My "disappointment about GMS2"

Discussion in 'GameMaker Studio 2 Community Tech Support' started by Marcos Ferreira, Jan 11, 2019.

  1. Marcos Ferreira

    Marcos Ferreira Member

    Aug 7, 2016
    Ok.. erh.....

    Let's try to discuss something about GMS2. When this version has annouced, my hype has go to extreme, following every post on facebook from Yoyo Games. I love the idea of how this version of engine go. Workspace, interface, new tools, is very cool.

    BUT, i'm sad to say i'm moving to another engine actually (is not the case what engine is... is not the point). Because i think GMS and Yoyo games move in a low pace with this tool. GMS2 its a excellent tool, but have some features necessary on today reality, things like Interface Editor... its such a pain losing much time to build menus and interfaces, shader with nodes, a kind of "fixed step" or "physic step" to work better with physics and networking.

    The upcoming list from GMS2 roadmap is a good list i think, but, see others engines, even with a small team working running more fast (see, i dont suspect any of potential from yoyo team). An example <another engine>, and open source engine with patreon support and some devs, the progression is very solid and a way more cleary what is the next release (features, fixes, etc).

    I love Game Maker, but to be honest.. its hard to keep, at least for me, working with. I made a dev of my game, have single and multiplayer game, i took 2 years to dev to realise the multiplayer will need more time. So i tried another engine. Took for me 6 months to convert all and build the alpha of my multiplayer.

    I know, this is about my experience and needs, please guys dont see this like a toxic or bad intention. I just sharing my thougs and frustration to see if is only me on this. thanks
    csanyk, Mert and Cowlord like this.
  2. DarklinkFighter

    DarklinkFighter Member

    Mar 25, 2018
    I agree with you in some points.
    I am using GMS2 primarily for teaching some friends the basics of programming. And for some free time projects where I don't want to get distracted by "to much" engine feature configuration stuff.
    For both things game maker is great... But also in these 2 areas I feel that other products are better for long term...

    For example my friends asked me why they have to "Code Configure" a lot in Game Maker and I simply have no answer to that...
    The Variable Definitions Window is great step into the right direction... But it lacks of so many things that would catapult Game Maker to a whole new level for Multi Professional Teams...
    Your point with an interface editor counts to that pretty much as well...

    On the other side I can imagine that developing such systems is incredible hard... Today I think we tend to argue a lot about things we know from the most used and highest rated products without taking into account that these companies have much more resources and experience. And I do that sometimes by accident as well even if I don't mean it bad then.
    In the end I still like Game Maker even if I feel that it fights against my productivity with all it's power :D
    But I also don't hide that I use multiple other game engines regularly as well...
  3. Marcos Ferreira

    Marcos Ferreira Member

    Aug 7, 2016
    I agree this is not a easy tasks, but yoyo games have conditions to invest i believe.. see how much this business has cost to playtech:

    Well... sad my post have censored another engines name, its a discussion... only a simple discussion... I think this is predefined but... man.. i hope this change... another example, i waiting for multiple pivot points.. this is not a complex thing, this is on roadmap since release of GMS2.
    Again, I'm not here to criticize, I just wanted to understand.
  4. Cowlord

    Cowlord Member

    Jun 29, 2017
    I agree with your point about their slow pace. I heard they just hired 2 new employees but they really need to up their game to stay current. I would really prefer to stick with GameMaker Studio over Unity as I find it a better 2D specific engine.
    csanyk likes this.
  5. JeffJ

    JeffJ Member

    Jun 20, 2016
    Sadly, I agree. It's also one of the reasons why Mike left - the stagnation of GMS2 over the past year especially. Even with the censor, I know exactly which engine you're talking about. Not long ago I even went as far as downloading it and making a small game with it just to test it out, because I've been standing with one leg out of GM for the past 2 years now. The engine you mention is very solid, especially considering that it's literally free vs. the $1200 I forked over for my current GMS2 license, not to mention the full price I paid for GMS1 Master Collection back in the day. One of the only things that engine is lacking is proper console support - their Xbox One module is basically just UWP (no native) and their Switch module is still in beta and costs $3000 (which is, believe it or not, with a discount). PS4 basically doesn't exist. So if you want console support, you're pretty much SOL. Other than that - it wipes its ass with GMS2. And it hurts to admit that, as someone who's invested thousands of dollars into it, as well as 15 years of my life.

