ChipIn model for the Construct Project.

New releases and general discussions.

Post » Sun May 10, 2009 6:18 pm

[quote="Ashley":o2tcv0lq]FYI we're not rolling in donation cash; in the past it has covered things like upgrades to the UI library (which we have to pay for), hosting and the domain name, but we haven't personally pocketed any of it yet. It's nice to cover the project's own costs without us having to pay out of our personal pockets, though, and it's still a nice motivational booster when we do see a donation.[/quote:o2tcv0lq]

If this statement was towards me, then I should say that it never crossed my mind the chance that you're rolling in donation cash. The principle of a chipin model is to promote incentive of what is lacking to a donation model. In other words, kinda like "Hey I get this really good idea that you might be interested, care to help? But if you don't, it may never be completed." when donations feel like "The project is doing fine but if you spare a change or two it might get better.".

[quote="Ashley":o2tcv0lq]ChipIn probably won't be necessary for the near future - we need to finish the 1.0 Windows branch before we think about any other porting. It's an interesting idea but I think it would have to be dealt with extremely carefully. If done wrong, we could end up looking like a commercial venture or something just for financial benefit of the developers, rather than a public open project.[/quote:o2tcv0lq]

Most likely not the near future, after all the project got this far without it. You may know that the open source community is filled with paradigms, I know that some or perhaps many might see a chipin model as some sort of treason to it's principles, the same people that will curse you if you ever decide to close the source for lack of time/money to invest in it. In my mind is like choosing the lesser evil. New ideas never lack criticism and protest, once they are in place the early critics often look back and say "Wow, that actually works!".

Selling extra services, asking for donations, doing merchandise works to some extent with larger projects, but not with smaller and medium projects, especially with those related to gaming. Open source gaming might need a new direction to be viable in the future and I believe a chipin model is a step in that direction.

I also think that this project would have a larger user base if it had a Linux port, seeing as how the open source community tends to lean towards it (Linux) for obvious reasons. I might be so bold to say that what the Linux needs right now is a good toolkit for quality games and this project shows a lot of potential towards being it.

Just consider it, discuss this idea with others, try to filter empty criticism and let the critical thinking take place as it should. A healthy discussion will not harm anyone.
B
2
G
3
Posts: 10
Reputation: 870

Post » Sun May 10, 2009 8:26 pm

Last I thought, a donation was an appreciation in the form of currency. Not some type of necessary payment... This seems to make it sound that way. If it were my choice I'd just let them keep fixing bugs and adding features whenever they want. If all Construct development were to stop right now and you had just donated a bunch of money to it, would you be mad? I wouldn't. I'd feel bad cause I really enjoyed the program but I'd be happy cause I donated to the developers of a great project.
B
2
S
2
G
4
Posts: 239
Reputation: 1,928

Post » Sun May 10, 2009 8:37 pm

That's true, a donation should not even implicitly be for anything in return - a chipin style system is more of a collaborative payment for a service rather than a simple donation in the true sense of the word (ie, not expecting anything whatsoever in return). If people expect a certain feature to be finished or worked on after contributing to a fund, that's not a donation, it's a payment, because naturally the contributor would expect to see some kind of result.

I'm not totally shooting down the idea; I think it's worth bearing in mind, but maybe to overcome this donations/payment split, it could be hosted on a different site as a more commercially oriented project. Then there would be no confusion whatsoever as to which is which.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,951
Reputation: 178,578

Post » Mon May 11, 2009 12:23 am

[quote="Ashley":3vpho7kp]That's true, a donation should not even implicitly be for anything in return - a chipin style system is more of a collaborative payment for a service rather than a simple donation in the true sense of the word (ie, not expecting anything whatsoever in return). If people expect a certain feature to be finished or worked on after contributing to a fund, that's not a donation, it's a payment, because naturally the contributor would expect to see some kind of result.

I'm not totally shooting down the idea; I think it's worth bearing in mind, but maybe to overcome this donations/payment split, it could be hosted on a different site as a more commercially oriented project. Then there would be no confusion whatsoever as to which is which.[/quote:3vpho7kp]

The idea is that you have an alternative that is true to the collaborative spirit of open source when it comes to get paid for your work.

Choosing whether or not to split from the main project is just an option. I can see it working independently from this site, I just don't know how it would be better. Say you wish to gather funds to pay for your time working on a Linux port or whatever that is related to the main project, how could you do that in a way that would really detach you from the main project? Somehow I can't see that happening, nor if it did happen that it would be better than being an option within the site. You're not shutting down the main project, you're just giving the option to get paid for your extra work in some related programming, I fail to see how that can be bad for the project.

Let me elaborate on that: So you have a project that you mostly maintain it on your free time because it is in fact your "free" time. Now say you wish to dedicate a larger portion of your time to it, but it would obviously affect your life budget. You keep working on the project on your "free" time and gather funds to work on it some more. In the end it's not that simple, but what's really stoping you from trying?

As an observation, I agree 100% that the priority must be the windows port to get to 1.0. I just wanted to point to an option that might come in handy after that.
B
2
G
3
Posts: 10
Reputation: 870

Post » Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:21 am

Why not see it as a way to vote ?

I see it as a way for me to put my money where my mouth is.

You could use it as a way to help prioritize features.

For example. I am playing around with construct. *noob* But I have to reboot into windows just to use it. So... i'm really not that motivated to donate to the project. But, if i was able to vote in this way I could show how much I would like it to be ported to either linux or Mac OS X. I wouldn't see it as a contract. It would be a way for the project to get some needed funding and a way for me to give voice in a very real and tangible sense. I wouldn't be upset if a feature I voted for never got finished.

You could say that just because you pay for a feature in this way doesn't mean it will get implemented in any time frame. Nor if the feature with the most "votes" will get implemented before others. But that it will be used as a way to see what the community would like.
B
1
G
3
Posts: 2
Reputation: 829

Post » Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:18 am

I could see this ChipIn model in Construct 2.0, but then again, 2.0 is going to use SDL isn't it?

If so then I believe it should be easier to port to linux, and the community will probably have attracted members who can do this themselves or at least find a way to run it and created exe's well under Wine.

Either that, or VMWare Player (free) will become much more capable of using DirectX in its emulations or have hardware graphics card support and Construct will run fine inside that.

Basically, I think that if and when this ChipIn model is used, the main features that are requested such as Linux and an internet plugin will be complete anyway even if the Scirra team aren't responsible for it.
"Construct 4 lets YOU make advanced games! (maybe)" Construct Classic - Examples Kit
B
86
S
28
G
13
Posts: 2,092
Reputation: 15,009

Previous

Return to Construct Classic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests