Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

AppGameKit Classic Chat / AGK 2013 Survey Results

Author
Message
RickV
TGC Development Director
24
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 21st May 2013 15:54
Link
Hi,

Here's a summary of the AGK survey responses.

It makes for interesting reading.


Rick

Financial Director
TGC Team
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Santman
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Sep 2011
Location: Inverness
Posted: 21st May 2013 17:51
Link
Interesting results, very mixed. It would appear that the automatic creation of APK's etc are the big ones. Are you going to summarize what you guys are going to look at next now?
Back to top
Profile PM
AgentSam
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Mar 2012
Location: Virtual Space
Posted: 21st May 2013 19:12 Edited at: 21st May 2013 23:32
Link
My interpretation of the results with a few comments.

[1.1] AppGameKit Platforms

Both of the valid options in this section were stupid, because there was no option to leave a vote for: "No more platforms, no more features, just fix existing bugs and make it stable". With no such option, both of the available options would be incorrect for me. But which would I select, not given any other choice? I think I went for "No, add more features"... although, with that I only intended that I don't want TGC to waste resources on adding more platforms, at the expense of fixing bugs, enhancing the language, the IDE, etc.

[1.2] AppGameKit Platforms

The results in this section are very similar to my own votes, but it was somewhat surpricing that Linux and HTML5 support was rated so low.

Most valued platforms:
- Windows, iOS, Android.

Least valued platforms:
- Tizen, Wii U, Chromebook, Blackberry, and Ubuntu.

The others fall in between.

Oddities:
- Why was there a separate entry for "Linux" and "Ubuntu". Ubuntu is almost synonymous with Linux. Also, Android is Linux based.

[2.1.1] 3D Engine
[2.1.2] Sprites & 2D Engine
[2.1.3] Physics
[2.1.4] Files and media
[2.1.5] Sound & Music
[2.1.6] Multiplayer
[2.1.7] User Input
[2.1.8] Device sensors & device specifics
[2.1.9] Misc

These are all feature requests... If you look at the results, you'll see that the answers are ALWAYS biased toward "Sure, we want this".

However, there are a few features where there's a sharper division - those with over 60% of the votes in "4-5" range. These are the features that TGC should focus on, and propably will focus on. It's clear to see that TGC could assign lower priority to any feature where the total number of votes in 4-5 range is less that 60%. And if it's over 70%, then that's a high-priority feature! (There were few of those.)

Oddities:
- There was relatively high demand for "3D command set that matches Dark Basic Pro". But, command sets need to improve sometimes. I'm sure not everyone is 100% happy about the DBP 3D commands either, so dragging those along to AppGameKit might not be the best plan.

[3.1] AppGameKit Tier 1 IDE Editor

I hated the questions in this section because they didn't reflect my usage at all. So I really had to weigh my answers from the prespective of other developers.

First of all, in the question "Do you like the current Tier 1 IDE?", there was NO answer that I could have chosen.

I do not use the TIER 1 IDE, at all - ever. But I could not select "No, it's terrible, start again!", because that would be incorrect also. It's certainly not THAT bad, if you don't have anything better. But, if you can replace it with another editor, and I do, then you can completely and happily ignore the "built-in" IDE, with no gripes whatsoever. Do I want to use it? No. Would I use it if it was better? No. I use a customized programmers editor which supports everything I need - I'm very happy with it. So how do I rate the built-in IDE. Hmm, I just don't care, all I need in addition to my programmers editor, is the TIER 1 compiler and the documentation.

[3.2] AppGameKit BASIC Language issues

Again, all of these requests were naturally biased towards "Yea, we want this". The percentages in the 4-5 ranges should be scrutinized. They are the most important ones for prioritization.

[4] Tier 2 C++ coders

The results in this section were a bit difficult to interpret. There isn't a very strong consensus in the answers. But apparently every TIER 2 coder wants Wizards - surpricing! (I hate wizards, I prefer to make good templates manually. No wizard has ever come even close to my level of detail.)

The open text answers are quite difficult to read... stringed together like that. We should reformat them for easier reading. (I think I'll do just that, otherwise I'll never read them.)

[5] Third Party Tools & Hardware

Skipping...

[6] Publishing Apps

Here's how I interpret this one:
- The 6% who say they have "no plans to publish any apps with AGK", are propably those who have gone on to better more professional development tools, like Unity. Or they're ones who wanted to see if AppGameKit was easy enough for them, and found that it wasn't.
- The 10% who say "No, I can't work out how to [publish apps]", are the ones that TGC needs to reach out to and make better docs.
- The amount of "Hopefully soon" is 60% alone, but that could split into 30% published, 30% who didn't quite get there. So the total number of developers who published an app vs those who didn't publish, is about 50/50. That's not so bad.

Also, notice the very high demand for easier APK deployment. Developers are absolutely screaming for it in the feedback section.

NUMBER OF AppGameKit USERS?

The total number of people who answered the last question is 337.

If that's the number of developers using AppGameKit what does it tell us? For one, it tells us, that it's a really really low number. TGC cannot survive on AppGameKit sales - but they know this, and that's why they've got their eggs in multiple baskets.

Cheers,
AgentSam
Back to top
Profile PM
Markus
Valued Member
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Apr 2004
Location: Germany
Posted: 21st May 2013 21:08
Link
i think it would be a better result if we can arrange a amount of points.
maybe each month can all forum members arrange this points public for
priotrity the agk developement way.
points = passing of hours for a task what agk team need~
so we can better plan the future because we can see the ~ hours remain for a task and they are reserved by this.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
AgentSam
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Mar 2012
Location: Virtual Space
Posted: 21st May 2013 22:49 Edited at: 21st May 2013 22:50
Link
Here are the feedback sections of the survey, reformatted for easier reading, while keeping some of the "preformatted" text structure intact.

Let's see if these HTML files work as attachments.. they load no external resources, and contain nothing but the reformatting CSS and the feedback sections from the survey.

NOTE: I did take the liberty of removing some of the email addresses which were included in the results. This was done to to protect peoples anonymity (such as it is).

Cheers,
AgentSam

Attachments

Login to view attachments
Back to top
Profile PM
AgentSam
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Mar 2012
Location: Virtual Space
Posted: 21st May 2013 22:52 Edited at: 21st May 2013 22:53
Link
Here is the second part of the feedback.

This reformatting made reading the feedback sections much more enjoyable to me. Hope it helps you guys too. If there are issues with the CSS, or it looks completely wonked, let me know.

Cheers,
AgentSam

Attachments

Login to view attachments
Back to top
Profile PM
Marl
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Nov 2011
Location: Bradford, UK
Posted: 22nd May 2013 09:29
Link
The results highlight one problem with the question style.

How important is feature X? Very High, High, ... Low, Very Low

Each feature is rated on it's importance to the voter, but not in relation to other features.

If this were to be used as a basis for setting the direction of AppGameKit and prioritizing the order of development, it gives no clear answers.

For example, "Sprite blending modes" got 40% for 5 (highest) as did "More 2D Commands". What if the developers had to choose one or the other? Which one goes in the next release, which one gets delayed a year? either way 40% of people are unhappy.

Perhaps rating the feature upgrades against each other might be a better idea next time.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Hodgey
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posted: 22nd May 2013 11:50
Link
Quote: "For example, "Sprite blending modes" got 40% for 5 (highest) as did "More 2D Commands". What if the developers had to choose one or the other? Which one goes in the next release, which one gets delayed a year? either way 40% of people are unhappy."

That's not strictly true. IIRC, we could pick "very high" for multiple things so if someone picked very high for everything then they'd probably be happy if either were added to the build. Also, after reading the questions, I remember reconsidering some of my previous selections and possibly changing some based upon what the latest question asked. You do have a valid point but it's not that black and white.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
RickV
TGC Development Director
24
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 22nd May 2013 12:30
Link
Hi,

The feedback shows up a number of issues. We realise AppGameKit is far from perfect and the journey is still up hill. We have good climbing equipment and are not scared of the challenges ahead!

Paul is currently focused on rolling out a new Beta and has been reviewing and fixing recent bug reports. I have also asked him to look into the APK building issue as a matter of urgency.

You rightly point out that we're a small developer with limited resources. So it's very important for us to plan carefully based on past experience and to also look at this feedback and choose what our community is looking for.

We don't think developing new platforms is the right way to go at present. They take a very long time to develop and the actual platform might not be there when we're done - far too risky. Also you would not see any changes to existing platforms.