    It speaks volumes for my current dissatisfaction that this is the first time I've experimented with a new engine since I found GM in 2004. More than that, I've noticed that more and more developers, even (or maybe especially) the more high profiled ones, are leaving due to similar reasons.

    I really badly want YoYoGames to succeed - not only are they very nice, passionate and hardworking people, but even from a purely selfish standpoint I have a very vested interest in their success, figuratively and literally. I don't want to flush 15 years of use down the toilet and start over. But there comes a point where you have to weigh what will be best long term; starting over now with a solid foundation for the future, or keep praying that things will get better. I've done the latter for 2 years now, and it isn't looking much brighter.

    TL;DR; I hear you, and as much as it pains me to say this, I agree.

    Oh, and as a side note; I've not even really thought about the GUI stuff you mention, as I've pretty much just come to accept that you have to build pretty much everything yourself, so last year, I spent 2 months building my own GUI framework with support for buttons, sliders, checkboxes, radiobutton lists, dropdowns etc., all extremely flexible, skinnable and customizable, and with extended use in mind. Now, the real issue here for me, is that I made it as an external package so that I could always just plug it into future projects, but then I bumped into the fact that GMS2 doesn't allow you to import your own local projects like GMS1 did, completely negating all my carefully designed module designed work. So yay.
    Cowlord, SnoutUp and csanyk like this.
  6. rIKmAN

    rIKmAN Member

    Sep 6, 2016
    I stopped using GMS2 and spent a few months last year using another engine, and seeing as for some pathetic reason even the name of other engines is being censored I will just say the one I used tries to bring people together - unite them some might say....

    I also tried the other 2 well known engines as I have an Oculus Rift and wanted to experiement with some VR stuff which was fun, but I ended up coming back to GMS2 as I'm an old fart and heart is in 2D games, although I did learn a lot of 3D stuff that will be helpful for me going forward even in relation to 2D and asset creation.

    There have been many threads like this over the last couple of years, most of which I have been a vocal part of (especially Spine related stuff which is finally being brought up to date at last) but the takeaway I got from it was that there isn't much point in continually going over the same problems over and over again as they never go anywhere other than being locked for talking about alternative engines or them being deemed by mods to be unconstructive or conjecture.

    The bottom line is that you have to talk with your wallet and your feet, if you aren't happy then go and find an engine that *does* make you happy, because as cathartic as venting on here or reddit etc is, it really doesn't achieve anything in terms of affecting change, seeing less users and less income might.

    Mike is a massive loss in my opinion, literally irreplaceable in terms of his talent and familiarity with the engine, but life goes on and I'm sure (or I hope!) that YYG would have planned for his departure, the future and have an understanding of where they are going and some of the roadmap improvements sound great.

    That's not to say that there still aren't some really talented people at YYG because there obviously are, the most visible and well known of which would be Russell who I feel just the same as Mike about in terms of his experience and talent - if he left as well I really would start worrying and looking elsewhere - but as I said things change and I'm sure the other existing and new devs there are extremely talented and are going to get their chance to shine and show what they can do.

    It could be a disaster, or it could be an amazing time for GMS2 with an injection of nw talent to the team - time will tell I guess.

    The issues I have are the speed at which things are implemented and how well they are tested before being released, as the last 18mths or so has made YYG look silly at times with some releases having very obvious bugs that should have been caught in QA way before release but weren't for whatever reason.

    They have improved their communication since the big thread last year, I think that is plain for all to see, although support is still pretty slow at times but maybe that's because my tickets are usually quite in depth and not basic issues. Also a special mention to Ross Manthorp who I think is doing a great job as Community Manager and handling things really well, he's also a really nice guy from the interactions I've had with him - so keep that up please Ross! :)

    As I said my heart is in 2D and I personally think GMS2 is better for that than any of the other engines I tested when I take into account my knowledge and understanding of the engine and the speed at which I can get things up and running in comparison - and I've already paid for my licences so I'll be here for a while yet especially with the Spine update opening a lot of opportunities for me personally.

    Ultimately everyone has to make their own decision for their own reasons.

    For the GUI stuff my opinion is that GMS can't possibly include every feature that every user might want, they can just provide the tools which allow the creation of any of those things - which is what they have done (for the most part)

    The marketplace has loads of assets that fill the various gaps that aren't in the core engine ( skinnable UI's included) and whilst I also much prefer having some features in-engine and "official" as opposed to relying on a 3rd party or individual to maintain an asset, I think most of us are aware that being "officially included" or maintained / developed by YYG doesn't mean that it will be kept up to date or maintained either.

    We only have to look at Spine, Google Play, various mobile extensions and the Facebook Instant Games extension to see that "official" extensions are often worse than those provided by people on the marketplace in terms of features and updates.

    You *can* export to consoles using the engine you mentioned, but due to the open source nature of it they can't include libraries etc to enable it as standard.
    Porting to XB1, PS4 and Switch is possible and available from a company that is listed on their website that has developed their own in house exporters and tools to do so, but of course this is a paid for service and you'd have to contact them for prices of those services to see whether it would be worthwhile.

    For the asset packages you can upload them to the marketplace, mark them as free and then they appear in My Library inside the IDE and you can pull them down into any project you like, or download the .yyz file and then drag and drop it into any new project like you would with any other asset.

    It isn't as easy as it should be I agree, and fixing that is on the roadmap - but it is possible if you spend a few mins to go through the marketplace upload etc.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2019
  7. JeffJ

    JeffJ Member

    Jun 20, 2016
    Oh yeah, I've not even bothered looking at engines that are primarily 3d, because I'm happily married to 2d too, so I get it.

    I have to say I disagree. People just leaving and talking with their feet and wallet as you put it tells of dissatisfaction, but nothing concrete. I think it's important for the users left who do care a lot about the future of GMS2 to be vocal. Silence may be misinterpreted as satisfaction, and people just leaving tells them nothing more than that people are unhappy. This is good, and it isn't unconstructive when people are actually telling quite specifically what it is they find lacking. But at this point we're basically discussing the act of discussing, so I'll leave it at that.

    I do agree however with the instability of the releases for the last 18 months, and as a result, I've lost a lot of trust in updates and update more and more infrequently, which in itself is an issue, since it will take longer for those issues to get notified and reported. I will say however that the fact that they finally listened to user feedback and introduced a beta channel (like GMS1 pretty much always had and GMS2 should have had from the beginning) is definitely a step in the right direction in that regard, so hopefully that will get better.

    I am aware of their offer for a third party company to do the porting. But I actually did reach out to their lead guy a few weeks ago and asked specifically about the console situation in terms of SDKs etc. as someone who's already in "the system" and would be allowed access. He directly told me that Xbox One support is boiled down to UWP, PS4 kind of exists but they haven't updated their SDKs in years and, in his words, is not really suitable for use. Switch is the most stable and active console module they have, and no games have yet been released with it, and it's still in alpha (hence why it's so "cheap"). You can go ahead and ask them yourself, but you'll of course need to provide console authorization credentials as I did.
    I am not interested in third party porting.

    Lastly, I am also fully aware of the marketplace "solution", which is not viable for me for several reasons. Even if it was, it is completely inferior to what GMS1 has already offered us for 7 or 8 years already (and again, should have been in GMS2 from the very beginning). You say that fixing that is on the roadmap, but as far as I know that is still just speculation based on people's interpretations of the roadmap, and YYG haven't actually confirmed that this is what it means. I really hope you're right, though. Even if you are, it's just a random item with absolutely no indication of when or even if it will happen.
  8. rIKmAN

    rIKmAN Member

    Sep 6, 2016
    I would agree with that if people hadn't been vocal multiple times in the past and got nowhere fast - me and you are both pretty vocal on here and had conversations with devs regarding various things and really got nowhere despite our best efforts to get and provide information. We just have to wait for the YYG timeline and what they deem important in terms of it's place on the list when it comes to what gets updated and what doesn't.

    So for me as I said the continual discussions on the same issues are a bit pointless and the only option is for people to make a decision based on what is right for themselves personally going forward. If that's a new engine then so be it, if it's to wait it out then so be it.

    It's not like GMS2 is unusable in any way after all, it just lacks that extra bit of functionality here and there, is a bit lacking when projects start to get larger and more complex and has parts that are left to go so far out of date that it gets silly.

    Everything appears great until you dig into it and then things start to seem like it was done up to a point of 75% and then left and they moved onto some other feature, so everythign feels unfinished or not a fully working or complete implementation of whatever it is.
    I played around with that engine and ultimately found it a bit lacking both in terms of community and documentation. Browsing the docs is how I stumbled upon the details of that company that do the porting.
    I also didn't really enjoy the workflow in comparison to the other engines so right now I'd say it's not for me.

    Fair enough with the 3rd party porting, I was just pointing out that the option is there and exists for XB1, PS4 and Switch exporting - just not as standard due to licencing.
    Again fair enough, but the option is there. Not that it should be that way of course, but the functionality does exist even if it should be a much less convoluted and local process.
    It was a while ago but I'm sure that it was confirmed that that was what that entry on the roadmap was by a dev on here, but it was a while ago now and woudl be hard to find the exact post. I do remember reading it though.

    However I agree the roadmap was a great idea but is ultimately a bit pointless.
    A roadmap that is in no particular order, can be changed at any time and have things added and removed without notice isn't really a roadmap at all, it's just a random list of things that may or may not happen and don't allow you to do any futureproofing or planning for moving forward.

    At the time it did stop people moaning about what new features were coming and being left in the dark etc though, which is why I think it was even created in the first place.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2019
    JeffJ likes this.
  9. immortalx

    immortalx Member

    Sep 6, 2018
    Watching this thread as it's of great interest and loving to hear what the pros have to say. As long as this discussion stays open, I don't mind the censoring of engine names. They are a business after all and I'd do that myself if I was in their position.
    I've no real big complaint about GM since I'm fairly new, inexperienced and just a hobbyist. But I do care and worry about those that put their bread in the table with GM. I really do.
    And what I get by reading this and past discussions is that there's just not a clear answer to the question "what does YYG want GM to be?".
    The way I see it, there are 2 kinds of engines as of now: The easy/cookie-cutter-game/hit-a-wall-too-early engines and the hard/can-make-an-AAA-title/even-pros-struggle ones. And then there's GM in the middle...
    So what direction does GM seem to be going to? If it it's going more to the latter, I think everyone would be happier. Pros would be definitely happy and I don't see why hobbyists wouldn't either, because it's the best of both worlds being able to start easy, but knowing that if you want to up your game you won't have to switch to another engine.
    Nocturne likes this.
  10. Marcos Ferreira

    Marcos Ferreira Member

    Aug 7, 2016
    I think the objectives is not a reason to this long time with small gm updates. But reading answers from @rIKmAN and @JeffJ i think this kind of thread dont change anything and, more than this, Yoyo Games seens not worryng about. I have a business here in my country, we work with erp softwares. We definitly like to hear about other solutions and, more than this, retain our customers trying to offer better solution. I doubt if the yoyo charge subscription of the tool would be taken this situation in this way. But..

    One last example about this, the future updates, see this information:

    The list below represents the planned additions, this is not necessarily the order they will be done in or released. Smaller items may well appear directly without appearing on this list.

    While we will try and keep this list updated, items listed are also subject to change or removal without notice.

    • 9-Slices
    • Adaptive Icons (Android)
    • Additional IDE Translations
    • CI Building
    • Colour tinting of tiles
    • Education Updates
    • Facebook Instant Games
    • HTML5 Web Sockets
    • Local Multiplayer
    • Redefine key bindings for the IDE
    • Sequences
    • Source Control Updates
    • Spine Update
    • Sprite Attach Points
    • Todo List
    • Video Playback
    • Vulkan
    Updates they say its not in discussion (theres another list on roadmap talk about things in discussion) and this could be change or removed (?) so this is in discussion too... so weird. Sprite Attach Points is the only thing i like to use, this item i think is there since the gms2 release (or on a date close of this). 9-Slices, sorry i think is not about Devs, i think this is a business view, but 9-Slices is a days work (not judge anyone). Whats why i'm sad leaving gm. Because "what does YYG want GM to be?" seens to have a bad answer for users. The focus is to release new ways to make more profit like exporters etc. Sorry my sincere words. I hope i'm wrong.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2019
  11. Tryzna

    Tryzna Member

    Jul 9, 2016
    I ageree and can add a bit more, like how unstable gms2 is(sometimes have to restart it dozen times before it ll allow me to import sprite), how almost every update breaks my project(last one broke collisions for current all the backups and have to use release from october to continue work current current project) and tons of tiny little annoyances, that even tiny, making the day less comfortable.
    However, i still somehow like it. Love the new user interface and workspace layout, even i hated it at first, but once i understood on how it is meant to be used i felt in love with it. Like how accesible gml is while allowing for creative freedom and so on. Its far from perfect, but im used to it, know what i can expect and in a werid way, im happy with it;-)
  12. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Jun 20, 2016
    The exporters aren't just for profit, though. Plenty of users were clamoring for console exports, and they finally gave them to us. For a lot of professional users, lack of console exports is a deal-breaker for an engine, so I think it's great that YYG has been focusing on consoles more.

