Candescence Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Holy shitballs, I knew Construct 2 was gonna use OpenGL as a renderer, but it exports to HTML5 too - and potentially every platform under the sun. Some of you will know Construct, the open-source game maker by a few bedroom coders. Personally, despite all the bugs, it is an absolutely awesome piece of software, but some of its main problems included the aforementioned bugs, lack of ability for collaboration with team projects, and the fact that it uses DirectX, limiting possible platforms. The developers realised from their work on the project and from constant feedback, was that Construct 0.X was technically flawed. I figured they would start on Construct 2 with a new, technically superior codebase, rather than try and slog it out for a 1.0 release. That, is pretty much what they did, which was a smart move. With Construct 2, they're making it better for themselves and users, with a far better codebase (hopefully), and fixing bugs will be much easier this time, too. They're already doing much better. The public preview of Construct 2 is extremely primitive compared to its predecessor (not surprising, as it's basically pre-alpha), but one of the most surprising things about it is the HTML5 support, which allows web support and support for every platform that can use web browsers that can use HTML5. However, that doesn't mean that Construct 2 is just for web games. Using its "Modular Export" system, further down the line, there will no doubt be exporters for Windows EXEs, Mac, Lunix, iPhone, and potentially every platform under the sun, allowing C2 to be able to adapt to new technologies in the future, and third parties will be able to make those exporters, as well. Other new features include: Checked builds Unicode Support XML Data Format Project Folder Structure (plus the optional single file format for smaller games and demos) Improved UI OpenGL Folder hierarchy for projects There is both a 32-bit and 64-bit native version of the IDE, so 64-bit users can enjoy improved performance. Portable Installation There's a new "configurations" system. You can edit multiple configurations (ie. tweaked arrangements) of your project, for example, to create a demo of just the first three levels - within the same project as the main game. The x.xx.xx version number system has been dropped. "1.0" is an arbitrary milestone - not only was it a bit of a fiasco with the previous version, but software rarely reaches 1.0 and stays there, so "1.0" hardly means "done". To reflect this, releases will simply be numbered (1, 2, 3, 4...). There is no backwards compatibility with Construct 0.x, but this is something that was necessary, since 0.x was technically flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luksamuk Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Hmmm... I've never tried Construct before, but it really seems like a good program to make games. Its code looks pretty much like the Clickteam ones. I'll download it and see what happens <3 Oh, um, there's not 360° Engine for it yet, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candescence Posted February 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Yes, there is, actually. Granted, it's a work-in-progress thing, but 360 degree movement with the Custom Movement Behaviour is surprisingly simple. Don't bother trying anything more than messing around with C2, though, no point right now. Doesn't stop people from TRYING, though, I mean, someone's already made a basic platformer and Asteroids in this thing. Severe limitations does not seem to stop anyone, it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuma Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 So you can choose what to pay for huh. That's...kind of weird. Does this mean people can charge for plugins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candescence Posted February 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Well, kinda. One could theoretically charge for plugins and export modules, but when plugins and stuff can be made in Javascript, I doubt anyone will like the idea of having to buy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perfect Chaos Zero Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 This is something that could have a huge impact on this community in the future once it becomes developed. From the looks of it, once it's actually working worth a shit, it could very well make MMF2 practically obsolete. I can't wait to see where this project goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuma Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 Yes, but that will take a WHILE. It's already been at least two years and C1 is only at 99.6. Like they said, they are "bedroom" developers. If people want this to take off, they need to help while is still open-sourced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candescence Posted February 12, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 To be fair, C1 was technically flawed, and the sheer amount of bugs... Thankfully, it's easier than ever to make plugins this time around, simply because they're done in Javascript rather than Python this time. Of course, for other exporters, I imagine the language would change, because Javascript wouldn't really fly for anything other than HTML5. ... Maybe Lua? Hey, it could work. Lua is pretty much THE fastest scripting language. Though, Javascript could still work if it was optimised in a similar way to Unity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuma Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think they gave up on it half way if you ask me. They still haven't finished the object folder system like they said the were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candescence Posted February 12, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 There's a couple of guys still working on another update to 0.x, so, who knows. But if they felt that they simply couldn't 'complete' 0.x to the level of quality that they and everyone wants, I respect that. C2 already has several features that everyone was clamouring for in the first place, has a far better codebase, and probably much easier to develop. Hell, the very inclusion of variables in the latest version at least makes it easier to make stuff that actually has a bit of substance. Not that it stopped anyone in the community, mind you, they don't seem to care about limitations. Edit: Also, I suggested an idea for how to incorporate various data structures and arrays into Construct 2, which would extend its functionality considerably. Ash is taking a break at the moment, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sslaxx Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 Pity. I have lost interest in it now it's gone commercial (again). Still, at least there's 0.9x.x still being worked on. And alternatives, such as LÖVE, Game Develop etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuma Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 I wouldn't mind paying for, as long as it 300 fucking dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candescence Posted February 12, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 Pity. I have lost interest in it now it's gone commercial (again). Still, at least there's 0.9x.x still being worked on. And alternatives, such as LÖVE, Game Develop etc. Someone hasn't been paying attention. It's not really "commercial", they've implemented a 'pay what you want' scheme (as in, pay what you want or pay nothing if you want), which is basically the donations thing they were doing before, and then there's Fundry, which allows people to donate towards a specific feature being developed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts