Proposed licensing model

  • 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.

    Oh, you're right... the subscription expiring has to revert back to demo mode, then. Good catch... it means users who have paid end up getting nagged again, but the message can be changed if the license has expired, and made less intrusive.

    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.?

    Because I graduate soon, and I need to get a job, and I can't think of a better job than working on this, but to do that I need a way to pay rent, food, bills etc. I could get a job, and it would be tech related because that's what I'm best at, but there's nothing worse than doing a 9 till 5 on a computer then coming home to carry on working on a computer. There's just no time for anything else. This has in fact been responsible for some lengthy gaps between updates in 0.x. Plus, if we're going full time, we can make a much better, more capable program.

    Mozilla are a large organisation with many employees, several income streams from parent companies and advertising or search engine deals, and I'm a guy in a bedroom who sometimes writes some code. Don't take this the wrong way, but you kind of sound a bit like "hey, this guy loves programming, so why can't he just do it because he loves it then I get to have a free program as well?" It doesn't work quite like that... I suppose you want painters to work a 9-to-5 in a call center so you can have their paintings for free, just because they love painting so much? What if they could make a living from painting instead?

  • Is a 2 year subscription model going to be enough for you to go full time on C2?

    Wouldn't it be better to put a price on major updates?

    40 pounds for a pro version and 10 pounds for major updates for example..?

  • I still agree with Neo1000 and also everything newt has said here and in the other thread. The way i am reading it is people are thinking anyone that disagrees just doesn't want to buy Construct if it is commercial at ?200 and bringing the argument that will pay for itself in no time.

    I agree with that and from what i have read so does Neo1000 other than the change of plan. This is not a problem with paying and in fact for a quality program like Construct if it was in a stable state i would pay up to ?400. The problem i have is this time out subscription plan, sure i want to support this app and would be happy to buy it if i could keep it but i can't see that happening if after 2 years i then don't own it and have to pay again.

    After a few years doing that it would be more than MMF2 and on the way to a unity pro price and also what is to say development will keep happening? What if i paid for 4+ years and then development stopped for some reason, i would not technically own the program i had spent hundreds on.

    Again i want to support construct and would be happy to buy if i can actually keep using the product i paid for but i really don't like this subscription idea.

  • How about lucid's idea then: a third license, 'indie perpetual', which is more (�150 say) but lasts indefinitely? You only save money if you keep using it for 7-8 years, but it never expires. You then can choose between a lower subscription rate or a higher one off cost. I suppose we could also have an option to transfer to perpetual from a subscription, less any subscription already paid.

    Edit: it's also hard to put a price on "major" updates because our development model doesn't have any major updates. It's planned that we have incremental updates (29, 30, 31...) indefinitely.

  • Because I graduate soon, and I need to get a job, and I can't think of a better job than working on this, but to do that I need a way to pay rent, food, bills etc.

    So you think that for about 40'000 People x 40 Pounds = 1'600'000 Pounds you would make a living?

    Having just one paid software won't get very far, with subscription or no subscription.

  • I think "subscription" is a bad name..has negative sound to it. I think pay $40 (or whatever you decide) for the product + two years of upgrades sounds a whole lot better. At the end of the two years if you choose to use the old product and not buy again then that is on you. You OWN it.

    The HTML5 market is going to get VERY competitive in the next couple of years though..so to be successful I really hope you have plans to do an .exe exporter soon. I will definitely buy it though!!

    Having programmed quite a bit myself I'm appalled as well at anybody who would think that because somebody likes to program they should do it for free. People pay more for a fancy night out on the town than the cost of this software. They either are so young they don't have to take care of themselves or are delusional. People got to it eat.....

    p.s. As far as the development model goes, I can see how having lots of minor upgrades would continue to encourage everybody to "subscribe" vs buy it once (unlike GM where everything is stable and solid before they release). So you do have an advantage there. I think I would be reluctant to pay 150+ for a lifetime license not knowing what would happen 6-7 years down the road though. Although allowing you to put existing money towards a longterm indie license isn't bad.

    Neo1000 You seem to think that it is bad to be successful and make money off of a project. Although, I personally doubt 40K folks are going to jump right on this myself with it in Alpha...if they did I would be happy for Ashley.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • How about lucid's idea then: a third license, 'indie perpetual', which is more (?150 say) but lasts indefinitely? You only save money if you keep using it for 7-8 years, but it never expires. You then can choose between a lower subscription rate or a higher one off cost. I suppose we could also have an option to transfer to perpetual from a subscription, less any subscription already paid.

