Subscription Pricing Alternative

> What happens when you don't pay the electric bill?

>

...

Software is not analogous to electricity.

Try running a business and not paying some bills.

Im sure you'll see a correlation eventually.

>

> > What happens when you don't pay the electric bill?

> >

>

> ...

>

> Software is not analogous to electricity.

>

Try running a business and not paying some bills.

Im sure you'll see a correlation eventually.

>

> > What happens when you don't pay the electric bill?

> >

>

> ...

>

> Software is not analogous to electricity.

>

Try running a business and not paying some bills.

Im sure you'll see a correlation eventually.

You're on a roll. Next are you going to remark on how money doesn't grow on trees?

Let's get right to it - my issue with your post was that there are far more productive ways to disabuse people on here against the currently proposed subscription model of the error of their beliefs than to troll their threads with facile one-liner nonsense.

I'm unable to imagine that you actually believe you just made a coherent argument that you have an interest in defending, rather, I gather your priorities lie more in attempting to deliver verbal put downs against your antagonists. So long as that's the case, as has already been noted, obliging you would be asinine.

You're on a roll. Next are you going to remark on how money doesn't grow on trees?

Let's get right to it - my issue with your post was that there are far more productive ways to disabuse people on here against the currently proposed subscription model of the error of their beliefs than to troll their threads with facile one-liner nonsense.

I'm unable to imagine that you actually believe you just made a coherent argument that you have an interest in defending, rather, I gather your priorities lie more in attempting to deliver verbal put downs against your antagonists. So long as that's the case, as has already been noted, obliging you would be asinine.

Well here's another one.

Only time will tell.

Done here, moving on.

> What happens when you don't pay the electric bill?

>

...

Software is not analogous to electricity.

Look guys,

Its like buying a house vs renting a house.

If many houses are on the market and suddenly the one you looked forward to buying is revealed as rent only, you start to look at what else is available.

That reveals a number of houses that have roughly the same price to buy and a bigger set of features. They might need some maintenance in a few years - so you will still pay upgrade fees to be up to date with the latest features. But because you bought them, you feel more secure living in them.

Yes, you have to get used to them, but at least the keys are your keys, not some landlord's. That way you don't feel rushed to constantly look for a proper job in order to not become homeless. You can chill and continue to see the whole thing as a fun hobby

Renting puts huge pressure on the user to spend more time using the service before time runs out. It makes it feel like another job, not a fun hobby. That is essentially what drastically changes scirra's target demographic. It will phase out a lot of the hobbyist users. That is why some people will feel left out

Look guys,

Its like buying a house vs renting a house.

If many houses are on the market and suddenly the one you looked forward to buying is revealed as rent only, you start to look at what else is available.

That reveals a number of houses that have roughly the same price to buy and a bigger set of features. They might need some maintenance in a few years - so you will still pay upgrade fees to be up to date with the latest features. But because you bought them, you feel more secure living in them.

Yes, you have to get used to them, but at least the keys are your keys, not some landlord's. That way you don't feel rushed to constantly look for a proper job in order to not become homeless. You can chill and continue to see the whole thing as a fun hobby

We understand your idea on houses and all, but software is different. I would give you more credit if you compared it to a rent able Car or Power tools. First I think they are determined on their pricing model and will stick to it, irregardless of our voice. Usually small companies need a predictable / forecast-able annual revenue. Scirra will take this risk, from there they would assess whether to change from one-time payment or subscription model.

Look guys,

Its like buying a house vs renting a house.

If many houses are on the market and suddenly the one you looked forward to buying is revealed as rent only, you start to look at what else is available.

That reveals a number of houses that have roughly the same price to buy and a bigger set of features. They might need some maintenance in a few years - so you will still pay upgrade fees to be up to date with the latest features. But because you bought them, you feel more secure living in them.

