Things I wonder about C2 (website)

Things I wonder about C2

1) C2 - game maker - website:

For me the whole construct2-website says that construct2 is a "html5 game maker". That's probably true when opening c2 and marvelling at the interface but in my opinion constuct2 is a html5-creator and editorsoftware. It's a software to create "whatever" with the html5-technology - that is much more than creating "only" html5-games and I think the website can/should have an article to point out that not only html5-game-developement is possible.

2) "no programming":

The website says no programming required. I've read some other posts about this topic and I personally think that this statement is really wrong. When somebody uses construct, she/he programms (visually with events) nearly the whole time. I think "no coding" points the workflow much more better out.

3) price - license:

"only a one-off payment": As a customer this sounds perfect but when I think of the developement I can't imagine that this can go well in the future. Other companies take for bad-software more money in a year as c2 costs for lifetime.

Perhaps something similar to the developement of Spriter can guarantee that the c2-developer(s) can stay as customer friendly with the licenses as they are now and he(they) has/have the ressources to focus on the developement.

Just to think about it.. <img src="smileys/smiley17.gif" border="0" align="middle">

Well, I think "no programming" is more clear to most non-programmers than "no coding". My mother, for example, who is in her mid 60s, would understand "no programming". She wouldn't understanding "no coding". My partner, who isn't half that age, and does use computers all the time, to her "no programming" is also substantially more meaningful than "no coding". In fact, pretty much everyone I know who uses "coding" in their vocabulary can code, at least a little. :)

As for the price -- I think a one-time payment attracts a lot more business than a recurring plan or a "until the next major version" approach where there is a new major version once a year, when your target audience consists of mainly hobbyists. I would almost certainly not have bought a license if it would have been almost subscription-like. I know that it's pretty common for development software, and I even agree that it's fine for company users (C2 has a business license, too), but for an end user and especially a hobbyist the model that Scirra went with is a far more appealing.

Or differently put, something like WebStorm and its annually update fee, or Sublime Text and its "until the next major version" way, those are expenses I can put on my tax declaration, because they are work-related tools for me, and my boss may even pay for them. It's different for C2, which is more or less solely for fun and hobby-stuff for me -- if it wasn't, I would have a business license and those do cost more than $79).

ad license: Just to clarify. I find it perfect as it is now.

I'm just thinking about something voluntary like a christmas-donation or something similar at the end of a year also for C2. When I look at the spriter-project I'm convinced that people are willing to support software-projects that they really want or need for a better life.. <img src="smileys/smiley17.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

If a subscription like option would ever come, it should be only for business related users. As a hobbyst, I would never pay a sub. and I am sure most hobbyst wouldn't.

"No programming" isn't the right term, but it's the term most people would understand.

On the HTML5 game creator topic... I kind of agree, after all games are just applications, too. C2 can make apps as well and even a website.

We raised the idea of a subscription model about a year ago before C2 was really getting going. It was extremely unpopular. The response was strong enough to make me think we'd lose all our users if we asked them to pay a subscription. So we went with the current traditional model. If you think subscriptions are a good idea then unless things have changed, there are a lot of people out there who will disagree with you.

Re: "no programming" - I think this is the best way to describe what Construct 2 does. I do think technically events count as programming, but not remotely in the traditional sense. We need a snappy and memorable way to describe how it works, and I think "no programming" covers that, in sense of "no [traditional typed-in with complex tools and high barrier to entry] programming".

Perhaps "no coding" would be more accurate.

Re: "no programming" - I think this is the best way to describe what Construct 2 does. I do think technically events count as programming, but not remotely in the traditional sense. We need a snappy and memorable way to describe how it works, and I think "no programming" covers that, in sense of "no [traditional typed-in with complex tools and high barrier to entry] programming".

I think it is fine to say "no programming". From a computer languages perspective, Construct 2 is an extremely high-level language. It hides a lot of the details and you get on with the creation. "Coding" seems to be a term used by coders, that is, low- and mid-level language users who have to fill in every detail. Assembly language is extreme low-level, JavaScript is mid-level, and Construct 2 is high-level. For example, I don't need to understand a lot of trig to move 37 degrees in Construct 2. But for JavaScript, I'd need to understand math and the Math functions. For assembly language, I'd need to take a few months off and get back to you.

Construct 2 reminds me of the original Visual Basic before it was gobbled up by .NET. Even down to the goofy way that text boxes are handled (sometimes I think I made an error and then I realize that I didn't make the box big enough and the type can't display).

As a very-long-time programmer, I really appreciate I can ignore the details and just create!

Subscription will make sense for server cloud like upload software, that will export html5 games into native mobile/mac/etc game, and this method alone need to make C2 open for the rest of the audiences also i think the outcome would be slow because users will subscribe when they finish their game, the time/year would cost more if not used wisely!, me personally hate subscription model.

I also hate the subscription model. Scirra's generous pricing really puts them ahead of the competition, and a subscription licence would not help them at all.

+1 for no subscription , there's nothing worse than "rental" of software.

Image-Line - the makers of Flstudio have the same "lifetime free updates" model, and offer regular updates and public betas.

For existing users there are always new plug-ins/sample packs etc that expand on the existing package, but whatever you purchase, be it the program or the add-ons, are all updated for free if a newer version is out. :)

I think just like the music industry needs to catch up with things, so too do a lot of software companies, and Scirra are doing it right - good communication with userbase and a very competitive licencing system - don't change a thing guys!

I think that the "no subscription" way is indeed much better, and it also makes more people interested in starting with C2. The existence of the free version is also a crucial and determining point related to its success. I'm a Blender 3D long term user, and those guys do such a great support to the software that I'd pay for it if it was required, the same way I'm intending to buy the $79 licence of C2. There are some great software that are worth the cash, and C2 is proving to be one of them.