Subscription Pricing Alternative

    Well, I've just bought GMS2 (Game Maker Studio 2) and by FAR the main reason is that C3 is heading to sub only, GMS2 is one price buy it and own it.

    So sadly, as much as I enjoyed Construct 2, I'm now moving platform.

    (I hope a lot of people do the same, why? because then perhaps Scirra will see the light and give us a one off price ..at which point I may purchase it and return)

    Take care all, bye (for now at least)

    I too will probably eventually jump ship. As much as I love the Construct workflow, I really think it's the best out there - there is simply no justifying the particularly narrow-minded subscription model they're proposing. If it were tweaked a bit in favour of users rights I would reconsider. But as it stands it appears to have a complete disregard for the user. Really not a good look. There are subscription models out there that protect users rights as well as developers, if Scirra aren't going to entertain these I won't entertain trying C3. I think the slow drip of information may be doing more harm than good. Unless they've got something big up their sleeve that will save it at the end, but by then it might be too late. People are already looking at other engines, myself included.

    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.

    I had a similar experience

    packaging a construct2 game + xdk = a super slow when ran from the installed game, but normal speed when running from localhost. So when you playtest with localhost you get different performance from waht you actually get when you export the game to an apk - inside a wrapper

    Exporting a fusion 2.5 game - when playtesting fusion creates a native apk and moves it to the phone via the usb cable, then runs the apk. So what you get when playtesting is the same as what you will get in the final game - and the speed/framerate was much better than construct's wrapped in xdk game apk.

    I think the low performance in construct2 games installed via apk is the wrapper. I tried it only with xdk, havent tested with cacoon.. That was a while ago though. Since then maybe xdk got faster?

    Native built games will always outperform games relying on a wrapper, because they dont have an extra software layer to talk to the hardware.

    A good question to ask is - will construct3 editor be able to export to html5 without using any network service, and allow the user to wrap the game with xdk/cacoon the same way construct2 does?

    A good question to ask is - will construct3 editor be able to export to html5 without using any network service, and allow the user to wrap the game with xdk/cacoon the same way construct2 does?

    Yes, they confirmed it in the blog posts that they'll keep the export options for using 3rd party wrappers.

    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

    I'll do so!

    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

    not my $99 sorry... my last day here is when they stop update C2

    Scirra should compete like crazy if they want to succeed with that rental model.

    Right now the export process will be improved, but using the same old wrappers will result in the same old slow under performing and over sized apk games.

    That really makes it fall far behind all the other game engines on the market- if the intent is making mobile games.

    If it can't export an apk that runs at normal speed - the same speed that you get when play testing - It's still just a toy for prototyping.

    From my point of view - that sort of makes the rental price crazy as a proposal. You can buy a lifetime license for almost the same amount for an engine with event sheet even - that does export to native android apk - no wrappers needed.

    Even stencyl- which has the same license doesnt need wrappers to create an apk.

    Even with a nicer to use editor - if the end result is slow or broken, it's really not competitive on the game engines market.

    You have to be either biased or blind to choose it over the competition.

    If scirra comes up with a wrapper that is tiny and fast - they might have a chance. Otherwise the target user will continue to be hobbyists or people who just want it for prototyping - people who cant justify spending 99$ per year for something that gets them less or no income in return

    Sorry, but I also will not to be purchasing Construct 3 now its gone the subscription route. For companies releasing lots of apps, its a bargain. However for hobbiest like myself, I just cant justify it. Was really looking forward to it too.

    Unfortunately, the subscription will push people onto alternatives (such as GameMaker Studio 2 and various others) though I do understand Scirra decision to do it and create a steady income for themselves. I suspect they have already factored in losing a reasonably high percentage of users but I wish them the best. Construct really is an impressive tool.

    For the next 5 years me using C3 that will be $500 and I unfortunately do not see myself earning money with making games. (though I am trying)

    I would prefer to see the price for Personal Use go down to $50 a year.

    As much as I love C2, I cannot and will not pay for a subscription service on principle. You have lost a customer and I suspect not just the one.

    This post has no meaning because they just post these "cloud services" are actually google drive / one drive / dropbox. The same we already have with C2. http://www.scirra.com/blog/191/saving-l ... onstruct-3

    How do you like this subscription now?

    Actually, saving the project locally to your system folder for Dropbox would be better than saving it via the web interface.

    It would sync on its own, out of sight.

    from tom close my post that was strike 3 out for me

    Not only are Scirra trying to shaft loyal customers by switching to a rip off subscription service, they are also getting the mods to delete posts if anyone complains.

    Bad practice man.. really shoddy.

    I hope people go buy Fusion 3 and GMS2 and let C3 sink.. until the devs wake the hell up and give us a one time price to buy the software.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

    Do Gamemaker 2 buyers get a discount if they bought the first version?

    I wonder how that averages out per year of use.

    299 for an export module?

    When is Gamemaker 3 due?

    Sorry I aint so goodly at math.

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