Proposed licensing model

  • So you can't afford ?1.66 a month? That's what it works out to. Besides you can still then use it - you just won't get updated?

    I know, right? There's people complaining about something that costs less than what their grandmother probably spends annually for her knitting hobby.

    Like I said before, still one of the cheapest hobbies to have. And if you make a business out of it, deduct the expense from your taxes.

  • > It also seems a bit odd going from a free software to one where you pay more than Game Maker but then 2 years later don't actually own it.

    >

    That's what I also thought. It just makes it sort of greedy.

    It's like you first make it as a free alternative for MMF2 and after 10'000 People use this, you just turn this into a subscribe program to cash in. This makes me feel really betrayed, even if the reason would be that you make Construct as a full-time job.

    It would be better if you do this like Clickteam does. You pay for the software and when another major update comes out, users owning the old version get a discount. This makes the user decide, if he really wants to jump to a newer version or if he's happy with the software he just has. That's how lots of major software developers do.

    But as said, I feel betrayed by having something free and later have to pay to still use it.

    i think its good idea,

    mmf2 cost 150 eur that would be like 5 years of construct with free updates.

    and game maker's limitation to export to mobile phones by an user ( asuming construct will have mobile phone exporters) is much more expensive then those 40 coins.

  • liamdawe, deebee

    The price is sort of ok. But! You own it only 2 years long. It's like if I would give you a software and after one year I take it away from you. I never liked subscription plans and I still don't like it.

    Also deebee, if I want I could actually learn a programming language and program for free. And if I learn like C# or Lua, I won't be bound with just the exporters Construct has. Yes, it's cheap.

    This is the biggest difference

    While with 150 Euro I can only have Construct fully for 5 years. I can spend 150 Euro for MMF2 and I can use it also after 20 years. Sure it's then old but I still can use it, because I own the software.

  • I've edited the original outline: I think it's fair that any official exporters developed will not be charged for separately, so your 2 years license will cover, for example, a desktop runtime (if we make one).

    There will not be any splash screens in what you create. There are two reasons for this: firstly, it really annoys a lot of people (it's nice some of you think it's fair, but a lot of people have been vocal about this in the other thread). Secondly, with all the javascript being open, it's probably pretty trivial to remove any splashes we put in, so if you're paying to remove a splash, you may well feel ripped off seeing demo users regularly tweaking the javascript to get rid of it.

    I also think it's fair that once your license expires, you don't get any nag screens, you can continue to use the software in a sort of "frozen" state (no more updates). No point nagging people who have paid.

    Some users get up in arms when asked to pay to upgrade to a next major version, even with discounts - I don't think there's any system we can come up with that isn't going to offend someone or other. I'm happy to stick with subscription, and providing official exporters for free should make that a better deal for you guys.

    That's what I also thought. It just makes it sort of greedy.

    It's like you first make it as a free alternative for MMF2 and after 10'000 People use this, you just turn this into a subscribe program to cash in. This makes me feel really betrayed, even if the reason would be that you make Construct as a full-time job.

    I'm sorry, but this kind of annoys me. Three of us spend over three years developing Construct 0.x in our spare time - it's about a quarter of a million lines of code - and we've not really made any money (donations just about neatly cover hosting cost and that's all). It's been tonnes of work and we did it because we really like programming. I'm sorry that we are disappointing you by moving to paid software. However, we're only asking for approximately one day's wages every two years and also making allowance to use the software entirely for free on the condition you click away a dialog every now and then, and I can't help but feel that deal is perfectly fair for everyone.

  • So far there's only two models that have been looked at, open source, and commercial.

    The thing is you've had no success in either thus far.

    Construct 0.xx failed commercially because... well we wont go into that here, and it also failed as open source because it never received the full benefit of being open source.

    If you plan on just using those two possibilities, then you need to make a final decision on what you want to get out of it.

    Either a program that's completely community driven, or one that's driven monetarily.

    It would seem you've already made the decision, but I think is far too early to be thinking about licensing, since you don't have a salable product.

    The recent HTML5 addition to Gm should really drive that point across.

    That and the fact that there's very little revenue, or finished projects from Construct 0.xx.

  • liamdawe, deebee

    The price is sort of ok. But! You own it only 2 years long. It's like if I would give you a software and after one year I take it away from you. I never liked subscription plans and I still don't like it.

