(This is a follow-up post to my other one which explained the reasons for choosing to remain working in C2).
When I review this whole venture, it stems from the desire to create a game on my own. I want to create the graphics, the logic, the story, the words, the music — everything — like how those guy did it back in the day when I was a wee child playing their games.
I came to use C2 because of its simplicity, and the quickness in which I can throw something together and get results. There’s nothing like instant gratification that hooks you in.
But as project size increases, so do doubts about working in C2. Lots of niggles, lots of creaks and groans give me doubts as to appropriateness of the engine/framework for Citizen. A framework is a convenience. But everything out there is a convenience except C++. I could have approached Corona or Phaser, I could have used Godot or Unity, and some of them might have been more suited to the task.
When you turn to an established game engine like Unity, you don’t tend to have that many doubts that your main goal is achievable if you were clever enough to code/design your game well. That’s because you see the sort of games that have already been developed and you can’t really argue with the fact that Unity is established for a reason.
Then you take a gander to notice the sort of games that C2 is generally used for, which is not the sort of thing Citizen is. There are plenty of developmental previews and tutorials of isometric games, — none of them are serious enough to take umbrage — but no finished product as far as the Search Engine can see.
Then one day, you come upon some kind of undesirable behaviour that you have no control over (because Construct is a very blackbox environment). You start weighing in the facts: that C2 isn’t being developed any more; that critical bugs appear in the latest builds; that downgrading is the only recourse because the developers will likely not fix it because they are committed to C3, an app whose design philosophy doesn’t nearly tick enough of your own boxes for you to use with dignity.
These leave you imagining the sort of adventures you’ll have with this little boat, which will receive no more refits, as it takes you across the pond. What awaits you, who knows? But there are tales of show-stopping, insanity-inducing odds, and some are journalistic facts as the asset obfuscation that you won’t get.
At the end of the day, it’s a ‘use the right tool for the job’ situation. And as the days go by, C2 (and C3) are becoming less of the ‘right’ tool to actually publish a game. But as many C2 users know, C2 is great at prototyping. And so at prototyping it will be relegated to.
Even if from some miracle I complete the prototype and I am able to scale it to encompass the scope of the game I want to make, it will still be a hard-sell for me to publish the game in C2 because of the absence of even a rudimentary obfuscation method: another design philosophy that didn’t get ticked.
We shall see…