Construct 3 any news?

—, I'm out of the loop here, but if you don't like C2, why are you even here in the first place? I'm hoping that was a joke on your part.

C2 benefits from being cheaper than everything else. It works great, I've never ran into any more problems with it than I have with other engines. Especially Unity.

Game Maker and UE4 are both very well made engines. Eiher way, if canceling a game is something to complain about, you either didn't plan out the development of your game at any point, or you're wasting your time developing games altogether. You should be learning how, rather than actually making them, if you don't know the limitations of almost all engines available to you.

I could list hundreds of free game engines' limitations to you right now, and even with the experience of knowing them all, I still come back to C2. So, I personally see no reason for Scirra to change.

It's not cheaper than anything else bar a few.

I wouldn't trust those fake news sites, especially not today of all days:

I wouldn't trust those fake news sites, especially not today of all days:

I wish. Oh, I wish, Jayjay

Wait a minute, there's still time for them to reverse this and blame it all on a hoax, isn't there?

Guys, you criticize something before even seeing it. Come on. Yes, nobody likes subscription model, but if the tool is like C2 but better (don't talk about browser-based issues, we don't know yet how it'll perform) and is very efficient, if somebody wants to do it professionally it's ok to pay a sub fee. Otherwise, stick with the free version or with C2.

Wait and see.

Guys, you criticize something before even seeing it. Come on. Yes, nobody likes subscription model, but if the tool is like C2 but better (don't talk about browser-based issues, we don't know yet how it'll perform) and is very efficient, if somebody wants to do it professionally it's ok to pay a sub fee. Otherwise, stick with the free version or with C2.

Wait and see.

Before seeing it? It's literally the same runtime as Construct 2. The "all export platforms" that they boast about in the C3 news means just HTML5, because it's all HTML5 no matter how you wrap it.

We have and are seeing Construct 3 every time we open up Construct 2. The editor might get fancy new plugins (which, aside from editor interface specifics, can be back-ported to Construct 2's runtime, due to both using the same runtime) and ease of use, but considering that its entire purpose is to make games the net result will be the same.

(Ashley has confirmed multiple times C3 is same runtime as C2, search the forums and news posts for the evidence)

Guys, you criticize something before even seeing it. Come on. Yes, nobody likes subscription model, but if the tool is like C2 but better (don't talk about browser-based issues, we don't know yet how it'll perform) and is very efficient, if somebody wants to do it professionally it's ok to pay a sub fee. Otherwise, stick with the free version or with C2.

Wait and see.

I agree, anyway you know "$99 per year" it's easy to trigger everyone.

—, I'm out of the loop here, but if you don't like C2, why are you even here in the first place? I'm hoping that was a joke on your part.

C2 benefits from being cheaper than everything else. It works great, I've never ran into any more problems with it than I have with other engines. Especially Unity.

Game Maker and UE4 are both very well made engines. Eiher way, if canceling a game is something to complain about, you either didn't plan out the development of your game at any point, or you're wasting your time developing games altogether. You should be learning how, rather than actually making them, if you don't know the limitations of almost all engines available to you.

I could list hundreds of free game engines' limitations to you right now, and even with the experience of knowing them all, I still come back to C2. So, I personally see no reason for Scirra to change.

Wait what ....

I'm dissapointed about C3 not C2.

Scirra was cool with C2 until C3 was announced.

> I wouldn't trust those fake news sites, especially not today of all days:

>

>

>

I wish. Oh, I wish, Jayjay

Wait a minute, there's still time for them to reverse this and blame it all on a hoax, isn't there?

Oh how i wish this was just a joke!!!

Ashley & Tom please tell us this is a joke.

—, oh that's my bad. I thought you were arguing the quality of Construct as a whole, and Scirra's HTML5 goals. I would also agree that C3 is flawed, but because of the licensing, not because of it's exports. Either way, this isn't the kind of engine that should require that kind of licensing, unless it becomes open source.

If it follows in Epic's shoes, by accumulating a lot of money from a subscription based method and then later releasing it as open source, I would be all for it. Otherwise, the convenience of it's use isn't worth the money I'd have to put into it. I use Construct 2 on a daily basis, and I'd like to do the same with C3. Really though, C3 just seems like a portable/multiplatform C2. :\

Hello

excuse me, where can I find what the news about Construct 3 compared to Construct 2 ?

Angiel, between now and the beta by April we'll be showing you lots of Construct 3 things

AmpedRobot don't jude construct 2 by a formatting , C2 is wayyy Greater to focus on handling formating , you can deep search by your self or learn some javascript , it's your problem not the engine problem , her is the solution in one line

hébergeur d images gratuit

Browser.ExecJS(YOU_NUMBER_VARIABLE&".toLocaleString('en', {maximumSignificantDigits : 21})")

Don't be telling me what to do.

Ha ha.

what happens if you just bought construct 2

what happens if you just bought construct 2

If you bought after the announcement, you'll get your first year of C3 free.

Angiel, between now and the beta by April we'll be showing you lots of Construct 3 things

Hi Tom!

From what I have read of the preliminary plan I just think Scirra is pricing themselves out of business going with such a high subscription rate.

Having run online businesses that needs people to subscribe and stay tuned for new materials I can tell you that very few people will pay $99 a year for a subscription.

I suggest you would make more money having more volume of customers and more customers attracts more customers if you would set your C3 personal license at $50 and $20 a year subscription gets you all the updates and addons and what ever other bonuses you can think of as incentives.

People will get a great deal at $50 for a licensed version and will be alot more inclined to sign up for a $20 subscription for ongoing updates and addons and that is ongoing revenue for Scirra.

To put it in perspective it is better to have 1,000 customers buying a license and subscription at that price than it is to have only a 100 buy the license for more and never subscribe.

Just my opinion!