Petition to change Construct3 subscription payment

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 6:05 am

byondisoft wrote:
blurymind wrote:(...) But at least I want to state why subscriptions suck for game development - especially for freelancers and indie devs. I think your claim of not locking developers out is just misleading- developers develop, they wont have much use in just opening a project they worked on if they cant edit it.


Thank you. My thoughts exactly.

I'm afraid to post things like that because my posts will seem very emotional as many others' do and I don't want to be banned. But I hardly come here anymore. Only to see if Ashley and team have changed their ideas. And they won't.

But the reason we get so emotional is that... well, most of us have an emotional bond to Construct 1, 2 and Scirra. And Scirra is/was a great company. I don't know what happened to make them change their minds. Subscriptions suck for indie games dev. Ditto. This is fact. The competition - and we're talking about Unreal, Unity, CryEngine, GMStudio, etc. - understands that. But that's Scirra's decision. And I must respect it because because it's a wonderful company that always was very close to the community.

Peace everybody.


You do have to technically pay a subscription model with UE4 and Unity, But at least with their models they don't start taking money until you make money, so the amount they take is low in comparison to taking money without you even starting something
B
34
S
23
G
49
Posts: 77
Reputation: 27,826

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 8:47 am

Phacanu wrote:
byondisoft wrote:
blurymind wrote:(...) But at least I want to state why subscriptions suck for game development - especially for freelancers and indie devs. I think your claim of not locking developers out is just misleading- developers develop, they wont have much use in just opening a project they worked on if they cant edit it.


Thank you. My thoughts exactly.

I'm afraid to post things like that because my posts will seem very emotional as many others' do and I don't want to be banned. But I hardly come here anymore. Only to see if Ashley and team have changed their ideas. And they won't.

But the reason we get so emotional is that... well, most of us have an emotional bond to Construct 1, 2 and Scirra. And Scirra is/was a great company. I don't know what happened to make them change their minds. Subscriptions suck for indie games dev. Ditto. This is fact. The competition - and we're talking about Unreal, Unity, CryEngine, GMStudio, etc. - understands that. But that's Scirra's decision. And I must respect it because because it's a wonderful company that always was very close to the community.

Peace everybody.


You do have to technically pay a subscription model with UE4 and Unity, But at least with their models they don't start taking money until you make money, so the amount they take is low in comparison to taking money without you even starting something


The difference is that their engines are proven tech and "Professionals" use it.
If Scirra goes the same way they might never make a cent.
As far as I'm aware "The Next Penelope" is Construct 2's most successful game. Probably financially.
I doubt that game made the Unreal Engine's type budget for them to have had to start paying. Even then to get it on Wii U they are porting the game to Unity since Wii U HTML5 support is weak.

I love Construct for the Event System and the quick turnaround times to features and updates even though Ashley will argue and argue if a feature is needed. I've almost never seen a feature requested by the community being implemented because they really asked for it other than the Multiplayer and this is used as a stick to enforce the "fact that people don't know what they really want".
I'm not sure how many games Ashley has developed but sometimes just because it's thought not to be important for the engine doesn't mean it's not important for game developers/ designers.

However, despite this, useful things get added anyway and I do feel that they at least have a finger on the pulse when it comes to UI, Ease of use but still being powerful to use etc.
I'm here because I find Construct clicks with me and they way I like to work. There is a flow to using it that I appreciate and now that C3 can work on the Mac easier than using Bootcamp or Parallels I intend to actually use it properly as supposed to another tool I was using.

Maybe I can use this forum to also say that imho this needs to change.
Image
At least have an asterix * stating that it's reliant on 3rd party exporters for some of the platforms.

What I do think though is that now we are going to have a split/Fragmented community. We are definitely worse off for it.
Some plugin makers won't be getting C3, so that means less behaviors and plugins perhaps etc.
Hopefully the HTML5 / Online Editor etc attracts more javascript developers so we keep on getting useful behaviors since the track record of getting these done is less than stellar.
The new plugin manager was an excellent idea though.

Anycase, I decided to sign up for the first year and then see how it goes and what's what. It may be a bit premature to judge C3 and Scirra till I haven't actually made a bigger project with it.
The fact that it runs on the Mac now (even if it's in the browser) is welcomed. I'll give Scirra the benefit of the doubt for now. So far C3 is fine for me and I'm cautiously excited for when it gets out of Beta - barring any unforeseen performance issues down the line.
B
29
S
8
G
4
Posts: 206
Reputation: 5,029

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 10:15 am

Havok I'm sorta in your boat I like construct 3 regardless but I do think their's some ignorance or delusion going on in the development
of the construct engine which should be publically announced officially unless It has already in which case ignore that little part.

Ashley I respect your work by the way and I don't consider you a bad person and I'm not trying to discredit your success.
Last edited by xrosax on Wed May 03, 2017 10:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
B
14
S
3
G
1
Posts: 31
Reputation: 1,308

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 10:26 am

blurymind wrote:It's like being in a cell, you can still look what's beyond the bars, but you are still behind them.

That's ridiculous. It's a product for sale, not incarceration.
Scirra Founder
B
403
S
238
G
89
Posts: 24,653
Reputation: 196,143

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 12:37 pm

Havok wrote:
byondisoft wrote:
blurymind wrote:

You do have to technically pay a subscription model with UE4 and Unity, But at least with their models they don't start taking money until you make money, so the amount they take is low in comparison to taking money without you even starting something


The difference is that their engines are proven tech and "Professionals" use it.
If Scirra goes the same way they might never make a cent.
As far as I'm aware "The Next Penelope" is Construct 2's most successful game. Probably financially.
I doubt that game made the Unreal Engine's type budget for them to have had to start paying. Even then to get it on Wii U they are porting the game to Unity since Wii U HTML5 support is weak.