Yes, you have to get used to them, but at least the keys are your keys, not some landlord's. That way you don't feel rushed to constantly look for a proper job in order to not become homeless. You can chill and continue to see the whole thing as a fun hobby

Renting puts huge pressure on the user to spend more time using the service before time runs out. It makes it feel like another job, not a fun hobby. That is essentially what drastically changes scirra's target demographic. It will phase out a lot of the hobbyist users. That is why some people will feel left out

Yes, and the rent of that "house" in 5 years, which is not yours, you have spent more money than if you had decided to buy another "house"

We understand your idea on houses and all, but software is different. I would give you more credit if you compared it to a rent able Car or Power tools. First I think they are determined on their pricing model and will stick to it, irregardless of our voice. Usually small companies need a predictable / forecast-able annual revenue. Scirra will take this risk, from there they would assess whether to change from one-time payment or subscription model.

Look I totally get that and Scirra is in their right to put whatever licensing model or price they want on their product. I am just trying to explain why subscriptions don't feel nice spending money on.. especially now with all the competing products on the market.

Be it a house or a car - renting it out makes it unreliable and changes how and when you use it.

There are a lot of very good game engines that are completely free and make money from the services they offer to professionals. They charge you only when you turn out a huge profit. Those are the engines that real professionals actually use - Unreal and Unity3d!

You know what, that makes them accessible to people to learn - as there are no limitations imposed on the user to create a full game. No limitations on the development period, no limits on the size of the game

That is partly the reason for their success

The more you impose limitations- even to your loyal paying customer, the more you will see them leave for the other engines. This is a domino effect - the number of content created is less, fewer games to advertise the engine, fewer tutorials, less assets on the market. Believe it or not - the quality of a game engine hugely depends on it's community. It is not just the developer. Game engine devs such as Defold understand that very well and even invest huge amounts of money in advertising their free engine

>

> We understand your idea on houses and all, but software is different. I would give you more credit if you compared it to a rent able Car or Power tools. First I think they are determined on their pricing model and will stick to it, irregardless of our voice. Usually small companies need a predictable / forecast-able annual revenue. Scirra will take this risk, from there they would assess whether to change from one-time payment or subscription model.

>

Look I totally get that and Scirra is in their right to put whatever licensing model or price they want on their product. I am just trying to explain why subscriptions don't feel nice spending money on.. especially now with all the competing products on the market.

Be it a house or a car - renting it out makes it unreliable and changes how and when you use it

Yeah, personally I also want it as an affordable one time buy (who the hell wants to pay more) or a cheaper subscription plan. I'm also disappointed by the $99 subscription model, I just try to understand it from their side. Sadly I'm pretty sure those guys have already decided the pricing tier and model, holding to release the price information, thus hyping the threads.

In the grand scheme of things I would argue that this move makes scirra less competitive, but only time will show. It might work out better for them.

Those of us that are not happy will obviously move on to other engines or stick with construct2.

I don't think that people will stay with c2, even if scirra continues to push out fixes. The moment c3 comes out, it is obvious that all new features will go in it and not in c2

I tend to agree with Blurymind.

In my opinion, a software rental scheme (so-called 'subscription', which it is not!) only works well if

1) your sofware is the industry standard (people depend on the software for their living), and/or

2) it is the best in class, and/or

3) it is unique/fills a niche that no-one else offers, and/or

4) it offers functionality no competitor delivers.

Compare to Adobe:

1) industry standard? Check.

2) best in class? Mostly, yes. Certainly on a professional level. Check.

3) Unique? At a professional level, yes, mostly.

4) offers functionality no competitor can deliver? Yes, for a large part, in particular for professionals again.

Construct 3:

1) Nope, C3 still has to proof itself. C2 is not the industry standard either - not by a long shot.

2) up to a point, as a visual editor, perhaps. But this is marred by its Achilles' heel: lack of native export, and other game dev environments just offer more features (animation timeline, for example!).

3) No, Construct is not the only visual game editor in town. With competitors improving this aspect (Fusion 3, Godot, Unity&external plugins, ...) it is not unique here. The web export is outstanding, though. Trouble is, the competitors also provide web export, aside from native export.

4) No, competitors deliver equal or more functionality at this point.

Here's the rub: as Blurymind mentioned, software rental works well for professionals. If Construct 3 would be aiming at that segment of the market, I believe it might do well. The trouble, though, is that Construct 2 isn't really part of that market. It is mainly small developers, freelancers, and hobbyists for whom Construct 2 is an attractive proposition, and that is how Scirra are marketing their tools.