We feel the core areas to focus on for now are;

* Compiler bug fixes / faster compiler
* Android APK export option in IDE
* Far better help
* 3D animation (AGO)
* Debugger for tier 1

The first two we're sorting now and the help is something I can get involved in as I have more time now that the driving apps we have developed are all done. Developing these driving apps was good for AppGameKit too. It raised a number of issues we had to fix in the engine to make these commercial apps a reality.

We have also considered making the Compiler and IDE open source. This would allow third parties to take the code and improve AGK. TGC would focus on the core engine and keep complete control of it. What do you think about this idea?

Rick

Financial Director
TGC Team
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Zwarteziel
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jan 2011
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 22nd May 2013 12:55
Link
Hi Rick,

Thank you for posting the results of the survey. The statistics are interesting to read and mostly reflect my own input (though I would've thought suport for things like Spriter and Spine would rank higher, since they can speed up aspects of the development-process a bit).

I think the points on wich the team will focus first, as outlined above, are all valid and needed to provide a solid base for further development. As to making the IDE open-source, I think that might prove a very smart move. Lookat Indigo for DBPRO for example... A fantastic effort that really delivers a quality product better than the original IDE. (Although granted, it's not really open-source).
Back to top
Profile PM Email
RickV
TGC Development Director
24
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 22nd May 2013 13:10
Link
Hi Zerotown, thanks for the comments.

In my experience, AppGameKit is a mega sized project for us. It still needs lots of love and attention to see it through to the vision we have for it.

Spriter and Spine are cool tools. They might be easy to support, we'll see. Anyone know which is the better of the two?

Rick

Financial Director
TGC Team
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Wilf
Valued Member
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jun 2006
Location: Gone to Unity.
Posted: 22nd May 2013 14:26
Link
Spine seems to have much better momentum, they've just finished the Runtimes and are back on the editor again.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
JimHawkins
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Jul 2009
Location: Hull - UK
Posted: 22nd May 2013 14:41 Edited at: 22nd May 2013 14:41
Link
I think that the absolutely vital thing is to finalise and thoroughly debug the core engine. Without this, everything else is pointless.

Frankly, calling the latest system "beta" from the start was a bit of a joke, because "pre-alpha" would have been a better description. Adding new functionality when the existing code doesn't work correctly causes frustration. This is clearly reflected in the forum.

Opening up the OGL or DX surfaces to C++ or Pascal developers would allow a lot of prototyping of "wishlist" operations which could then be passed back to the TGC development team for potential inclusion. That way you get an army of geeks on your side.

It's also important to realise that the core is separate from the calling language. Holding up development of the engine because of the Basic implementation isn't very sensible, because we can test the core as a distinct entity, and that can then be reflected back into a language interface.

To be successful, AppGameKit needs a bullet-proof runtime system. For example, my company still sells some programs which were written 12 years ago and which still install and work correctly on W7 and W8. We're updating now with a major change to the methodology, but the central design issues remain based on solid and tested experience.

-- Jim DO IT FASTER, EASIER AND BETTER WITH AppGameKit FOR PASCAL
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Timshark
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2007
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posted: 22nd May 2013 17:52
Link
Yes, focusing on the compiler and the core engine seem like a good plan.

I also think the idea of opening up, at least, the IDE is a very smart move. It will help you focus and relieve you of some work. There are plenty of people in this very helpful community that will smack up those extra features we miss in the IDE.

About Spine and Spriter: I agree with Wilf. Spine is the most solid one right now and the progress is well thought out They won't add features before they have found the best way to implement them.

Keep up the good work.

I never want what I know.
Back to top
Profile PM
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 22nd May 2013 18:07 Edited at: 22nd May 2013 18:14
Link
I agree with AgentSam, the first question should have had an option for fixing bugs. There is no point adding new commands or platforms if users cannot use the existing functionality to complete their games.



Quote: "We don't think developing new platforms is the right way to go at present. They take a very long time to develop and the actual platform might not be there when we're done - far too risky."


Ouya should not be a big investment (I believe) as it already runs regular .apk files. Still waiting for mine, so haven't tried RTA on it yet. They are doing a lot of promo stuff for indie developers right now, asking for videos etc.

I have no idea what would go into adding support for Linux, but that's not a platform that is going away. It's growing. A lot of indies are supporting Linux.

Quote: "We have also considered making the Compiler and IDE open source."

I don't know what impact making the compiler open source would have. Are there any sequitur risks? The IDE I am all for.

Quote: "Spriter and Spine are cool tools. They might be easy to support, we'll see. Anyone know which is the better of the two?"


Haven't tried either. Both seems to do well so far. But I think there are more important matters to look into first.

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Phaelax
DBPro Master
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 22nd May 2013 18:08
Link
Quote: "Spriter and Spine are cool tools. They might be easy to support, we'll see. Anyone know which is the better of the two?"


I haven't used Spine yet, but from what I've seen it looks to have stronger development than Spriter which appears to not be going anywhere.

"You're all wrong. You're all idiots." ~Fluffy Rabbit
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
AgentSam
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Mar 2012
Location: Virtual Space
Posted: 22nd May 2013 18:09 Edited at: 22nd May 2013 18:13
Link
About the AppGameKit IDE

It's based on the Code::Blocks IDE, which is open source and licensed under GPL V3.

So, how can the AppGameKit IDE -NOT- be open source??

POST EDITED:

I suppose the answer is here:

Quote: "Q: What license is Code::Blocks released under?

A: GNU General Public License 3 (GPL) with an exception for third party plugins that can be of any license (including closed source) as long as they use only the SDK sources of Code::Blocks.

As an example: If you use the Code::Blocks SDK to develop a plugin, this could be even commercial. When you start using/modifying source code of other parts (i.e. the Code::Blocks core or other GPL3 plugins) the modifications or relevant (affected) parts must be provided as source code, too. However, usually (probably 99.9% of the cases) you'll only need to use the SDK.
"


Cheers,
AgentSam
Back to top
Profile PM
Paul Johnston
TGC Developer
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Nov 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 22nd May 2013 18:52 Edited at: 22nd May 2013 18:56
Link
Of course since CodeBlocks is GPL we have to provide the source to anyone that asks for it (although we can charge a reasonable fee to do so), currently no one has, but what Rick means by "open sourcing" it is actively promoting the source code and asking for changes that we would include in our version of the IDE.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Santman
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Sep 2011
Location: Inverness
Posted: 22nd May 2013 20:44
Link
Rick, paul

If you are looking at the ide, here's one thing I think as a part of that would be appreciated and probably not too hard: a list of functions like dbpro had for easy movement. I know you have folding active now, but that's never really worked in my use over two operating systems, and on large code moving between functions is just annoying. When your at it, the notes would be good too.

And on behalf of Paul and the whole team, perhaps we should focus less on shouting about bugs and more on being constructive. I've been annoyed by this in the past, even publicly on fb, but Paul has been pretty constantly ironing them out, and with regular updates that I for one appreciate. Less we forget, we all use agk because half the hard work is done for us.

At one point I almost gave up on agk, but as far as I'm concerned, there responsiveness to, what is effective for the new commands, a non paying community saved my support.
Back to top
Profile PM
Timshark
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2007
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posted: 22nd May 2013 22:27
Link

That's pure love to TGC and AGK.

AGK is the purest and coolest high level coding platform in ages.

I never want what I know.
Back to top
Profile PM
Apps Mobilis
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jan 2013
Location:
Posted: 23rd May 2013 15:50
Link
Quote: "
We feel the core areas to focus on for now are;

* Compiler bug fixes / faster compiler
* Android APK export option in IDE
* Far better help
* 3D animation (AGO)
* Debugger for tier 1

The first two we're sorting now and the help is something I can get involved in as I have more time now that the driving apps we have developed are all done. Developing these driving apps was good for AppGameKit too. It raised a number of issues we had to fix in the engine to make these commercial apps a reality.
"


I agree with the above 5 areas to focus on especially the 3D animation - please can you try and allow importing of Collada files or at least have a converter that will convert the textures and animations within it. Most (?) 3D packages can read and write in the Collada format so just supporting / converting this one format would be a huge step.

Quote: "
We have also considered making the Compiler and IDE open source. This would allow third parties to take the code and improve AGK. TGC would focus on the core engine and keep complete control of it. What do you think about this idea?
"


I REALLY want to be able to code on a non-Windows box (a Mac specifically) so having a cross-platform editor (and compiler) would be great.

