Look, I think some of the comments are justified. Not everything is rosy. The way some people have gone about making their concerns known does come across as overly aggressive though. It also doesn't help the feeling of ..."hey we are all here to get the best from Construct 3"
So I think the energy is just not focused correctly. - from both sides sometimes actually.
The fact that Ashley's blog posted some stuff we really wanted to see. i.e the Performance enhancements etc. doesn't mean it's going to magically get fixed overnight but at least, for me at least, there is a positive future in committing to Construct 3.
In other words, I start making a game now, run into performance issues etc. but hey...at least down the line somewhere, sometime, there is help coming.
The rudimentary 3D mentioned is really a good thing so maybe we can expect some normal maps for sprites, some lighting effects and so on.
Construct performance is always brought up when compared to other engines.
Maybe an update to this post when C3 is out will also set some expectations.
It's maybe important to note the difference between Comparing HTML5 performance for the sake of it being HTML5.
Realistically people want to see the performance of C3 running on a desktop or Android tablet for instance against a native compiled app. i.e If I want to make a game and run it on Steam or Wii U or whatever compared to another compiled native engine.
The press about The Next Penelope having had to get people to re-write the game in C++ for Wii U doesn't help either.
I feel that maybe that would give a better perspective and put people's minds at ease when evaluating C3 if a nice comparison can be done again. I know I'm worried about that...although i have not seen any evidence that i need to worry too much (At least on Desktop)
This part ...
" On the other hand in Construct 2 everything from WebGL shaders to your favourite third-party plugin will work everywhere from iOS to Xbox One."
I think this is an important point to highlight - I would..esp since now charging $99 per year. It provides some explanation as to "Why should I pay $99 a year vs X engine"
I think the C3 "PR" was not handled very well...but it's ok. Seems it's being corrected.
It's amazing what a little more information released to the community can do, rather than having a attitude that, on the surface, feels like "screw you,we dont have to tell you anything, we are steaming ahead come with or leave".
The new suggestion platform is also something good, if it gets taken seriously.
Things are looking up.
The funny thing...and I'm sure Ashley and Tom will probably have a bit of a chuckle at this.....I find the "in Browser experience of C3 Beta" quite different, in a good way.