    I agree that GM is updated slowly, but the engine does everything I need it to. I can't really think of a time where GM has gotten in my way while making my game, and there aren't many things I'm really wanting from the engine, so the slow updates don't bother me much. If I was a carpenter, GM would be the hammer I've had sitting in my toolbox for ten years. Not super glamorous or anything, but it does what it was made for well. I understand that not all developers are working in the same niche as me, so it'd be great if GM updated quicker, but GM's always been perfect for me.

    Everyone is always complaining about GMS2 stability, too, but I haven't had too many problems.
    kupo15 and BaBiA Game Studio like this.
  13. Sn3akyP1xel

    Sn3akyP1xel Member

    Mar 13, 2018
    As 2d dev goes, i'm blown away by GM2 and the intuitive interface. The only thing I'm dissapointed about is a lack of FMV support (which made up a small chunk of my initial project plan).
    Since i started on the project, the quality of content i've built and the speed at which it's running at under YYC is superb.

    It's still important to always note, you will only get out of it what you put in.
    RichHopefulComposer likes this.
  14. GMWolf

    GMWolf aka fel666

    Jun 21, 2016
    What bothers me most with GMS2 these days, is that in a couple months I am able to piece together a custom engine from open source libraries that has most of the features I use in GMS2: a lever editor, asset management, scripting language, renderer, physics.
    And though the expexperie of using the engine may not be as seemless as with GMS2, I do get the benefit of week established programming languages (c++, Lua), far better performance, better level editor (tiled is great), and a whole host of libraries to use in my projects.

    Now granted GMS2 offers cross platform development. But that's about it's only redeeming quality. And even then, if you want to do anything remotely complicated (More complex shaders, using extensions, etc), you have to port these features yourself.

    There are very few projects I want to start in GMS2 anymore, as I feel it's future is uncertain, and it offers very little in terms in tooling and features. The fact of the matter it that GMS2 really doesn't do that much for you. Especially when you start working on slightly more complex projects, where you have to throw out most of what GMS does for you:
    Isometric view: better write you own batching system.
    Path finding: gonna need a DLL for that. And slowly creep all your game logic into it.
    AI: again, better write a DLL.
    Networking: you're gonna need a server not written in GM.
    Blendmodes and shaders: write your own batching system, again.
    The list goes on.

    At which point you bypass so much of the engine, all wirtten in GML , that you may as well just write your own engine with a language that actually makes this easy to do.
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2019
    csanyk and DarklinkFighter like this.
  15. the_dude_abides

    the_dude_abides Member

    Jun 23, 2016
    Hasn't that always been the case? GameMaker started off as an easy to use tool for everyone, but it had the capability to do more if you had the know how. Not everyone does, and that's why the marketplace exists. If everyone had the same skill level then it wouldn't be needed, as why would you buy something you could "easily" program yourself?

    You might have legitimate complaints about GMS 2 features, but you are coming at this from the angle of being quite a capable person. Not all of us are, and the notion of sticking together open source stuff to make an "engine" - sheesh! If you can do all that then you're not representative of who GMS is for....because if we could all do that then GMS wouldn't need to exist! Why would you buy something you can "easily" put together yourself from free assets?

    The answer is pretty simple. If GMS is still the best source for inexperienced, or less capable, developers it will be used by them. If they are the majority - it is what it is. If the majority are more capable and want better features, then GMS must improve or they will use another engine. I can understand gripes about whether an engine you've paid for delivers on that cost, but you always knew the intention behind what it offered - something for everyone.

    If "something for everyone" is not enough for you, and the others, then you've all clearly outgrown the software. If that's true for the majority of users.....well, then YoYo have a problem. If it's not true...well, then you (and the others) have a problem with a lack of perspective.
    breakmt likes this.
  16. Mert

    Mert Member

    Jul 20, 2016
    Here's a tutorial about Game Maker - Facebook Instant Games integration. The tutorial won't work, don't bother reading. It wouldn't work the time it was written neither, the author missed some parts. It lacked the most important core facts anyways. Now it won't work because the api is outdated and Facebook implemented some other things afterwards.

