> I've had construct 2 for like 5-6 years now?
> That would be $500+
So by your own reckoning youve had 5-6 years of bug fixes and improvements, all for one price. Thats not bad value.
> Like I said, myself, I'm not using construct daily. It's mostly a prototype tool. I would LOVE to develop full games with it but no exporters has really hurt my development. It seems intel and cocoon always have some issue or another.
So does every other game making platform. There has never ever been a service or workflow that has been 100% bug free all the time. Its impossible. I will admit you have to wrestle with packaging services quite a bit, but that isnt 100% on Scirra.
> If I was a daily construct user. My income was coming from my use of construct 2, yes $100 a year isn't much, I still wouldn't like it but I would be fine with that price. For everyone else that isn't a daily user or isn't selling their work from construct 2 the subscription model is incredibly hard to justify.
Ill say it again and again: Theres no gun pointing at anyones head. Continue using C2 or the free C3. The only people here that stand to lose anything with the subscription model is Scirra.
Yes, I had 5/6 years of updates for one cost. That's the pricing model that works for me.
I'd rather pay upwards to $300 upfront for a permanent lifetime license than subscribe.
I subscribe to cable and Internet. Not the programs on my computer.
Correct, even unity has bugs from time to time. The fix is as easy as picking and sticking to a stable build and not updating unless you need to. At that point, nearly any risk of an unexpected bug/problem is eliminated.
Construct, you have many different areas for problems. 1. Construct can be the problem. 2. Cocoon could be your problem. 3. Maybe intel is the issue or switching from one to the other fixes the issue. 4. Maybe it's just a browser issue that doesn't support something.
Well, you can't fix people's browsers, so that becomes a waiting game.
Scirra isn't developing for cocoon or Intel etc...so that's a waiting game on those guys and that's if they are actually the issue and not construct somehow being an issue for them. Etc etc. the list goes on.
Things have gotten much better performance wise over the years but there are still constant bugs and issues, more so than I've had with any other game engine. That's a huge red flag and problem.
Even as I write this, isn't there currently a major issue with audio working on IOS?
And scirra can't fix that because it's third party.
Go and use something like unity or game maker and the issue doesn't exist.
I absolutely love construct for its speed in development and prototyping. I hate it with a passion for its reliability.
Finally, I made it pretty clear I'm going to continue to use construct 2. This isn't about that though. The point is if Scirra as a company wants my continued $$$ they will have to re-think and consider a few things.
With all the threads about this it becomes pretty clear I'm not alone in that mindset.
If you compare to the competition, game maker 2 beta is available now. Buy once. Native export to all platforms.
Unity, free with nearly all features. Paid only when you start making money.
Unreal, free with royalties.
Clickteam. Pay once.
Agk pay once.
$100 a year isn't much.
But then again, Netflix doesn't cost much either.
How does Netflix make money? People subscribe. Pay monthly or whatever. And don't use the service.
Subscription models nickel and dime the consumer knowing they won't use the service full time and stay subscribed for the occasional time they do use the service. Or if you unsubscribe you eventually will re-subscribe.
Subscriptions are a disgusting price model and I personally don't get value out of a subscription model.
Software subscriptions mostly work for studio environments where the software is used consistently all the time by a business to make money. That pricing model works against individuals.