Concerns from a "Serious" developer

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 11:14 am

Tom wrote:
lamar wrote:What data is that Tom?


In our database and analytics

lamar wrote:Where is the thread with glowing reports and requests for a browser based subscription engine?


Are you suggesting that because you think people don't want a browser based engine, we should just bin it and start again? Or is your complaint only about the fact it's subscription based?


This is also data Tom and is 11 pages of long time C2 users most of whom are disappointed in C3 and now looking for another engine:

so-what-is-your-first-impression-of-c3_t189564?start=100

If you have data in the form of thousands of people requesting a browser based subscription engine then I would like to see that because maybe they have some reason we have not considered but just saying you have data in your database and analytics without actual people supporting that data looks to be flawed.
Banned User
B
27
S
7
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,800

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 11:16 am

That's qualitative data on from a subset of the community. I get some people are unhappy, but we're going to try what we've planned. That's the last thing I'm going to say about the subscription pricing for now as I'd rather be getting on with working on the website.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
175
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,384
Reputation: 54,238

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 11:16 am

Tom wrote:Addon package is an interesting idea but it's not on the road-map for now. The export to mobile options we're building for C3 rely on external servers which have cost to keep running so any addon would have to be subscription based.


AND there in lays the REAL answer and it is because Scirra wants to tie people to a subscription instead of a one time payment for exporters that were advertised to already be in C2.
Banned User
B
27
S
7
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,800

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:02 pm

@lamar LOL, it's not a big conspiracy theory you just uncovered. It's basic business 101 ...

They have service costs, staff costs, rent, support costs, server costs, etc.... to me subscription makes sense, given that they chose to do C3 online.

Even if they didn't go for an online approach they would still have to figure out a way to earn money on a regular basis in order not to go bankrupt. Apparently pay once for lifetime updates, bug fixes, features, is pretty hard to upkeep.

You're a developer? You should know that? If you sell a game for a one time fee you can't just rely on that one sale your entire life and keep supporting your product... There is a point where your customers cost has exceeded the income. Then you need to plan for your next release, and your next and your next, in order to get a steady income to support your business if you're going for a pay once approach.

There's a lot of developers here that are trying to monetize their product in one way or another. Some choose ads, Some chose IAP, some choose pay once.

From what i've researched for my own projects.
* If you release a short game where a player usually only spends a few hours then done with it - Pay once is a very good option. You're only gonna get a few cent from ads per play/customer.

* If you release a game that you are maintaining and constantly updating with new levels and content, or a game with a lot of replayability - ad based is very good option, it provides a steady flow of income.

* If you want to keep it "free", but don't want to rely on ads, you have to create some ingame desire to buy more content. - IAP is a good option.

C2's approach with one time fee, can work if they constantly get new developers buying licences all the time, and plan on regular payed version upgrades, like photoshop in the past. Photoshop CS4, CS5, CS6. But they dropped that, since it's pretty hard to maintain several products for old time users still sticking with old software, it probably costs a lot to support old software.

I have some old software I payed licences for in the past. They are not even supported anymore, or some companies don't even exist anymore. I bet they don't even run on a modern computer. It was for windows 95/98. I still own the software but it's pretty useless to me now.

C3's leaves out the one time fee option pretty much, unless they start selling new features similar to how IAP works, or already have C4 and C5 in the pipeline.

It's no conspiracy theory to lure people into a subscription model, it's just basic business 101. It's the approach they chose to be able to continue to develop their product.

They chose to make an online dev tool, with running costs, and subscription makes sense. To me at least... Even if I skipped Business Economics class in school.
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
41
S
18
G
18
Posts: 1,024
Reputation: 13,345

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:12 pm

tunepunk wrote:@lamar LOL, it's not a big conspiracy theory you just uncovered. It's basic business 101 ...


They chose to make an online dev tool, with running costs, and subscription makes sense. To me at least... Even if I skipped Business Economics class in school.


Basic business 101 is to give your customers what they want and to honor your license and advertising.

Scirra advertised those exporters in C2 and we paid for our licenses based on that advertising.

I have suggested a reasonable compromise that would still make Scirra money and would keep their base happy but a few people like you still seem to want to follow a Scirra road map that has very few people supporting it and that makes no sense to me and is probably cutting your own throat (figure of speech).

If you or Tom or Ashley can show me the thread with thousands of people like you asking for a Chrome browser based subscription engine then I will consider your reasons?
Banned User
B
27
S
7
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,800

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:24 pm

The quote oft attributed to Ford applies here:

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.


People don't know they want cutting edge until they have it.

I didn't realise how helpful a browser based editor would be until I realised when I was at work that I could just login to C3 and work on my files; what's more, the editor actually updated automatically, and told me so with a pop-up. I'll confess I was impressed.