Switch to a software rental business model, and I am pretty sure a large (if not the majority) of Construct users will leave for alternatives - or at the very least consider a switch. The market for game engines is just too open, and I can see commercial competitors such as Clickteam rubbing their hands together right now, and I assure you they will offer Construct 2 license holders a cross-update when Fusion 3 comes out later this year.

On the other side competitors like Unity, Godot, Unreal all offer excellent FREE options for the market Scirra is operating in currently. Why pay the rent for software that is out-classed in most departments (excepting perhaps the 'easy' visual scripting) when so many free escape routes exist? Speaking for myself, I am now teaching myself Godot, and will look into Fusion 3 when it comes out. (Godot is actually quite an amazing tool.)

Anyway, I just can't see this work out for Scirra. Perhaps I am a cynic.

I tend to agree with Blurymind.

In my opinion, a software rental scheme (so-called 'subscription', which it is not!) only works well if

1) your sofware is the industry standard (people depend on the software for their living), and/or

2) it is the best in class, and/or

3) it is unique/fills a niche that no-one else offers, and/or

4) it offers functionality no competitor delivers.

Compare to Adobe:

1) industry standard? Check.

2) best in class? Mostly, yes. Certainly on a professional level. Check.

3) Unique? At a professional level, yes, mostly.

4) offers functionality no competitor can deliver? Yes, for a large part, in particular for professionals again.

Construct 3:

1) Nope, C3 still has to proof itself. C2 is not the industry standard either - not by a long shot.

2) up to a point, as a visual editor, perhaps. But this is marred by its Achilles' heel: lack of native export, and other game dev environments just offer more features (animation timeline, for example!).

3) No, Construct is not the only visual game editor in town. With competitors improving this aspect (Fusion 3, Godot, Unity&external plugins, ...) it is not unique here. The web export is outstanding, though. Trouble is, the competitors also provide web export, aside from native export.

4) No, competitors deliver equal or more functionality at this point.

Here's the rub: as Blurymind mentioned, software rental works well for professionals. If Construct 3 would be aiming at that segment of the market, I believe it might do well. The trouble, though, is that Construct 2 isn't really part of that market. It is mainly small developers, freelancers, and hobbyists for whom Construct 2 is an attractive proposition, and that is how Scirra are marketing their tools.

Switch to a software rental business model, and I am pretty sure a large (if not the majority) of Construct users will leave for alternatives - or at the very least consider a switch. The market for game engines is just too open, and I can see commercial competitors such as Clickteam rubbing their hands together right now, and I assure you they will offer Construct 2 license holders a cross-update when Fusion 3 comes out later this year.

On the other side competitors like Unity, Godot, Unreal all offer excellent FREE options for the market Scirra is operating in currently. Why pay the rent for software that is out-classed in most departments (excepting perhaps the 'easy' visual scripting) when so many free escape routes exist? Speaking for myself, I am now teaching myself Godot, and will look into Fusion 3 when it comes out. (Godot is actually quite an amazing tool.)

Anyway, I just can't see this work out for Scirra. Perhaps I am a cynic.

Plas Plas (Applause)

I think that Scirra is going to lose many potential users, as not some alternative to the subscription.

I like C2, and I know that C3 will be a great program, but Fusion will offer the same, with native exports and a single payment.

I do not want to, because I like Construct, but I do not think this policy change seems right.

I'll be looking at future blog posts;)

Another approach to this is the feature-pack approach.

For example:

-The base software is $100. This comes with unlimited bug fixes, stability updates, and a set of basic features. It's basically Construct 2 in the new engine.

-As time goes on, new features are made available for purchase (multiplayer, IAP, etc).

-Features that require a constant level of maintenance and growth can either be more expensive, or, on a subscription basis

-People buy/subscribe to the modules they want, but don't have to if all they want to do is learn Construct or make basic 2D games

-Others can add features to construct 3, but only through the construct 3 store, so that the devs can take a portion of each sale to support the engine

-Unlimited access to the engine and all scirra-made features is available as a subscription

--

This lets people use construct as amateurs and/or professionals. We can invest in the uses relevant to our individual needs, and never get more than we pay for.

Food for thought