> HTML5 + Javascript is really a great choice for a game engine, the performance isn't optimal, but that sacrifice is worth it for the portability
>
At the beginning of Construct 2 I held a very negative stance towards HTML5. Once C2 developed further and my own experience grew, there was a certain enthusiasm about being able to develop for almost any device. Only owning an older android device, I even went ahead and bought a Nexus tablet.
Unfortunately I was pretty soon disenchanted, because the performance was and still is a very fragile thing if you're trying something remotely advanced. Construct 2 heavily relying on third parties for exporting options to different platforms doesn't help the issue either. If there's a problem with these, it is not only out of your own control, but Scirra can't do anything about it directly either.
Overall it gives more of the impression of a bit of a mess rather than a great breakthrough in portability. To me at least.
Granted, it also depends on what kind of games you want to develop. C2 attracts a whole "new" group of developers, who want to make game apps. Casual games rather than, well, core games. I can see this being a good business decision for Scirra. At the same time I can't deny it makes me feel a bit alienated.
> All I really want in C2 is a better editor sdk for plugin devs, and all the other features would then come from it eventually.
>
In a podcast interview not too long ago Ashley stated this would be one of the major things for Construct 3. I also got the impression that C3 might come earlier than expected and C2 will then stop being extended, but still maintained. Don't kill me please if I'm incorrect here.
I feel somewhat the same way about being alienated. My imagination doesn't really consider casual games. I'd really really like to actually want c2 to work as it should, so that license I've payed for would not be a waste, but also so I can finish my game.