GMC Forums How many GMS user vs GMS2 users?

[Curial Lloses]

Because I started developing assets for marketplace in GMS but I'm starting to feel much more confortable with GMS2 than GMS, I'm working on some of them with GMS2 since the very beginning. But this doesn't seem a good idea to me in commercial terms and I was wondering at which level porting to GMS is worth it in order to have more impact and downloads.

I don't know if this information can be public and don't pretend to be it here if it shouldn't be but I would like ask at least for an estimation. There still will be in short terms much more GMS than GMS2 users?

How much would you would recommend to publish assets for GMS in the next 6 months?

Any feedback from YoYo staff or users would be appreciated. Thanks!

 

[GMWolf]

If your asset would work in 1.4, then built it in 1.4, it will still work in 2.0.

I have made an asset that works in both (gm 9patch, check it out!) And I have had no problems getting it to work in 2.9 and 1.x.

However I am currently building an asset that will only work in 2.0, so 2.0 is what I'm using.

 

[Curial Lloses]

I've taken -yet not the best representative data to analysis- a comparative between GMS1 Tech support forum posts and GMS2's posts and I would think that most of the active community has passed to GMS2. I don't remember at which date the new forums went up or if it was after GMS2 beta was public but could give me an idea -no much exact, must say- of GMS2 growing users.

Wondering how many marketplace active users are thinking in GMS2 yet...

 

[Bingdom]

I've taken -yet not the best representative data to analysis- a comparative between GMS1 Tech support forum posts and GMS2's posts and I would think that most of the active community has passed to GMS2

That is mainly because of the number of bugs that are in GMS2.

 

[Curial Lloses]

If your asset would work in 1.4, then built it in 1.4, it will still work in 2.0.

I have made an asset that works in both (gm 9patch, check it out!) And I have had no problems getting it to work in 2.9 and 1.x.

However I am currently building an asset that will only work in 2.0, so 2.0 is what I'm using.

Yes they will work but I don't like to publish assets with all the import compatibility scripts. It seems... ugly to me and I prefer to use GMS2 own functions in this version. Anyway you're right better to work still in GM 1.4 and port and clean after to GMS2.

That is mainly because of the number of bugs that are in GMS2.

Lol, you had a point.

 

[GMWolf]

Ooooh no! Not nessesarily.

For example, my video player extension will undoubtably throw a fatal exception if you try to use it in GMS2. Reason being GMS1 is based on DX 9.0c and GMS2 is based on DX 11.

Not a great mix calling DX9 functions in a DX11 environment.

Yes, but I assume most people are not mad computer scientists with a lust for GM DX hacking.

 

[JeffJ]

While I do understand your initial thinking, what you see as a disadvantage may in fact possibly be an advantage - the userbase may be smaller, but so is the supply of quality assets. A less competitive marketplace will make your assets stand out more and sell more easily to what userbase there is.

I'm not in the business of developing marketplace assets myself, but if I was, I would definitely go for GMS2 assets. You have a small customerbase, but at the same time near nonexistent competition - for a while. Use it.

 

[GMWolf]

While I do understand your initial thinking, what you see as a disadvantage may in fact possibly be an advantage - the userbase may be smaller, but so is the supply of quality assets. A less competitive marketplace will make your assets stand out more and sell more easily to what userbase there is.

I'm not in the business of developing marketplace assets myself, but if I was, I would definitely go for GMS2 assets. You have a small customerbase, but at the same time near nonexistent competition - for a while. Use it.

Well, most gms1.x assets work just fine on GMS2.
Intact I designed my 9patch asset to not even need any of the compatibility scripts, and I think its the right way to go. (Despite the fact I'm not getting many sales :'( )

 

[FormalCloud]

I currently am using GM:S 1.x for production and will be moving over to GM:S 2.x in August if they announce Switch support at some time before summer, otherwise I probably won't be moving into GM:S 2 until end of 2018 or beyond.

 

[QuangDX]

Still using Game Maker Studio 1 until we finish our first game, MaoMao Castle.
But once that's done, I'll be looking to switch over to Game Maker Studio 2. To rebuild from the ground up our main game,
Dr Harrison and the Blood Crystals.

 

[hippyman]

I still use 1.x much more than 2.x. I occasionally check on 2.x just to see how it's going but I'm too comfortable with 1.x

 

[Storyteller]

I moved to other engines for the last several years, so I skepped a lot of the 1.x era and even some of the 7.x - 8.1 stuff. Ive used gms1.x a bit, but Im happily diving into GMS2. I rather like 'most' of the changes, though there are things still missing. GMS2 is the future, they are not going to update 1.x anymore, so why bother using something that is already dying out? I have several of the exporters for 1.x, so I guess there is some use of it, though Im pretty much native in GMS2 now.

 

[Curial Lloses]

Still using Game Maker Studio 1 until we finish our first game, MaoMao Castle.
But once that's done, I'll be looking to switch over to Game Maker Studio 2. To rebuild from the ground up our main game,
Dr Harrison and the Blood Crystals.

Man, you have my respects. I would like to port our GMS1 project to GMS2 but I'm so afraid of the amount of importing bugs tha could appear.

I moved to other engines for the last several years, so I skepped a lot of the 1.x era and even some of the 7.x - 8.1 stuff. Ive used gms1.x a bit, but Im happily diving into GMS2. I rather like 'most' of the changes, though there are things still missing. GMS2 is the future, they are not going to update 1.x anymore, so why bother using something that is already dying out? I have several of the exporters for 1.x, so I guess there is some use of it, though Im pretty much native in GMS2 now.

Well, I'm agree with that but as far as I'm seeing, there's still lots of active users in GMS1 so developing assets for GMS1 seems to be a clever option at this moment despite of the laziness that gives me

 

[kburkhart84]

I've switched to GMS2 completely. I tend to like to be with all the newest versions of stuff when possible. I wouldn't develop assets for GMS1 at this point, mainly because I think a majority of new projects will be done with GMS2. Other people are going to be finishing whatever they are doing in GMS1, and those people likely already have the assets they want and are far along enough in the projects both to not switch to GMS2 and to not purchase any new assets.

I only have 1 asset(FHInput) in the marketplace. It is only an input wrapper though, and it was at most an hour I think to get it right in GMS2, including changing documentation, etc... I know that this isn't always the case, rather it just happens that what my asset does and uses is among the things that didn't really change much between the 2 versions. Something like Lonewolff's video player, dependent on the renderer and DX9....yeah that is another story completely.

I'm not really a big marketplace seller, but if I was, I think I would consider greatly how easy it would be to actually maintain both versions of my assets for GMS1 and 2. If it were simple enough, maybe it would still be worth maintaining the old versions, upgrading them with new features, etc... but with a good amount of people moving forward with GMS2, I don't think there are going to be very many "new" sales for GMS1-exclusive assets, at least the ones that wouldn't be easily converted to GMS2 due to changes.

 

[OneDayDreamer]

I'm thinking that a lot of newbies (like me) will stick with the free option until they are more confident that they have mastered, or at least gained a solid foundational understanding, of GML. That way they know if GMS is right for them, and whether or not the financial investment is a smart option. From what I can tell, GMS2 looks really good. I was actually wondering a few weeks ago if it would ever come out!

 

[Blakkid489]

Ehhh..... GMS 2

 

[Blackened]

I use both GMS 1.4 and GMS2 and I will continue to use both for the foreseeable future. Game Maker Studio 1.4 has plenty of life and support left to it although updates will be more infrequent. BTW, I still use Game Maker 7 and 8.1 Standard on occasion as well!

Now is the time to get familiar with and build a solid foundation of GMS2's core functionality because the future of GMS2 will see planned IDE and Runtime additions made to it in some VERY exciting AND long anticipated ways:

https://help.yoyogames.com/hc/en-us/articles/231719448-RoadMap

 

[Geoff Jones]

Full package 2.0 user here. There was no way I could use 1.x room editor without jamming a fork in my eye.

 

[Geoff Jones]

I use both GMS 1.4 and GMS2 and I will continue to use both for the foreseeable future. Game Maker Studio 1.4 has plenty of life and support left to it although updates will be more infrequent. BTW, I still use Game Maker 7 and 8.1 Standard on occasion as well!