C3 is the evolution of a product, Scirra aren't going to compromise their vision of progress to cater to the vocal minority. Ultimately the effectiveness of their decisions will be determined in sales figures, of which a subscription model is infinitely better suited to their constant maintenance and upgrades business plan.

If Scirra are able to provide the same level of improvement and growth that C2 experienced before the work on C3 cut into the dev time, I'll be a customer for life. C3 isn't a product, it's a service.
B
61
S
22
G
10
Posts: 647
Reputation: 10,453

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:29 pm

Elliott wrote:The quote oft attributed to Ford applies here:

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.


People don't know they want cutting edge until they have it.

I didn't realise how helpful a browser based editor would be until I realised when I was at work that I could just login to C3 and work on my files; what's more, the editor actually updated automatically, and told me so with a pop-up. I'll confess I was impressed.

C3 is the evolution of a product, Scirra aren't going to compromise their vision of progress to cater to the vocal minority. Ultimately the effectiveness of their decisions will be determined in sales figures, of which a subscription model is infinitely better suited to their constant maintenance and upgrades business plan.

If Scirra are able to provide the same level of improvement and growth that C2 experienced before the work on C3 cut into the dev time, I'll be a customer for life. C3 isn't a product, it's a service.


OK so that makes you and Tunepunk that want a chrome browser based subscription engine.

If there are more than two of you get them to post here or start a thread and when you get a thousand people that agree with you or even a hundred then you have a case to support your opinion.

There are that many that disagree with you though and they have made that clear!
Banned User
B
27
S
7
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,800

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:43 pm

lamar wrote:
Elliott wrote:The quote oft attributed to Ford applies here:

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.


People don't know they want cutting edge until they have it.

I didn't realise how helpful a browser based editor would be until I realised when I was at work that I could just login to C3 and work on my files; what's more, the editor actually updated automatically, and told me so with a pop-up. I'll confess I was impressed.

C3 is the evolution of a product, Scirra aren't going to compromise their vision of progress to cater to the vocal minority. Ultimately the effectiveness of their decisions will be determined in sales figures, of which a subscription model is infinitely better suited to their constant maintenance and upgrades business plan.

If Scirra are able to provide the same level of improvement and growth that C2 experienced before the work on C3 cut into the dev time, I'll be a customer for life. C3 isn't a product, it's a service.


OK so that makes you and Tunepunk that want a chrome browser based subscription engine.

If there are more than two of you get them to post here or start a thread and when you get a thousand people that agree with you or even a hundred then you have a case to support your opinion.

There are that many that disagree with you though and they have made that clear!

There are way more people that like the basic idea of browser based subscription engine.
However not everyone participates in the forums or wants to add to the discussion. People with hate will always be more visible than people who love something.

I guess the discussion is over.
B
22
S
7
G
4
Posts: 154
Reputation: 3,709

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:49 pm

5Type wrote:
lamar wrote:
Elliott wrote:There are way more people that like the basic idea of browser based subscription engine.
However not everyone participates in the forums or wants to add to the discussion. People with hate will always be more visible than people who love something.

I guess the discussion is over.


Well that makes Three of you?

The same three on all these discussions unless you count your comments multiple times.

Still waiting for the thousand or even hundreds that support your position and want a chrome based subscription browser?

Here are 11 pages of real long time C2 users that disagree with you three:

so-what-is-your-first-impression-of-c3_t189564
Last edited by lamar on Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Banned User
B
27
S
7
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,800

Post » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:50 pm

@lamar

I didn't ask for that specifically, because I didn't even know it was possible, or that they even had that plan in mind. But since I've tried the beta, i'm quite optimistic.... It looks great, feels great, and I can even make games on my phone while having a dump. :lol:

I can just speak for myself. The only thing i can remember I requested was 3D support, and not having to rely on 3rd party build options for mobile. Apparently they provided 50% of my needs so far, and they have no interest whatsoever adding 3D support.... but I'm not complaining. That it's browser based is just a bonus for me. I find it pretty cool.... Unusual, but I kind of like it.... so far.... I will still be using C2 for my main project, but will be playing with C3 as I go.

Subscription model or not... I could care less. Game development is still pretty cheap hobby of mine. I have several subscriptions running just to make my project a reality. Photoshop, Autodesk Sketchbook, Maya... hell ... even my gym card costs 250Euro for 6 month membership, and I don't even like going there, but I still pay for it, because it's good for me. >_< ... LOL

I'm not speaking for everyone, ONLY myself. As everyone has their own needs and request, but I put my trust in that they know what they are doing, and so far I'm still optimistic, especially if I will see my favorite plugins ported to C3.

I just feel there's way too much negativity before we even got our hands on the complete product.... even when first stable is released, it's still gonna have some problems, or lacking some features until the product matures. I think we would have to deal with that even if they went for a pure desktop version.
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
41
S
18
G
18
Posts: 1,024
Reputation: 13,345

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests