I've been a C2 user since 2011 with the first alpha. I started with Construct Classic in 2009 and I was in love with the tool. So much promise and to make PC games so easily was my dream, and it came through when I finished my first big game and released it on Steam.
C3 was just announced and I was baffled by the path Scirra chose to take.
While I don't think paying $99 annually for web-based software is that bad (I'll explain why later), I do think it's a bad deal when you still rely on 3rd party tools to get most of your job done and being an in-browser engine this basically confirms it..
It would be like Adobe asking users to pay to use Photoshop online, but if you want to save your project as a JPEG file "OOPS you need to go to a random website that does it for free".
What baffles me the most is that C2/C3 are GAME ENGINES. And in my opinion the next big step for any game engine is being able to deliver a game to multiple platforms. You decide to instead focus on usability. What good is it if the editor is great if I still can't have my game working on a Windows desktop without needing 3rd party tools?
I clearly remember someone saying on the forums that "C3 would just be an editor overhaul" and Scirra coming over and saying "We never said that. C3 WON'T be just an editor overhaul".
What is it then? Because nothing you've said differ C3 from C2 so far. No matter how good or what stunts the C3 editor could pull off, or how easy it is to make a game on it, it doesn't matter, at the end of the day you'll still have to depend on so much to get your game on mobile/PCs/consoles it would never be worth it (especially not paying $99 for it).
Now, if I could pay $99 a year and get my game on consoles, or mobile, or desktop without any trouble, I would gladly do so. I don't even think it's a very bad price, and I don't think subscription based payments are completely bad, but I need to know that I'm not going to make my game and have to wait 6 months because something broke on NW.js or IntelXDK.
I've seen people on the forums saying it's also not worth it for hobbists, too. This made me think a little as to who is C3 for anyway. Console devs won't be able to get their games on consoles, mobile devs will still rely on either IntelXDK or CocoonJs (and break their game every now and then), desktop devs rely on NW.js (and Scirra's broken Steam plugin) and HTML5 devs will get their game running great until they have to add plugins for an specific site (like Newgrounds or Gamejolt). Hobbists would have to pay $99 for it, and if they made a good game and tried to release it, would still have the problems mentioned above.
Anyway, this is my rant. I'll probably be changing to another engine focused on getting games across all platforms (probably GMS2 or Unreal) since both allow for console development.