Now is the time to get familiar with and build a solid foundation of GMS2's core functionality because the future of GMS2 will see planned IDE and Runtime additions made to it in some VERY exciting AND long anticipated ways:

https://help.yoyogames.com/hc/en-us/articles/231719448-RoadMap

Why do you use both? and how? just curious

 

[tafkatfos]

Currently using 1.4 but will move onto 2.0 fully once my game is out.

Working on a prototype in GMS2 to get used to the IDE etc.

 

[hdarren]

I'll continue to use GM1 until they fix the godawful workflow in GM2. In GM1 if I open a sprite it just pops up and I can do whatever I like with it, but in GM2 it flings me off to the nether regions of the workspace. It's really sad that it's far more efficient to work in GM1 than a newer version. And before you say it, no, clumsy tab menus and minimaps are not the solution. The solution was not to change the perfect GM1 workflow or at least add minimisable popups back as an option.

 

[GMWolf]

perfect GM1 workflow

I'm not saying GMS2 is, But GMS1 IDE was far from perfect.

 

[CommunistFacePuncher]

I like GMS.

 

[SVG]

I'm continueing to use 1.x, finishing my game on what I know and am comfortable with then looking into 2.x after, plus by that time 2.x will have been out for a bit and will have addressed issues. Anytime theres an update I always wait a bit if possible before updating for that very reason. Usually.

 

[hippyman]

Ehhh..... **** GMS 2

Tell us how you really feel.

I'm still in the middle of a long transition. I do like where 2.x is going though. The ability to go fullscreen with events was a big plus for me. Not sure how long it's been in there but I just recently found it because of that new blog that was posted by Mike I believe.

 

[Blakkid489]

Tell us how you really feel.

I'm still in the middle of a long transition. I do like where 2.x is going though. The ability to go fullscreen with events was a big plus for me. Not sure how long it's been in there but I just recently found it because of that new blog that was posted by Mike I believe.

Lol okay maybe I was a little bland with my statement.
I guess my main and only complaint is the IDE starts to slow down at critical times. I mean sure we can the blame compatibility of the computer I'm using, but my PC is pretty up to date. minus my speakers . So I don't think it should be killing the frame rate of the program to 10.

 

[hippyman]

Lol okay maybe I was a little bland with my statement.
I guess my main and only complaint is the IDE starts to slow down at critical times. I mean sure we can the blame compatibility of the computer I'm using, but my PC is pretty up to date. minus my speakers . So I don't think it should be killing the frame rate of the program to 10.

I was just giving you a hard time

But I've heard about these performance problems. I've heard some people say if you set all of the power saving settings to 100% it should run better.

 

[devlkore]

There are definitely going to be more people using 1 than 2. 1 has been out for longer, there is a free option, many people have projects in progress and 2 is expensive (especially compared to the cost of all exporters in the humble bundle). The tech support forum might be more active, but that's because many issues with GM1 have already been fixed and have years worth of pre-existing discussion.

 

[Lukan]

I fully switched the second they let us start buying licenses.
I imported my main project of 2+ years, and it ran with no issues.
I really like the new IDE, and the room editor is soooooo much better.
It even seems to build faster than 1.x, in my experience.

 

[unoya]

I am now GM users, if GM2 allows me to use (currently can not login), I will consider using it.

 

[JackTurbo]

I'm still on GMS1, will likely be for sometime.
I've yet to hear of a feature implemented that really excites me.

Although the concept of super light objects intrigues me a great deal, its still a way off implementation.

 

[GMWolf]

I'm still on GMS1, will likely be for sometime.
I've yet to hear of a feature implemented that really excites me.

Although the concept of super light objects intrigues me a great deal, its still a way off implementation.

Tilemaps alone changed the way I write all my games. (I tend to work with tiles a lot in my games).
Though, I am still very underwhelmed by GML. Still a mess to work with. Its mostly the same coding experience as in GMS1, that is to say, sub par.

 

[chaz13]

I don't think there's much reason to build for 2 if it'll work in both.