    You might think that that tutorial was written for you, but in fact it was written just so Game Maker can take place in Facebook's list which should be removed until Game Maker brings-in the proper support.

    That's Yoyogames boys, everything is outdated and overpriced ^^
    csanyk, kagamma and rIKmAN like this.
  17. Warspite2

    Warspite2 Member

    Jun 23, 2016
    Overall I have mixed feelings about game maker. We have to remember in the beginning it was basically a hobby game creator. Once 1.4 had the ability to compile to Android and other platforms (in 2012), devs started using it as a commercial development tool. Yoyo realized this and made a new version from ground up which is gms 2. So I dont necessarily consider it just a hobbiest dev tool anymore. Many people use it for their business. I use it as roughly 80% business and 20% hobby and I love it I really do.

    Since 2012 I started my business and i've created games that i've never thought would of been possible with it. Now my games are all coded from scratch with gms2.

    Now here's the thing for me. I've come to the conclusion that it is possible to outgrow it. I feel like I have reached a point where in order to take my game dev and business to the next level I must move on. I recently started learning one of the big 3d engines.

    Now check this out. When I jumped into the 3d engine I had a pretty good understanding of programming from using gms for years. I was completely surprised how the c# seemed so similar to gml in many ways. So it's like I already had somewhat of a head start.

    Things such as multiplayer and all the social side of gaming like heavy Twitter and Facebook integration are crucial to success. Next many different ad advertisers and things like reward ads are also important. I feel the above mentioned things are the areas where gms2 is holding me back. Yes, 2d games are great but I need to have a couple 3d games out there in the mix as well. It's all about revenue and profit at this point.

    It's much better to start with gms2 instead of a 100% codeless engine. Those code free engines don't really teach you what you need to know to move on. You get zero programming knowledge out of those. Plus you are at the mercy of the developers of the engine. You have to hope they keep the engine going and updated or else you will no longer be able to update your games.

    As I already mentioned, using gml for years at least gets you some basic understanding of programming. This understanding can be applied to other more advanced engines to take your dev projects to the next level.

    My conclusion is this. I may not be where i am if it wasn't for game maker and the community here. Next it is still totally fun to think of a game and be able to develop it so extremely quick that you will be playing it within an hour! Now that my friends, i'm not so sure the big engines can do.
  18. Samuel Venable

    Samuel Venable Time Killer

    Sep 13, 2016
    Only things I'm interested in are right here^

    Mac support that doesn't die, a better graphics system than OpenGL on Mac and Linux, and cross-platform video playback.
  19. Amon

    Amon Member

    Sep 13, 2016
    Since I bought GMS2 my initial time learning it was fun and easy. I'm so happy I jumped onboard the GMS2 bandwagon as my productivity has increased 10 fold. For me, it has everything I need. Granted I'm not in any way a pro coder which is what lead me here in the first place. I have ideas and those get realised very quickly with GMS2. GML is a lovely simple language to use with tons of helper functions that help get done what I need to be done.
    RichHopefulComposer likes this.
  20. BaBiA Game Studio

    BaBiA Game Studio Member

    Jun 20, 2016
    I think that happens to other people too - Tom Francis for example. He had success with the Gunpoint and Heat Signature (both were GMS1.x games), but for his newest project he has moved to another engine. Doesn't mean that he hates GMS, but he has found that he probably pushed it to the limits that he could in Heat Signature and now needs deeper 3D functionality.
    I'm a bit like @Amon as I jumped straight onto GMS2 when it was first released. I have found the transition very easy and for some reason never seemed to run into the major problems that other people have from one release to the next. I am still just hobby-coding, aim to start this year on a project that I will look to release commercially.
    RichHopefulComposer likes this.
  21. FrostyCat

    FrostyCat Member

    Jun 26, 2016
    If you want to talk about outgrowing GMS 2, it's worth talking about how uneven this tendency is across different use cases.