Penelope made over 300,000$ before the WiiU port, you start to pay 5% per quarter if you make over 3,000$, So yea, They would have hit the threshold to start paying
B
34
S
23
G
49
Posts: 77
Reputation: 27,826

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 12:38 pm

Ashley wrote:
blurymind wrote:It's like being in a cell, you can still look what's beyond the bars, but you are still behind them.

That's ridiculous. It's a product for sale, not incarceration.


Firstly, it's just a metaphor for things being out of reach. Secondly, your product is not for sale, it's for rent. If it was for sale, we wouldn't have this issue.

Ok, how about this comparison:

Imagine you're an artist and you bought the best brushes for your art style and used them for years, now the company that made those brushes have brought out better brushes but you can't buy them, no, you have to rent them.

Now these new brushes a great and you want to use them, so you rent them and work on your masterpiece, but oh, no, you're at the end of the rental period, you can't afford to rent again because you're not finished yet and haven't sold anything, and the company takes your brushes away.

All you can do is stare forlornly at your unfinished work while you figure out how you can rent the brushes again because you can't go back to your old brushes to finish it.

Ashley wrote:As I've said before, we're looking in to adding a special option for people who have had exported projects in the past, so they won't have to sign up for another full year just to export again or make a few quick changes. Assuming we have something like that in place, I don't think it's fair to say any work is "held hostage" either.


That's good news that you're considering options like that, and should probably be more widely publicized since I if I missed it, then I'm sure others missed it too.

Could that be extended to allow people to edit existing scenarios if they've subscribed in the past, not just those that have exported?

I don't think people would mind too much if they have to re-subscribe to export, I think it's not being able to continue editing your work that is the real sticking point.
Last edited by OddConfection on Wed May 03, 2017 12:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Find all the Construct 2 games that were on Steam Greenlight here
B
36
S
10
G
7
Posts: 479
Reputation: 7,023

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 12:43 pm

Havok wrote:Maybe I can use this forum to also say that imho this needs to change.
Image
At least have an asterix * stating that it's reliant on 3rd party exporters for some of the platforms.

Yeah I have noticed a similar case with the "make multiplayer games" showcase.
While these cases don't necessarily fall into the category of "false marketing", they are still quite misleading in my opinion.

The explanation for why my case could be misleading:
Sombrero: Spaghetti Western Mayhem is actually not using the native multiplayer plugin, it's using Photon.
Photon is a 3rd party (ironically subscription based) service, which offers multiplayer features using a traversal/cloud server.
A traversal server is generally more stable compared to the traditional "peer to peer" system that the native multiplayer plugin uses.
Not only that but I guess that Photon probably also offers features which the current native multiplayer plugin doesn't have.

Important notice: I'm not suggesting that Scirra should remove the promotion!
I'm just recommending to add a small "hint" (maybe using an * as Havok suggested), which makes it clear that the showcased game is using 3rd party services.

Wanted to get this off my chest for quite some time now, keep up the great work Scirra and I'm going back into lurk-mode. :P
ImageImageImage
B
69
S
24
G
78
Posts: 695
Reputation: 45,332

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 2:02 pm

Phacanu wrote:

Penelope made over 300,000$ before the WiiU port, you start to pay 5% per quarter if you make over 3,000$, So yea, They would have hit the threshold to start paying


...per calendar quarter though.

But really interesting and awesome for the devs that it did well.
Although my statement still stands. How many more people would have been paying Scirra now from successful games?
B
29
S
8
G
4
Posts: 206
Reputation: 5,029

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 2:22 pm

Ashley wrote:
blurymind wrote:It's like being in a cell, you can still look what's beyond the bars, but you are still behind them.

That's ridiculous. It's a product for sale, not incarceration.


I just think people doesn't get that C3 has moved to being more of a service than a standalone app. I can't think of any services that you only pay once, and then continue to use it forever.

Maybe it will start to sink in eventually, once people realize C3 is more of a service provided online than a traditional software.

C3 has moved to being more of an online tool for creating games, that you get access to while you subscribe.... I don't know what's so hard to comprehend about that? I guess people just got used paying once and getting an all you can eat buffet for years after paying once. I wouldn't worry about it too much. 99$ per years is by no means expensive, even as a hobbyist, (if you like the software).

Although I feel some are using "locked out" as an argument, to be able to get continuous service for free, or only want to pay IF & WHEN they actually manage to make something worth exporting. I don't think it's worth overcomplicating stuff, by special access for previously exported projects and such. It's probably better to add a monthly option so they at least can subscribe shorter periods, especially for quick fixes, new exports, and updates to earlier projects, or for those who don't want to subscribe on a yearly basis.

That's just my two cents.
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
42
S
18
G
19
Posts: 1,060
Reputation: 14,054

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 3:39 pm

In a way, the community provides a service to scirra. We find bugs for them as well as create educational content for their product, we also create plugins and behaviors that improve their product. Can Scirra start compensating us for this service that we provide?
I doubt scirra wants to do that, they prefer getting it for free.. hmmm..
B
48
S
23
G
66
Posts: 1,144
Reputation: 39,059

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests