Subscription Pricing Alternative

    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.

    I think ¤ ÷ 8 is a pretty good return on investment.

    Oh yeah 99 for a new editor and 199, or 299 depending on module needed every few years is a much better option.

    I guess learning Gml is a good investment as well.

    Oh yeah 99 for a new editor and 199, or 299 depending on module needed every few years is a much better option.

    I guess learning Gml is a good investment as well.

    Game maker 2 has an improved visual coding editor - no need to learn gml, but the visual code editor also can preview code that is generated in real time - so it can help you learn gml if you want to.

    Its still a better deal imo, because what you pay for is native exporters for android/ios.

    You get native exporters for windows/mac and linux just by buying the editor for 99$

    No subscriptions needed, its all a one time payment. If you wait for a while, yoyo games releases a humble bundle offer where you can get it all cheaply

    Scirra's offer at the moment is just insane considering that it can only export to html5 and you have to use wrappers

    Even stencyl exports to native , and even offers the editor with no limitations and export to flash for free. That is way more inviting to people to get started making projects in it

    > Oh yeah 99 for a new editor and 199, or 299 depending on module needed every few years is a much better option.

    > I guess learning Gml is a good investment as well.

    >

    Game maker 2 has an improved visual coding editor - no need to learn gml, but the visual code editor also can preview code that is generated in real time - so it can help you learn gml if you want to.

    Its still a better deal imo, because what you pay for is native exporters for android/ios.

    You get native exporters for windows/mac and linux just by buying the editor for 99$

    No subscriptions needed, its all a one time payment. If you wait for a while, yoyo games releases a humble bundle offer where you can get it all cheaply

    Scirra's offer at the moment is just insane considering that it can only export to html5 and you have to use wrappers

    Even stencyl exports to native , and even offers the editor with no limitations and export to flash for free. That is way more inviting to people to get started making projects in it

    You make the distinction that Windows, and Linux are somehow better.

    Steam is the only viable way to distribute a pc game and it's terrible, and $100 dollars to start, well was, Greenlight is going away, and so is your hundred bucks.

    Then there is no worth while market for Linux. lol

    Html5 works on virtually every modern browser.

    You make the distinction that Windows, and Linux are somehow better.

    Steam is the only viable way to distribute a pc game and it's terrible, and $100 dollars to start, well was, Greenlight is going away, and so is your hundred bucks.

    Then there is no worth while market for Linux. lol

    Html5 works on virtually every modern browser.

    Numbers tell a different story.

    https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/gl ... rating-37/

    Casual webgames are down -7.5%. The PC market is still the most lucrative one, although the report mentions that will change by 2018, and personal screens (phones) will take up the first place instead.

    And the competition on mobile markets is by far more competitive than the desktop markets:

    http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2378 ... _facts.php

    It's only gotten worse in the past year. The mobile game markets are utterly oversaturated, and hundreds of games are released each day: in 2015 500(!) new iOS games per day were released and the norm on the Apple market.

    The odds are against making money in the mobile markets without decent exposure, unless you are very, EXTREMELY lucky.

    In fact, all these figures (and there are others, just check out Gamasutra) seem to point at that:

    1) web games are in the decline

    2) desktop games are still going strong - the most lucrative on a global scale

    3) it is easier to earn revenue in the desktop games markets for indie developers compared to the mobile markets

    4) personal phones are the mobile game platform of choice for many users.

    5) tablets (especially Android tablets) are showing signs of dying

    6) overall world-wide games revenue is growing (while web games are declining!)

    7) China and the Asia-Pacific regions cannot be ignored - by far the largest games markets

    I suppose most users who play on their mobile phone prefer to play games as apps, not as web games.

    In any case, the numbers seem to point out that it is smarter to focus on Windows, Mac, and Linux platforms if your intention is to get some money out of your game making endeavours. It does depend as well on how much Valve will charge an indie developer for its new Steam Direct - we do not know yet.

    I also think this means that having native exporters for the various mobile (phone) platforms is an advantage in a game engine.

    Oh yeah 99 for a new editor and 199, or 299 depending on module needed every few years is a much better option.

    I guess learning Gml is a good investment as well.

    Yes.

    I can appreciate the need to turn this into another debate for native, but that's not going to happen.

    Yes the numbers don't lie, but we aren't in the high end for those markets.

    We would be lucky just to hit the middle.

    Yes web games earn very little, but it's apples and oranges for what html5 can reach, especially with Uwp, and Instant games on the horizon.

    If you want better monetisation for web games then complain about that, don't complain about $99 dollars a year here when it's going to average more than that somewhere else.

    I can appreciate the need to turn this into another debate for native, but that's not going to happen.

    Yes the numbers don't lie, but we aren't in the high end for those markets.

    We would be lucky just to hit the middle.

    Yes web games earn very little, but it's apples and oranges for what html5 can reach, especially with Uwp, and Instant games on the horizon.

