Announcement PR wreck so far...

>

> > For what it's worth, I think you did good presenting the subscription based model first, before the features and hype and being transparent about it. This is what many of us love about Scirra.

> >

>

Thanks, seems we might be in the minority who think that was the right way of going about it though

To be fair, for me you guys didn't take the right decision, but at least were correct on the way of presenting it. I think that kind of crucial information should be released first. Props for that. Because at least for me, knowing that, unfortunetely no matter how good the features will be, I'll not be using it.

But just one question, while the decision is already made, lets say this model of subscription don't work as intended, would you guys be whilling to reconsider it and go back to pay-once model? Or at least that kind of discussion between you could happen?

So I've read the blog posts and this thread...

Whether we announce the pricing sooner or later is really irrelevant if I don't know exactly what I'm paying for - and I don't really get why there hasn't just been a fancy video with a vibrant narrator showing this thing off. Maybe I'm just an advertising novice but giving out details of software over weeks feels unnecessary. I'm pretty excited about the idea of a browser mode and I want to feel more of that excitement. Also, I'm wondering if that could actually be a separate price-point. You want standalone, it costs $X one time; you want to use our servers and have cross platform login features, that costs Y yearly/monthly. Not sure exactly how that would work for Linux users (and maybe other platforms?) but I'm willing to bet if it was investigated it wouldn't be too difficult to figure it out, even if it remains a web application.

I think it kind off sucks that we're (myself included) discussing a PR method instead of the software itself, which in my estimation means something went wrong.

[quote:385227oh]But just one question, while the decision is already made, lets say this model of subscription don't work as intended, would you guys be whilling to reconsider it and go back to pay-once model? Or at least that kind of discussion between you could happen?

Well yes, if the model fails we'd of course have to re-evaluate otherwise we'd be fools!

its the first time im seeing this you sell a product for years now theres 3-4 major things community wants like crazy but you dont care that much

From my point of view, multiplatform support was definitely one of those 3-4 major things the community was asking us for.

Well, to throw my hat in the ring:

Personally (and I'd bet there's lots like me), I always have it in the back of my mind to leave C2 for another game engine. There are obviously a lot of problems inherent to C2 especially when trying to make a larger/ambitious project, which I am. The only reason I have never gotten around to switching to another engine is I've put 2 1/2 years into learning C2 and I have a decent chunk of my game finished. I hate the idea of starting that process all over, to the point that I have been in denial for a very long time about whether or not the game I want to make is actually possible in C2. It probably isn't, but most likely, we'll never find out, because the announcements + screenshots that basically show C2 in a browser was just the push I needed to move on. but not necessarily because I saw it as "bad news". It's more about what this says to us about Scirra's plans for the future. I'll be more specific:

( Tom or whoever's in charge here)

It seems a lot like Scirra got the money bug. It seems like getting new users became more important than keeping current users happy, to the point, that getting new users became more important than even keeping current users.

Now I'm not claiming that as fact. I'm just saying what it seems like.

And from a business standpoint, there's plenty reason to do that. I get it.

But the reason we all like C2 so much is the community. The reason C2 has done as well as it has is the community. In fact, I'd venture to say that we sell your product MUCH better than you do (most (all?) of the developers whose games are advertised on the front page have moved on to other engines!) So when you even seem to alienate that community. It's a pretty big deal.. and in the end, maybe not the best thing from a business standpoint.

> its the first time im seeing this you sell a product for years now theres 3-4 major things community wants like crazy but you dont care that much

>

From my point of view, multiplatform support was definitely one of those 3-4 major things the community was asking us for.

from my point of view you pretend that you don't understand thats alright construct is not the only game maker out there. your decision your risk your product not mine

[quote:3n3ksy3z]But just one question, while the decision is already made, lets say this model of subscription don't work as intended, would you guys be whilling to reconsider it and go back to pay-once model? Or at least that kind of discussion between you could happen?

Well yes, if the model fails we'd of course have to re-evaluate otherwise we'd be fools!

I hope that the subscription model fails miserably and so learn to listen to the community

> [quote:2jsl7k0f]But just one question, while the decision is already made, lets say this model of subscription don't work as intended, would you guys be whilling to reconsider it and go back to pay-once model? Or at least that kind of discussion between you could happen?

>

Well yes, if the model fails we'd of course have to re-evaluate otherwise we'd be fools!

I hope that the subscription model fails miserably and so learn to listen to the community

Ah, that's poor form. You shouldn't ever wish failure on anyone. It's easy to be bummed, but take a breather on that thinking.

> [quote:3lk6jntw]But just one question, while the decision is already made, lets say this model of subscription don't work as intended, would you guys be whilling to reconsider it and go back to pay-once model? Or at least that kind of discussion between you could happen?

>

Well yes, if the model fails we'd of course have to re-evaluate otherwise we'd be fools!

I hope that the subscription model fails miserably and so learn to listen to the community

Well that's unpleasant.