With an open source editor you could open up the compiler as a service from TGC that the editor calls and passes code/assets to that the editor (from any platform) calls (I really did like the Freedom Engine code and deploy from the cloud idea!).

Sounds like you're focussing on the important bits.

I've been wavering about using AppGameKit (as I really need blended 3D character animation) and I've been investigating the potential use of using C#/Xamarin/MonoGame as it's incredibly useful to be able to debug a live running native app on the iPad but stepping through the C# code and setting breakpoints and inspecting variables etc through the Xamarin Studio IDE (even though it has converted the C# code to native Objective-C). Of course the downside is that there is only support for a more limited number of platforms and I think that AppGameKit looks as though it will better support things like Smart TV that MonoGame will never support and I see a big (and potentially profitable) future for Smart TV and casual / family games.

Luckily I'm not fully into the developing my game due to time constraints in my personal life so I'm sticking with AppGameKit and hope that in a few months when AppGameKit has 3D blended animations (fingers crossed!) that I'll be able to start serious work on my game.

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits" - Albert Einstein
Back to top
Profile PM
DazzyF
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th May 2012
Location:
Posted: 23rd May 2013 18:53
Link
I think the main problem with AppGameKit (for me), is trying to compile an app. I have followed all instructions provided, you tube videos etc, and always hit a problem, it is in desperate need to compile as Android, iOS etc straight from the program and not have to follow a 75 step instruction video, this is the main frustration with it, not only from me, but from I bet, the majority of users.

http://www.yorkshirereflections.com
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Jimmanator
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Nov 2010
Location:
Posted: 23rd May 2013 18:56
Link
Sad that there is not more interest in the playbook and bb10
All of the apps that I have released on the playbook and bb10 have got 100 times the downloads of all the other platforms combined.
Its free to develop and publish.
Back to top
Profile PM
easter bunny
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Nov 2012
Playing: Dota 2
Posted: 24th May 2013 03:29
Link
For me, the main thing I need (yes, need!) is Arrays in UDT's. A t1 debugger is next on my list. Then probably intelli-sense and context sensitive help (not having to open the browser)

Dodge those Balls, awesomest app on the Play Store
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Zwarteziel
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jan 2011
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 24th May 2013 19:18 Edited at: 24th May 2013 19:20
Link
Regarding the 'Spriter vs. Spine-support' question: it seems that the recently released Spine has the biggest momentum and greatest support. If I remember correctly, the JSON file-format is more easy to interpret than Spriter's equivalent. What's more, the Spine-team seems willing to pop out quite a lot of runtimes for different programming-languages, so it can be used natively. Maybe AppGameKit could be supported as well?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
TDavid
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Feb 2013
Location:
Posted: 25th May 2013 21:30
Link
I agree with AgentSam, the option to vote for bug fixes was lacking.

I bought AppGameKit because I don't know how to code. So if something doesn't work, I can't tell whether it's because of my lack of skills or because of a broken function. This can lead to pretty frustrating situations. I know that AppGameKit needs to expend it's 3D functions but I believe AppGameKit needs first and foremost to be dependable.

Besides, there are a lot of bug reports on the forum. I know it's normal for such a program, nevertheless it's not reassuring for newcomers.

Thanks for your continuous efforts. Keep up the good work.
Back to top
Profile PM
Zwarteziel
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jan 2011
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 26th May 2013 12:57 Edited at: 26th May 2013 12:58
Link
It might be that the option to vote for bug fixes was intentionally left out, since it is a given that TGC does it's best to squash them when they appear / are reported. Paul Johnston (and maybe other employees?) does (do?) a very good job in this regard imho and Rick has put 'compiler bug fixes' at the top of his list a few posts back.

As a side note: there is a special site devoted to bringing bugs to the attention of the team. You can use the issue tracker here. While it may be less frequented by AGK-users, I think it is given more (frequent) attention by AGK's main programmers than the forums.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Lucas Tiridath
AGK Developer
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Sep 2008
Location: Kings Langley, UK
Posted: 27th May 2013 18:35
Link
+1 for open sourcing the IDE.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-05-04 06:43:20
Your offset time is: 2024-05-04 06:43:20