    Also deebee, if I want I could actually learn a programming language and program for free. And if I learn like C# or Lua, I won't be bound with just the exporters Construct has. Yes, it's cheap.

    This is the biggest difference

    While with 150 Euro I can only have Construct fully for 5 years. I can spend 150 Euro for MMF2 and I can use it also after 20 years. Sure it's then old but I still can use it, because I own the software.

    yes but only if you wont update mmf2 in those 5 years .

    and after 20 years with construct, ull launch it one day and get a a nice nostalgic splash screen( Ashley make a sexy splash screen ) to remember old days.

  • It's a good idea to not include any splash screens or something. But wouldn't then people tend to juse use the free version. The nag screen can be clicked away and you won't earn anything anyway.

    Also, why are you thinking of licensing this now? Wouldn't it be more in the priority list to actually finish Construct 2?

  • Realistically, the only way that everyone will get the software they really want, anytime soon, is if the guys can earn enough money from licensing to enable them to work full-time (or near enough!).

    I think people should realise that it's do or die time, because if this doesn't come off for Ashley et al, then Construct will not live for very long.

    I think there should be a little more support for whatever they decide.

    My 2 cents.

    Zen

  • In my mind, the licensing/subscription angle appears to be simple and fair. I have no problem paying, and I think that the Construct team benefiting financially from their hard work is long overdue. When I think of an ideal Construct 2 product, the paid version includes free updates and plugins for the duration of the 2-year period. Continuing support is crucial, and I know personally that you all are committed to that. So excited for Construct 2!

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • So basically, if we buy it, we get free upgrades for 2 years and after that we need to buy again, right?

    "Subscription" is an ugly word. "free upgrades for two years" is more palatable I think.

  • Ashley, there's only one problem I see here, but it seems like a major one.

    Someone using it for free gets unlimited updates, but nag screens

    someone who pays for subscription basically gets a frozen version, so after 2 years, the free one is actually better.

    Also, if it settles on a final model where some people couldn't update for free, the helpfulness of the community would diminish as some people would be asking questions, and there would be a constant,

    "I'm using v1.2",

    "oh, you should upgrade to v1.3, that bug isn't there"

    I think it would be better for the subscription to wear off with the return of the nag screen. You're paying for the right to publish it commercially, it seems anyway, right? or are you just paying to alleviate the annoyance of the nag screen. I know pirates will do what they will, but officially, are you 'allowed' to publish with the free nag version?

    Also, I propose a 3rd license model, an indie lifetime model, it would cost the price of the commercial model, but you would get lifetime updates with no nag screens, but still be limited by the 20,000 profit cap. I would definitely be willing to pay for that

  • Ashley

    Also another question pops up, you say that you and your team did this because you like programming, well why don't you want to keep it free.? You're not forcing yourself to program Construct because you don't like to program. You wouldn't mind programming 5 million lines for that, you make Construct because it's your passion to program a software!

    If I would make a software like this and first let this be free, it will stay free in the future. I don't want to scare away people with a subscription plan.

    I wouldn't even mind having to wait every month for an update. But well I can't do anything alone. Almost everyone says that the subscription plan is the best so I'm pretty sure it will stay like that.

  • Neo1000

    I'm a little appalled at this. Like everyone, the guys would like to earn a living from something they enjoy doing, but you imply they are wrong to do so.

  • You wouldn't mind programming 5 million lines for that, you make Construct because it's your passion to program a software!...

    If I would make a software like this and first let this be free, it will stay free in the future. I don't want to scare away people with a subscription plan....

    That's a silly thing to say. I love to make games. Because of this I have to sell my first salable game. In the real world, if you want to continue to do something you love, you need to make sure your bills are paid first. There's a free version anyway...what's to complain about. I don't even notice when I close the winrar nag screen anymore.

    Also, in case this goes to third page, please read my previous post about the third license model idea

  • I'm still just annoyed that the first plan was to have Construct open source and later it gets closed source. It's if Mozilla would decide that you pay a subscription plan for the latest version Firefox 4. I wouldn't mind if the next big non-construct project would be a paid software. It just will forever give a bad taste.

    As said, there are a lot of people that like this plan and I alone can't do anything about this and I gave my hopes up for Construct 2. I'll just stay with Construct 0.X

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)