Too bad...

  • When I first saw Construct 3 running inside the Chrome browser, I was a little bit sceptical. However, I have to say it is stable here, but I only was browsing and looking to the user interface.

    then I played the Kiwi game, just to see how the new engine was performing. I received an error that not all features where supported by the free version of C3 (which is normal warning).

    I found the Kiwi game performing better than I expected before. I was afraid that the Chrome browser would influence Construct 3 performance. That was not the case, at first sight I do not see anything slowing down.

    Saturday, I will meet my companion because we like to workout a new game idea. We will see if we can use C3 for this new game. Nevertheless, we prefer the full paid subscription version, which we use the moment it becomes available.

    Maybe following a tutorial first to see where that leads us. Especially a tutorial written for the free version of Construct 2.

    It seems logical to me first test the free version. It may look now C2, however keeping things simple gives Scirra the possibility to fix bugs and improve the initial edition much easier. I look forward to see more features appearing near the end of the beta cycle.

    I am sure Construct 3 will be an ever developing product. I like very much what I see in Construct 3.

  • I know how C2 was at the beginning but:

    If Unity right now releases a new version which got less features than previous one, it would be a disaster. Why?

    Well, because users already got on-going projects which they would like to test with the newer functionalities.

    This is normal. I expect to be able to test my project with the new version of Construct before making my mind up.

    So far the result was? Well, lets start searching for other more friendly solutions such as Unity.

    I dislike the idea, but its business. There's no faith here, just business. either C3 augment my project performance and fixes past issues or either it doesn't.

    While it might still be a great engine for a lot, it simply might not suits my needs.

    So right now that's the feeling I got.

  • After trying out the demo projects and giving the program a quick test, I'm split. From an engineering standpoint this an amazing feat. Achieving all of this in a browser is very impressive. The editor runs smoothly, at least for the simple sample projects that were provided. It runs on iOS and Android now, as well as Mac and Linux. Great. But I don't care about that as a Windows developer. Running in a browser is more of a hindrance than anything. Running in a browser is better for Scirra, since they can easily port the editor to all platforms. But why would I want an additional point of failure/slowdown in my IDE? Answer: I wouldn't. It's cool to be able to edit a project on a phone or tablet (the main feature of being in a browser) but it's more of a novelty than a useful feature.

    It's basically just Construct 2.

    The "free edition" is essentially useless. 25 events, and for some reason even more strict restrictions on layers and effects, as if "25 events" wasn't enough. The free edition is for you to try the thing, and then subscribe. There is no useful free version like Unity has. I was thinking they would make the free version actually usable with Construct 3 since it costs so much more, but I guess I was wrong.

    I see this as being a very good program for education or schools, since it works on all platforms.

    But as developer on windows (as is everyone here) there's no point to using it over C2. Construct 2 does everything I need if I want to make a HTML5 game. The small amount of features it adds to 2 just aren't worth the cost. It's a marvel of engineering, but why bother using it when Construct 2 exists if you're on windows? If this was a new product and there was no Construct 2, it would be much better received by the community.

    Many people are upset with it because it really adds nothing new, yet costs so much more.

  • I was thinking they would make the free version actually usable with Construct 3 since it costs so much more, but I guess I was wrong.

    You would think they'd allow more events like 200 or 300 so that people would become more invested in their projects. If you spend enough time to use up 300 events, chances are you have begun to actually make something that you want to continue developing and then at that point paying makes more sense.

  • Most of the new features are subscriber-only so you can't try them out in the public beta right now (although you will be able to during the Newgrounds Gamejam). Take a look through the blog posts, there is actually a lot new in C3, it's just not all accessible right now.

  • Most of the new features are subscriber-only so you can't try them out in the public beta right now (although you will be able to during the Newgrounds Gamejam). Take a look through the blog posts, there is actually a lot new in C3, it's just not all accessible right now.

    Ashley, with respect,

    I really dislike the whole browser thing and will just stick with C2 for fun with the kids, and stay in the 3D world - so very unlikely I will subscribe, sorry.

    However I do appreciate the work and ingenuity you have put into C3 - but being locked down for a beta just makes no sense to me - at all.

    I really think it would go a long way to sell C3 if you unlock the whole engine, let people see what C3 has to offer, let them play with all the features for the whole beta period, not just for a one week game jam session that only the more experienced users will take part in.

    There is no point telling people about the cool features they can't test, and saying that they will love it in the full version when they subscribe.

    Throw them the bait, so they can really see if they want to swallow it, or just spit it out.

    Just my 2 cents for what little it is worth

    I do however wish yourself and all the Scirra team the best of luck.

    Michael

  • We thought people would be even more upset if we let them build up big projects over several weeks and then pulled the rug out from under their feet and withdrew access to their projects until they subscribed. I can easily imagine the posts accusing us of "holding projects to ransom", "weeks of work held hostage", etc.

    So the compromise is to use the free edition - which should be fine for finding out the bugs, it's already turned up a lot! - and enable the full version for one week later on in the process when C3 should have stabilised a lot.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • Why not just state clearly that after the beta you can only use the full version upon purchase.

    You could not be accused of anything underhanded by any rational person.

    And how can you find all the bugs if most of the features are not accessible?

    Most people will not be using the beta to help find bugs, but to see if they want to enter a subscription for the tool.

    With respect

    Michael

  • Well like i said before the beta, giving the free version for testing makes only so much sense... - nobody said anything

    I was really excited for C3, because taking Construct to the web is pretty much a great step and it for sure is an amazing achievement for Scirra.

    However...

    The blog posts did not offer a lot of really new features, which is okay, since they are building the foundation first, but limiting the testing to even less than the announced features and a stripped down free version takes the whole fun out of the beta testing period.

    Basically I opened C3 and thought "yup it works and looks good" which i expected anyway, but then thought "mhm... i can do pretty much nothing with this, there is no point in testing things in here". The limitations are just really really tight. I honestly can't tell now if i want to subscribe anymore, because nothing new is available for me to try out.

    For a product that you want to sell after the beta, there is a lot of work left on the product.

    I read somewhere that your UX guy hasn't had the chance to go over it - so why even release it to the public for testing already? I believe you should have just polished it a little more, let me wait some time and make it so that i want it.

    Even with my deepest respect for what you achieved technologywise - it's just so disappointing.

    It does not feel like it is "worth" the price upgrade yet. Will take a look in the last week when you opened up the "full" version for sure, so maybe you can still suprise me.

    I liked the Construct workflow a lot and am more than willing to support great software, so probably i have to checkback in a year and see if the improvements can make me wanna subscribe.

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