    If you want better monetisation for web games then complain about that, don't complain about $99 dollars a year here when it's going to average more than that somewhere else.

    Isn't it clear by now the majority of people here don't care about paying more, they just want to own it for life? Principle, like.

    Isn't it clear by now the majority of people here don't care about paying more, they just want to own it for life? Principle, like.

    Ok, yeah sure. Just like Windows Xp. You still own that? You can still use that. Somewhere.

    >

    > Isn't it clear by now the majority of people here don't care about paying more, they just want to own it for life? Principle, like.

    >

    Ok, yeah sure. Just like Windows Xp. You still own that? You can still use that. Somewhere.

    At least my old Windows XP license is a perpetual one: I can install it in a virtual machine for testing purposes any time I need to do so.

    Would not have been possible if XP had been a "subscription" service (MS stopped support). Let's suppose I need to re-install Construct 2 five years from now to update an older C2 project - no issue. Perpetual license.

    Construct 3 rental: you stop paying, you cannot open your older projects for updates/changes. You are locked in a software rental service. And the free version does not support your projects either.

    As an indie dev I would never consider locking myself into a rental-based game engine - just makes no sense to me. It is too risky. It may make sense to larger studios, I suppose. But not to hobbyists and small/single member teams in my opinion.

    Even if Scirra goes belly-up, I can still use my C2 license. Not so with C3 (although Tom did mention that they would consider open sourcing Construct if that would ever happen - still too risky).

    Just too many potential caveats and risks tied to renting my game dev engine. That is my view on things.

    Provide both options, and everybody is happy. The thing is, most people would probably opt for the perpetual license in that case. That is one of the reasons why Adobe went digital serfdom only. Software rental always benefits the company more than their customers (aside from mid-size and large companies). No matter how a company may sugar-coat it.

    Construct 3 rental: you stop paying, you cannot open your older projects for updates/changes.

    How do you know that?

    What if you just can't export without a subscription?

    How many times a year do you export?

    Would you prefer to pay each time for that?

    > Construct 3 rental: you stop paying, you cannot open your older projects for updates/changes.

    >

    How do you know that?

    What if you just can't export without a subscription?

    How many times a year do you export?

    Would you prefer to pay each time for that?

    True, I can't be sure whether that is actually the case. I am basing this on other rental software: if Scirra would allow their users to open, edit and save any project in Construct 3 without renting, they would possibly be shooting themselves in the foot: what's to keep users from using the free version to create their games, and only paying a rental fee at the very end of their development cycle? Suppose someone takes 2-3 years to finish their game, and paying the rent only when they need to export? That is, if it is possible to test the game in the free version.

    Anyway, it would make the rental service too complicated for Scirra. Better to have a simple limited version that cannot open larger projects nor export to mobile (perhaps just web), and only allow these to be opened when the rent is being payed. Similar to the current Construct 2 situation: the free version is limited in export functionality, and cannot be used to open project beyond the basic limits set by that free version.

    Works like that for Adobe, Autodesk, and other rental software. I don't see it working differently for Construct 3.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

    You can't reliably protect a html5 product from being copied, that's one of the few real issues with it.

    You can try to restrict its use with logins, but that too can be bypassed since the code is right there for the taking, just like our html5 games, or any exe for that matter.

    Of course the most likely abuse will come in the form of scam, or phishing users passwords.

    > Construct 3 rental: you stop paying, you cannot open your older projects for updates/changes.

    >

    How do you know that?

    What if you just can't export without a subscription?

    How many times a year do you export?

    Would you prefer to pay each time for that?

    Well, I just read in another thread that Tom confirmed that

    - If your subscription expires, you will not be able to edit the game (but you can open them in read only mode)

    So projects can be opened, but cannot be edited (or exported). Stop paying and you are locked out of your own projects.

    Now, I just do not understand why anyone (outside larger studios) as a game dev would willingly ever shut themselves in like that. Scirra sort-of holds your projects hostage, in my opinion. Unless the rent is payed.

    I have a real hard time understanding how this is a 'good' thing for small developers.

    So projects can be opened, but cannot be edited (or exported). Stop paying and you are locked out of your own projects.

    Now, I just do not understand why anyone (outside larger studios) as a game dev would willingly ever shut themselves in like that. Scirra sort-of holds your projects hostage, in my opinion. Unless the rent is payed.

    I have a real hard time understanding how this is a 'good' thing for small developers.

    I don't understand how it's good for any game developer to stop supporting the company that provides the software they are using to make money. If you're a serious developer why would you even consider cutting small a yearly/montly fee to save a few bucks unless you're a real cheapskate... IF you're serious about your game development and decide to lock your self out from further development, and can't even spend 99 per year to keep your products up to date for your customers you should probably do something else than developing games.

    If you're a pure hobbyist and don't intend on making any money on your games, 99 per year is still a very cheap hobby... if you really enjoy it, and can't stand the limitations of a free version.

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