of how old or inefficient this may seem -it's how it's done. Calling the ad networks to support ZIP is as useful as asking facebook to fix their playable testing tool that's been busted since release.
At the moment I can deploy on just about every ad network aside from facebook. Kinda sad you are willing to let single file go to wayside. I understand if it's affecting core product... just not what some of us want to hear.
Currently I use r379 stable (upto r381) for playable development as it seems to be the most compatible release for playable dev.
Are you going to continue to host the older releases of C3 so we can continue to develop playables with C3 OR should we begin to think about alternatives?
A single file with base64 encoded images is actually an unusual format and as far as I'm aware not needed anywhere else in the industry outside of ads. Every single other platform uses separate asset files, including some ad platforms that now accept zips. It's unclear why this single-file format is even needed - why can't they just have normal separate asset files? By the zip format I mean a zip of web assets, with separate HTML, CSS, JS and image files. This is the only format it's easy for us to support, and if supporting an unusual format with extreme restrictions ends up causing major problems or otherwise holding back improvements to Construct for all customers, that would be untenable and so we'd rather drop support for the single file format in that case. We are doing our best to forewarn people of a possible outcome, so people can advise the ad networks of the change they want, and any ad networks that can be upgraded to support a much better format can do so ahead of time.
Projeto exportado para Android Studio, compilado por lá, não apresenta erros no Console e anuncios Admob sendo exibido normalmente.
Regardless of how unusual it is - base 64 is the preferred method. I don't make the rules. Unfortunately, the Ad networks do.
I totally understand moving away from it and appreciate the forewarning.
Thanks for effort and dialog. Cheers.
I don't think "preferred" is the right word. It's an extremely difficult format for us to support and I don't think it even makes sense for the ad networks to support it either. For example base64 encoding increases the size of files by about 30%, so it bloats the download size unnecessarily. Allowing separate files avoids that. Presumably ad networks want efficient ads that show promptly? So why would they invent a weird and inefficient format?
Base64 generally speeds up ad load time (not to mention ad size) and reduces dependency on outsourcing. Outsourcing, even within the same directory, is not good for ad networks and is not supported. (only some ad networks support it and you still have clear limits for the assets (like using base64))
In summary, using base64 is accepted by all ad networks without exception, even if you are limited to a total limit of 5mb. Your own "zip" format is not supported by almost any ad network. Ad networks support the "zip" format, but there are still certain rules, and your zip format (almost) doesn't follow any of them.
So you either need to remove support for playable ads or produce a format that conforms to these rules. Your defense of "go talk to them" makes no sense to the ad networks, sorry to say that...
...
I like Construct 3 but I don't like where it's going. You need to decide or find a way forward. This is your problem. If you ignore it, it's the developers' problem too. We developers are already doing our best for Construct. No ad network will care about your arguments for a 30% size increase. They won't care about a few developers voicing it either.
Thanks for everything. We'll have to move to a different framework with our company or find a solution. I've done my best to represent Construct 3 in a good way for playable ads, but if the developer of c3 feels they can't continue, there's not much we can do. This situation will be clarified in your own way Ashley
Note: One solution might be to answer the open question about whether old engine versions and all their features will be kept alive or not, which you did not answer.
Thank you
"Single-file playable ads are extremely difficult to support with very tough requirements that make them very hard to develop and maintain"
"sad you are willing to let single file go"
I mean, not their fault, obviously