    You wouldn't outgrow GMS 2 for years if your project or specialty looks anything like the pixel graphics action fare on YoYo's Showcase page (the over-representation is just absurd). But with many other common and well-known use cases, you'd outgrow GMS 2 within days of starting. I'd bet YoYo's precious telemetry data hasn't been telling them any of that. Here are some of the most prominent examples:
    • API integrations (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, IAP, etc.)
    • Non-action strategy genres and associated language features (e.g. background threads, "lightweight" objects, basic OOP, etc.)
    • Native integrations with the window/layout, the audio stream, drawing surfaces, data structures or the file sandbox
    • 3D, non-raster 2D graphics, or CTL text
    Add to this the completely un-businesslike behaviour that YoYo has exhibited over the past year and beyond:
    • Complete neglect of official extensions, to the point that non-official alternatives do a better job at customer support
    • Improper and incomplete accounting of Marketplace transactions
    • Continued reports of paying customers not able to activate or maintain their paid GMS 2 licenses
    • Excessive wait time in the support queue (e.g. radio silence from last summer) and inappropriate feature prioritization (e.g. forcing through a large Spine update in the midst of the Android libpng security bulletin deadline)
    • Not a single advert coming from the publishing wing for partners under its fold, 6 months down the road
    It's almost like they want us to grow out of GMS 2 the instant we are ready to turn professional or do anything that resembles professional capacity.

    I still have some intermittent income reliant on my general knowledge of GM, so maybe I'll stay just to have a revenue-neutral hobby. But once the staff at YoYo comes back from the holidays in spirit and body, they'd better shape up and listen to pros, or they'll get coal down the chimney sooner or later.
    DBenji, cyberkirin, Arconious and 3 others like this.
  22. Sn3akyP1xel

    Sn3akyP1xel Member

    Mar 13, 2018
    Wouldnt make much sense from a business perspective. GMS2 is so close to being great, video support and localisation and the like would be a massive convenience for sure.
    Lets hope they're listening and working hard behind the scenes to make a GMS3 based on their loyal customers feedback.
    If they acknowledge some of the requests it would increase our production times, the quality of our game and likely fetch more attention to GMS, which can only be good for the product and the dev.
  23. Maa2007

    Maa2007 Member

    Jul 15, 2018
    game maker was my gateway into game making and programming, but now after many years, it does show some lacking, one obvious thing for me is its bad support for vector graphics,
    my game would have benefited from vector graphics for this reasons:

    - small size of vector files
    - you can make curvy platforms while maintaining small sprites file sizes
    - don't have to worry about resolution

    other thing is the levels editor, even though it became way better in version 2 compared to 1.4, but still it should have way more features,
    level designing some times can be as tedious as programing the actual game,

    some of the features i wish i had is if you can draw bezier lines directly in level editor then turn them into platforms, something like this would help designing levels way faster
  24. Arconious

    Arconious Member

    Jun 20, 2016
    I've been with GMS2 since the beta and I bought into the product then, because at the time, a lot of the buzz was about how the move away from Delphi would finally mean expansions and changes to GML and other engine functionality.

    Since release, very little has been added on that front. Features on the road map have been there for over 2 years, with some of them being pushed into an even further out "In Discussion" category. The last major feature YoYo talked about (if I recall) was Sequences, and that was back in August -- we have yet to hear a peep about them since.

    My confidence that GMS2 will expand as a useful tool, in a meaningful time frame, has thinned greatly.
    kagamma and JeffJ like this.
  25. rmanthorp

    rmanthorp YoYo Games Staff Admin YYG Staff

    Apr 15, 2016
    Hey, just dropping in to let you know we are reading and all working hard. I appreciate your thoughts and I'm sorry you've gone from excited to disappointed, Marcos. It's good to know that the issues raised are all things we are aware of and looking to improve in 2019. Thanks.

    Noticed a mention on publishing as well, when we first announced that was the start of the team and the initiative. These things take time but we should have some stuff to share from the publishing team soon.
  26. JeffJ

    JeffJ Member

    Jun 20, 2016
    Ross, if at all possible, I think a lot of us would greatly appreciate any thoughts on the concerns shared in this topic a bit more specifically - ie. if some of them will be addressed, if some of them won't (for whatever reason) etc.. Rather than the bit more broad "we hear you", which, while still appreciated, isn't saying a whole lot.
  27. rmanthorp

    rmanthorp YoYo Games Staff Admin YYG Staff

    Apr 15, 2016
    Overpromising and underdelivering is a lot of the reason we've landed in bad situations in the past. I want our actions to speak louder than my words. However, broadly: Roadmap for 2019 is being updated / Beta channel for 2 was introduced for faster turnaround and more stable releases for 2 / Processes for better workflow for reporting bugs/issues / Marketplace and general web updates ongoing (now that the team is back up and running) / Publishing news soon. It's been a very transitional period for us as most know but I think 2019 is looking strong.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice