What payment option would you like to see for Construct 3?

    Here are some other successful payment option examples:

    GameMaker Studio, GameMaker Studio 2 -> Buy -> users are happy

    GameMaker Studio transition to GameMaker Studio 2 -> Pay the difference for an upgraded version -> users are happy

    Fusion 2, Fusion 2.5 -> Buy -> users are happy

    Fusion 2 transition to Fusion 2.5 -> Pay the difference for an upgraded version -> users are happy

    Unreal Engine 4 -> Free to use and Pay only if you make profit with your games -> users are happy

    Unity -> Free to use and Pay only if you make profit with your games -> users are happy

    Construct 2 -> Buy -> users are happy

    Construct 3 -> Rent -> community gone crazy

    Construct 2 transition to Construct 3 -> change from Buy (own the product) to Rent -> commuity gone crazy

    why break away from this traditional upgrade fee model? Is it making any less money?

    That math for GameMaker Studio 2 is what's a little crazy.

    Here are some other successful payment option examples: ....

    Overall cost for thous engines is like 3x + higher. Construct 3 have rly cheap rent which let you test everything. Unity year is like 450 single seat vs 100 construct 3. Some use adobe producs, which cost more yearly then C3.

    Successful would be opensource Free About GM success, when beginners try it they pirate it(or bought it from humble bundle). Thous GM export prices are huge for hobbyist with legal product. And if Construct 3 makes again one-time payment lets say 75-100, and then starts selling official features/updates in market, you end up paying much more then yearly 100.-

    Man, why everybody gettin all upset? your wasting your energy on this debate, it is what it is, they made something great, and asked a price for it. Their product, their price. what makes people so entitled to think they can tell the developer how much their product should cost? They are giving a demo of its features for FREE... why not use the energy creating something great? please dont waste your energy complaining and being unhappy. PLEASE use your energy for having fun and making fun games.

    ZakChaos

    I have to say that bad capitalism should never ever be allowed and the mentality you hold for allowing product makers to sell their product for any hugely unfair price really allows for that so I think we have a right to say that we do not want to be paying for more then we should unless their's a fair reason for it .

    William Henry Bill Gates III is a philanthropist he's making tons of money and only giving what he needs

    not going to extraordinary lengths to cure common pitfalls in all kinds of research that he could be doing .

    Jeff Bezos wants us all in a monopoly in space around the earth

    Eric Schmidt is an asshole the list goes on an on.

    These are not what you want to be supporting.

    how many games have u made with construct 3

    I have to say that bad capitalism should never ever be allowed and the mentality you hold for allowing product makers to sell their product for any hugely unfair price really allows for that so I think we have a right to say that we do not want to be paying for more then we should unless their's a fair reason for it .

    That's not how a free market, or capitalism works.

    Supply and demand dictate price.

    If they price it too high, not enough people will subscribe.

    If they price it too low, then business is not sustainable.

    If the demand continues with an overpriced product, then other products will come about to fill the void.

    Competition means they either reduce price, or increase quality.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

    Idea #1:

    - 30 minutes a day

    - Time resets every day

    - Unused time is not accumulated

    Idea #2:

    - About 10 hours a month

    - Time resets every month

    - 20 minutes a day is accumulated until the end of the month.

    An other issue with this idea (next to the ones mentioned before this post) is that some bugs take more time to fix than 30 minutes (obviously). When a developer is in a flow state, you don't want to break that by locking them out while they're thinking hard about a problem and trying different approaches to solve it. I would be so furious to be locked out because of time limits while I'm on the right track of fixing something and I would have to come back the next day.

    Guys - you just need to move on - Scirra will not listen - Ashley said as much in the last thread he locked.

    We are listening - I think what a lot of people want is not for us to actually listen (which we are doing) but do something different than we've planned.

    This thread and others like it will be locked, users who continue to voice their opinion against it will eventually be banned - and neither will be listened to anyway - so just get out there in google land - There are options.

    A very unfair characterisation. Which threads have been unfairly locked? And looking at our banned list, 99% of people have been banned for spam. Haven't banned anyone for voicing their opinion if they keep it civil.

    Guys it's not about the price, it's the license model!

    I stated it before and people keep going back to the price - Scirra can charge more if they want to. I think the price is fair - no problem there!

    The subscription fee payment method is quite OK too. I know many will still be against it.

    The lock out kill switch is the problem. Other subscription models don't have that lockout when your subscription runs out. The user simply loses access to software updates and support. They do not lose access to the editing capabilities of the software itself!

    I know that Scirra is hell bent on keeping it that way, so at this point I am simply trying to make my opinion as clear as possible. Many people seem to be confused why people are angry about the new license. No no and no - it's not the price!

    It's simply the idea that we are now forced to renting it and nothing more. You don't ever get to own your copy of the software and that greatly devalues it.

    blurymind I've posted these price models on Fusion forums. I was planning to post them here, but you did it instead of me. Thanks

    Who in the world would go through all that effort simply to run it for another 10 minutes

    but yeah you are right, the clock thing is easy to cheat, unless you have a user login system - which you do.

    Exactly what I was thinking. Also, notice that the number of events an user can have can be modified server-side (like now the unregistered users have 25 while registered ones have 40)

    But overall that idea is stupid. It kills the creativity forcing you to move fast, and I don't even want to think what will you do if you encounter a bug.

    SnipG Yes, GameMaker is a lot more expensive, but it actually delivers. Just look at the showcase (there are some popular titles). Also, don't forget, you will pay 100$/year, if you use C3 for 4-5 years, you will get close to the price of Game Maker (with mobile exporters). After that time you will notice that you only rented C3 instead of owning Game Maker.

    In my opinion you get less with C3 in the long run.

    michael Good advice, I'm already doing that. Clickteam just made it clear that F3 will not have subscriptions. It's obvious that C3 is "take-or-leave" offer.

    From what I see, even at this stage, C3 has monopoly over Chromebooks and Android tablets. So there is a market for it, but not for me and probably more than half of this community.

    We're going in circles again. We covered all this in the other thread.

    I genuinely think it's a perfectly fair deal. It's a fantastic product and it's still pretty cheap: you get all features and exporters, including a build system, for less than the cost of a build system alone (PhoneGap Build). Nobody is completely locked out of their project; it just disables some features (not even all of them; you can still edit layouts and such). We have already talked about how we plan to have a maintenance subscription to help people who just need to do light maintenance so they don't have to go for a full subscription to make changes after their subscription expires.

    Since I honestly think this is a fair and reasonable deal, at this point I suspect some people's motivation is only to whip up as much of a frenzy on the forum as possible. If you really think this is an unfair deal and you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. You can go somewhere else. But you might end up with a lesser product that ends up costing more for the same features. It's up to you.

    If your only goal is to bring up the same old points we've discussed previously in order to whip up a frenzy, I'm afraid this thread will probably end up locked too.

    >

    > but yeah you are right, the clock thing is easy to cheat, unless you have a user login system - which you do.

    >

    Exactly what I was thinking.

    I'm not sure why I have to point this out, but you can sign up new accounts for free, which entirely circumvents that.

    >

    >

    > >

    > > but yeah you are right, the clock thing is easy to cheat, unless you have a user login system - which you do.

    > >

    > Exactly what I was thinking.

    >

    I'm not sure why I have to point this out, but you can sign up new accounts for free, which entirely circumvents that.

    I meant the timer would imply if you already had a subscription and the subscription ran out. That means it would be a former paying customer who had already spent $99 on C3 and just wanted to update their game. The limited time in part is suppose to be a bit troublesome to encourage the user to subscribe again, but not completely punish them for not being able to afford it. Previous paid customer account = free time to fix bugs.

    That last part about timers for free users wasn't really thought out, I admit. I just came up with that as I typed my suggestion for previous subscribers. But whatever. It was only a suggestion. I wasn't trying to cause a frenzy or anything. It's insane how out of control these threads can get. People get worked up over the most insignificant things...

    I genuinely think it's a perfectly fair deal. It's a fantastic product and it's still pretty cheap: you get all features and exporters, including a build system, for less than the cost of a build system alone (PhoneGap Build). Nobody is completely locked out of their project; it just disables some features (not even all of them; you can still edit layouts and such). We have already talked about how we plan to have a maintenance subscription to help people who just need to do light maintenance so they don't have to go for a full subscription to make changes after their subscription expires.

    Hey Ashley, here is an idea: you offer a Phonegap-type build system for Construct 3. Why not allow any html/js/canvas developer out there to not only build C3 apps, but also regular html/js/canvas based projects, just like Cocoon and PhoneGap?

    So in effect a Phaser developer might want to sign up for Construct 3, and use the Construct 3 build tools to upload and build their own code.

    This may open up new revenue streams for you, and Construct 3 gets introduced to js developers.

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