Although I don't like it, they've moved to a subscription system BECAUSE of the in browser software, and they moved to the browser software to enable the program to work on pretty much any system that can run Chrome.

This means they'll be able to widen their user base to other operating systems (theoretically, it may be possible to open it up on phones and tablets), and the subscription system also acts as a security measure.

With the software online, without a subscription, a user could just buy once and share their license with others, potentially resulting in less sales. This way, they get paid every year, which will help enable them to maintain both C2 for a short period and C3 long term.

So I understand it, yes...

I still can't get my head around this method of drip feeding us features on how the actual software is better. So far, all I've heard is that you can do math inside the layout screen.

I look at Construct 2 and consider it capable of doing almost any 2D game I can imagine. I want to know what elevates Construct 3 above it, and as a Windows user, using it in a browser isn't remotely interesting to me.

Even if it fails, by the time you have decided on another licensing model, a lot of the people here would have moved to the obvious contender - fusion3.

Clickteam is releasing it this year, so it will be interesting to see what happens.

Putting asside clickteam's better game in pr and all that...

Not only do they have the native exporters that everyone here is crying about, have an improved event sheet that is going to surpass or at least be on par with construct's, but they are sticking to the classic licensing that everyone is comfortable with. None of that renting nonsense

You guys are literally imposing a challenge to your loyal customers - at a time when the competitor is presenting the solution to it.

Nobody likes this type of subscription type DRM, because it feels like purchasing a trial of a product and not the actual product.

Can't you meet your community somewhere in the middle? Locking them out of updates is one thing when the cash flow stops, but locking them out of being able to edit their own projects is just painful

Yes you dont hold their files hostage, but really you are - they wont be able to edit their game until the next payment is made.

You could at least offer them something for paying for the first time - something that will keep them around - otherwise you have no lure to put on the hook that is supposed to take them to a place where they are loyal customers of the cloud service.

With game engines a lot of the quality of an engine is the community and the contributions they make to it.

If construct3 locks out current and potential contributors with this license, the popularity of the engine will be harmed. Who will then make you shaders and plugins, tutorial videos and demos?

The more features you add to it, the more it will become incompatible with construct 2 - which will not take long.

Ashley and Tom -- when you release and start selling construct 3, will you continue to sell construct 2 licenses alongside?

If you are so adamant https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/d4/63/b9/d463b92e3a943ea82ecea4a3e6c3ec6c.png on trying this license model, It's in your right to do so, regardless of how much it will disappoint the users.

Even if it fails, by the time you have decided on another licensing model, a lot of the people here would have moved to the obvious contender - fusion3.

Is Fusion 3 multi-platform? Can I run it on a Mac? Just curious...

they don't have to worry about the users who wouldn't have paid for the new scheme anyways.

So far that's coming up on about 75-80% of them, I know I'd be worried.

Already got a tattoo of 'C2 til I die' across my chest.

Is not the price that worries me, neither the fact is browser based.

So far I was expecting to see functionalities that would surprise me.

Per exemple, at every update Unreal delivers fantastic stuff. So I was expecting something similar. To see more functionalities.

New plugins or behaviours or anything that would help me in the future.

So far C2 is great at doing what it does. I'm happy to be able to build up a game without having to learn a whole programming language. I'm a 3D artist (my job) so I cant afford to spend so much time learning new tools that are too complex and would make me spend too much time on dev, so Construct is by far the best option.

So here you ask me to pay per year, I say no problem, your updates are usually really good and everything is fixed.

But if you want me to support and buy new software, show me more. So far I'm not really impressed.

Just my two cents. But I leave the chance to Scirra since probably there's something they didn't communicate properly or I didn't understand.

Hopefully we'll get a great software just as C2 is.

> Even if it fails, by the time you have decided on another licensing model, a lot of the people here would have moved to the obvious contender - fusion3.

>

>

Is Fusion 3 multi-platform? Can I run it on a Mac? Just curious...

Fusion 3 editor will be multiplatform yes - confirmed to be developed and tested on windows, mac and linux. More than that - running natively - not inside a web browser.

Fusion 3 will have a similar license model to the current version of fusion 2 - with an upgrade discount for existing users.

You buy the editor, it comes with an exporter that compiles the game natively on the platform you are on.

You can buy separately native exporters for android, ios and even html5 - they go on special offers with huge discounts a few times in the year. Things like the event sheet have been reworked to be more modern. Disadvantages such as code reusal are also being addressed in fusion 3. So scirra is in a tough spot and things will only get worse when clickteam releases it - especially if the license price for lifetime is around the same price point as the yearly subscription of construct3 <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_neutral.gif" alt=":|" title="Neutral">

btw here are some of the NATIVE indie games made on fusion 2 and 2.5:

nice frame rate there

fusion 2.5 runs almost perfect on mac and linux via wine. There will be no need for wine when 3 comes out - it will have native editor for each of the three platforms.

Construct2 does not run well with wine - you cant run a server to playtest your game and there are crashes.