    Yes please allow for that also, i was originally expecting a payment method like MMF2's you pay a base price for a major version and then it never expires and then you get until the next major release or a bit longer before upgrading.

    As long as there is a option like that which never expires i would be happy to buy that once the editor is a bit more stable and has a few more features than it currently does (more complete like C1 rather than beta before i had to buy basically).

    But yes that sound much better

  • Neo1000 You seem to think that it is bad to be successful and make money off of a project. Although, I personally doubt 40K folks are going to jump right on this myself with it in Alpha...if they did I would be happy for Ashley.

    I never mind if someone would make a program to earn. It's just that something that has been planned to be open source gets changed to closed source, which is extremly annoying to me. Especially it should a subscription plan.

    Even if the subscription plan gets renamed to "2 years free updates" that's still a subscribtion plan even if it has a super fancy name.

  • [quote:29w5jfmw]

    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 silly. Scirra is asking so little for so much. I can't believe some of the comments I'm reading. Atleast Scirra is actually consulting us about it, where most other companies would just slap an outrageous price on their software and call it a day. You don't see any threads on their sites about such prices, do you? While the whole subscription thing seems kind of odd, 150$ every 2 years is nothing, especially if you're profiting from your games. C2 could be 5x more expensive and still cheaper than a lot of other hobbies out there. Anyway..this 'indie perpetual' license sounds like a winner to me.

  • Yeah ashley...I like lucid's idea..

    But maybe neo is right about it not being enough....

    Maybe you should charge for exporters that are made beyond the original html one. Not insane prices, but something...and once again, simply have the license forbid the creation of exporters for platforms that are already officially supported. I think people won't feel ripped off by the exporter thing, since if they don't need them they just won't pay for them.

    also, if you could open a plugin store where you would sell community made plugins and take a percentage of profit for the price of hosting and the exposure you get. That way there would be a more constant revenue stream, that would grow larger with the community. The same could work for a much higher percentage with exporters on perhaps a case by case basis

    Also, I agree about rewording. C2 is free for personal hobby use. $40 is two years of publishing rights for indie games with no strings attached. It isn't a trick of the wording. Its actually a more accurate description, since you still get upgrades for free versions

  • OK, sure, two years of upgrades/publishing sounds better.

    The only possible problem is the perpetual license, in the very long term, could end up being a problem. For example, Microsoft are soon dropping support for XP, so everyone who got an "indefinite" license for Windows XP can't expect Microsoft to then fix problems or provide support or updates. If Microsoft did our "perpetual license forever" type thing, XP users (having paid for XP) have the right to get Windows 7 as an upgrade and all the support and fixes, which costs Microsoft money to provide. In short, that would cost Microsoft more than the customer paid, which is why Windows 7 is a separately purchased product.

    So I'd suggest the "indie perpetual" is actually a 10-year license at �150 (which would be �200 by renewing normally). You save money compared to renewing and get the product for a very long time. When it expires you are not forced to stop using it.

    It's just not long-term sustainable to give away licenses that last absolutely forever. Nobody does that!

    Does that sound like a good compromise?

  • You could also make money from additional components. I don't know where I've seen this, but there was a tool that charged money for a Box2D physics add-on.

  • Hmm, this sounds better.

    But I still wonder how would you then make a living out of this? When people bought the 10-year license, then you won't get a lot of people buying this and this means you will slowly go out of money.

  • So I'd suggest the "indie perpetual" is actually a 10-year license at ?150 (which would be ?200 by renewing normally). You save money compared to renewing and get the product for a very long time. When it expires you are not forced to stop using it.

    Yes please allow for that also, i was originally expecting a payment method like MMF2's you pay a base price for a major version and then it never expires and then you get until the next major release or a bit longer before upgrading.

    I think there's one good thing about MMF after all...

    Personally I would really like to simply have a pricetag on Construct 2, with a certain healthy set of features. Then I would consider myself owning the product as it is, with the right to publish. Things like additional exporters or extensive plugins could come at a smaller fee too. And should the day come that Construct 3 arrives, I'd be happy to pay for that of course.

  • right now there's only 2 devs, 10,000 people buying the 10 year license would be $1,500,000, not that everyone would. just saying. I don't know about you, but half that amount would be a few years of my current pay.

    also, not trying to be picky ashley, but you said

    [quote:1e6oukk7]two years of upgrades/publishing sounds better

    give yourself credit for what you're doing, it's just two years of publishing, if you're allowing the free version to upgrade. so it's a fantastic deal, you should sell it as such.

    still though, seriously consider a profit sharing option with plugin makers. if people can make and sell plugins anyway, you might as well get in on that. An ever growing residual income model is the way to succeed bigtime.

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