Subscription Pricing Alternative

I think we can all agree that with the amount of complaining going on versus the slow release of features a lot of you are going to be pretty tired by the time we get a beta.

The fact is no one buys C2 because they think they are going to get rich making HTML5 games. The majority of us buy it because we like making games. If we make money from it, even better. I think Scirra is losing sight of that few of us are professional game makers. This software doesn't appeal to studios with share holders that require profits from their games. Those studios hire programmers and use more elaborate software.

I'll be absolutely honest, I took an old game with a lot of badly optimized code, HD screen resolution intended for desktop-only, loads of layers and extensions (even some 3rd-party that weren't comparable with the exporter and wouldn't build) in Fusion 2.5, and slapped on a thumbstick and compiled my very first ever android apk in F2.5. And it worked. Flawlessly. Perfect performance. Smooth fps and gameplay. First. Apk. Ever.

I've build hundreds of apks in Cocoon, Phonegap and XDK. And none of them have come out well. So far, my only "succesful" compile with cocoon on GooglePlay doesn't even work with some phones (thanks to cocoon, XDK was painful slow).

That's just my experience though.

Well, for what it's worth, Construct 2's education license is already a subscription, and that seems to have been working out fine.

Also, you'd rather pay $500 up-front? That gets you five years of usage...

I think they do not understand what the problem is here, or if they understand it but they do not care ...

People do not want to Rent, people want to Buy software and use it when they want without any Pressure, if a year can not use it because they are busy with other tasks do not have the feeling of Throwing Money and when 10 years pass if Want to reuse that particular software Can always do it

Scirra is forgetting a large part of its users, which make up a large part of the users of C2, many people who have a hobby and who do not dedicate full time to make games

For these people, Subscription equals Throwing Money

Why can't their be a store bought version with unlimited updates for one price only and never needs repaying

and a donation model for those who want to help out and then you can supply other plugins,etc that people want

as an addition similar to what phaser does, the entire thing is free and works with none if any real big or minor issues

but you can buy extra stuff ?, and if you wanted to get really cheeky I wouldn't recommend it but

make a subcription model anyways so people can buy the subcription if they want,

some people might do it out of kindness or moral.

Why hasn't ashley or scirra set up a patreon account , kickstarter or whatever

to fund this somewhat awesome shit man people are so clueless, no offence I may not enjoy

flawed but deceptively workable mathematical and un-needed unnecessary tedious programming

because it's full of flaws in my honest opinion but still.

Zonacas I totally agree.

A free editor with no event sheet limitation and at least one export option for testing is something that will get hobbyists invested in the engine, the more developed their project - the more invested. That will then get them to pay for a subscription/exporters.

I hope Scirra considers the feedback users give on the forum regarding the free version's limitations. We don't know how limited it will be, but I also hope that they get rid of the event limit, force a splash screen and only allow non-cloud exporting into HTML5. That should help out developers who don't want to make any money, but just want to play around for their own enjoyment. I'm not sure how this would effect sales, but it would certainly increase the user base.

Although I have no issue with the pricing of C3 if the platform is good (I think most people should wait to have the full feature list before complaining or not), I do have an idea that may be interesting.

Ashley Why not adopt a model similar to that used by Xojo? See here: https://xojo.com/store/index.php

You can develop for free on their platform, but when you want to export the final version, you need a license. They also have several levels of pricing depending on the export targets. This would allow people "playing around" with C3 to do so free of charge and anyone wanting to distribute their game would pay a fee according to the platforms they want to use.

Although I have no issue with the pricing of C3 if the platform is good (I think most people should wait to have the full feature list before complaining or not), I do have an idea that may be interesting.

Ashley Why not adopt a model similar to that used by Xojo? See here: https://xojo.com/store/index.php

You can develop for free on their platform, but when you want to export the final version, you need a license. They also have several levels of pricing depending on the export targets. This would allow people "playing around" with C3 to do so free of charge and anyone wanting to distribute their game would pay a fee according to the platforms they want to use.

XOJO has the exact license model I proposed in my original post. Here is a quote from the FAQ at the bottom of the linked page:

[quote:327u5xvo]How does a Xojo license subscription work?

All new licenses allow access to Xojo updates for the next 12 months. After that, you can continue to use versions of Xojo that were released before your license expired indefinitely, and your apps continue to be yours to sell or share! To get access to new releases of Xojo for another 12 or 24 months, renew your license. Your Xojo license is set to auto-renew. Click here to adjust your auto-renew settings.

I want a $1000-a-decade feature.

>

> Well, for what it's worth, Construct 2's education license is already a subscription, and that seems to have been working out fine.

>

> Also, you'd rather pay $500 up-front? That gets you five years of usage...

>

I think they do not understand what the problem is here, or if they understand it but they do not care ...

People do not want to Rent, people want to Buy software and use it when they want without any Pressure, if a year can not use it because they are busy with other tasks do not have the feeling of Throwing Money and when 10 years pass if Want to reuse that particular software Can always do it

Scirra is forgetting a large part of its users, which make up a large part of the users of C2, many people who have a hobby and who do not dedicate full time to make games

For these people, Subscription equals Throwing Money

I give up its like talking to brick wall.... no one's care about selling C3 only to rent it, why I'll be out until I find a alternative

The problem here is that Scirra can happen to something like Toshiba (Read news about Toshiba)

By not focusing on its authentic users and going to other markets can lose everything

Ok, the subscription is mandatory and I think that will not change in 6 months at least, that is, I think there will be no single payment option in at least 6 months and this would be if the subscription does not work for Scirra.

This is what I think right now.

Ok, the subscription is mandatory and I think that will not change in 6 months at least, that is, I think there will be no single payment option in at least 6 months and this would be if the subscription does not work for Scirra.

This is what I think right now.

Tom

This will really depend on the volume of existing users (maybe minimum at least 6-8k subscribed users) that are willing to bite the 50% off promo. I think scirra will not change the subscription model for at least 1 year. Btw pricing is already announced https://www.scirra.com/forum/construct-3-pricing_t187766 and is final.

Yes, it is possible, 1 year or 18/24 mounths mostly.

I think people have power

If people do not support subscriptions, it will force Scirra to reconsider the situation

I'm not going to support the subscriptions system, I was willing to pay much more but to buy, rent? no thanks