Petition to change Construct3 subscription payment

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 3:54 pm

I think some market investigation would help a lot.
Find out if the main objection is to the subscription model, and what would cancel that out.
The lack of having full features, and no guarantee of when or if they will be added, versus the price point at release.
Surely a lower yearly rate would sway some users.
Then for fairness, offered as a early adopters price as was done of C2.
An exclusive for existing users if there are any objections from Scirra.

Or just nuke em all, and start from scratch.
Hoping enough subscribers pop up out of the rubble.
Image ImageImage
B
172
S
50
G
182
Posts: 8,439
Reputation: 115,097

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 4:01 pm

We use C2 as a hobby of learning to make games. We have had issues with the platform we wanted to publish on (IOS) and after having a bug resolved , still have issues.

we paid for C2 and use it to teach in our Home School Groups. we are now researching other options out there as C3 is enticing (as we only have iMacs in our computer labs) however the subscription model has been nightmarish with Unity3D as hobbyists.

We also will be moving from our GOOGLE FIBER ENABLED home to a home with less of an internet connection, which worries us as we want to build anything and save it to the cloud via C3.

We will not be paying for C3 if it is a subscription model and we don't have option for one time fee or upgrade from C3 license.

I would assume most of your paying users are hobbyists like ourselves who end up frustrated after a few months of trying to get a game going only to find issues with IOS.
B
11
S
7
G
1
Posts: 20
Reputation: 1,675

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 4:13 pm

@tunepunk

People understand, they just aren't going to buy the product. Making C3 a service is alienating a huge chunk of the userbase, and largely seems to be done as a step to get more money from schools.
B
79
S
13
G
8
Posts: 1,977
Reputation: 9,947

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 4:48 pm

newt wrote:An exclusive for existing users if there are any objections from Scirra.


this is a no-brainer and it's crazy missed opportunity if Scirra does NOT do this...

they should absolutely grandfather-in all their current C2 licensees and give them a discounted rate for life, or until they cancel. Going forward with a new product and such a dramatic change to their finances, they need to make sure their user-base is strong. What better way than to give incentive and benefits to solidify your current userbase? They would instantly have a fleet of C3 advocates, spreading the word of positiveness.

The mantra should be: take care of your customers and they will bend over backwards for you.. even if it means at a cost to you in the long run. Success does not happen with using the "nickel and diming" method. Take cues from successful companies and think.. would they do this? doesn't matter how small you are, it still applies.

just my .02
B
100
S
33
G
16
Posts: 1,204
Reputation: 16,865

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 5:15 pm

QuaziGNRLnose wrote:@tunepunk

People understand, they just aren't going to buy the product. Making C3 a service is alienating a huge chunk of the userbase, and largely seems to be done as a step to get more money from schools.


I don't see how a subscription method would alienate anyone. The only valid arguments I've seen on the forum is probably only questioning their browser based move, but that was probably decided long ago. No one is forcing schools to use C3 instead of C2. If they teach in c2, future users can easily move over to c3 if they like. It's pretty much the same thing. And people who still buy C2, get C3 one year "for free".

Scirra now has two major products. C2 and C3 for sale, both very similar.. Just because something has a higher number and is "newer" doesn't mean you have to use it or buy it, unless you're like an apple fanboy and have to buy everything they sell. Yeah I guess people have been waiting a long time for C3, some like it some don't. But what does the payment method have to do with the product? If it's a good product and worth the price.

I just get the feeling that a lot of people here are stingy as hell, and probably wipe their behinds with both sides of the toilet paper to save a cent, because they still want c3, but just not with a subscription model, because god forbid, you have to pay Once a year for a product that you really like to use. Pathetic.
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
42
S
18
G
19
Posts: 1,055
Reputation: 14,044

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 5:44 pm

tunepunk wrote:I just get the feeling that a lot of people here are stingy as hell, and probably wipe their behinds with both sides of the toilet paper to save a cent, because they still want c3, but just not with a subscription model, because god forbid, you have to pay Once a year for a product that you really like to use. Pathetic.


That's a very tone-deaf attitude and very insulting. Many people posting here have very valid reasons for not liking the subscription model, just as you do for liking it.
B
16
S
7
Posts: 190
Reputation: 1,823

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 5:53 pm

tunepunk wrote:I just get the feeling that a lot of people here are stingy as hell, and probably wipe their behinds with both sides of the toilet paper to save a cent, because they still want c3, but just not with a subscription model, because god forbid, you have to pay Once a year for a product that you really like to use. Pathetic.


This paragraph is way out of order.

Please do not make such posts again.
If your vision so exceeds your ability, then look to something closer.
Moderator
B
137
S
31
G
87
Posts: 5,548
Reputation: 60,440

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 6:05 pm

I think the current subsciption price is too much for what at the moment being offered is essentially C2 in a browser (C2.3). I'd have much less of an issue if C3 launched with the C3 runtime and all the new features it will hopefully bring, but for now i don't think it's worth it.

If it wasnt for the 50% off deal i wouldnt subscribe, but i'll definitely be seeing what is added over the next year to see if it will be worth renewing at the full price.
B
43
S
23
G
21
Posts: 735
Reputation: 12,132

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 6:21 pm

Be it subscription or not, I still don't consider C3 to be a brand new product knowing how much time I spent with C2.
Scirra should have entered the web application building market and delivered a C2 app creator edition.
And that way they would have been the first company to introduce the world's first no-coding required app creator.
But instead they spent 3 years porting C2 to the web without getting the opinion of their userbase, which made a lot of users leave the forums and look for alternatives.
Bad decision.
Banned User
B
17
S
7
G
24
Posts: 388
Reputation: 14,494

Post » Wed May 03, 2017 6:35 pm

I don't like the subscription model either, but if C3 is just so good that it's worth is far better than the subscription rate, I'd probably pay for it. Like Netflix. I think I pay around $10 a month for unlimited movies? At Blockbuster, I use to spend between $20-150 a month on movie rentals and late fees. Netflix is a great deal for the amount of movies I watch. I use this same logic for deciding not to pay for Spotify. I don't buy new music enough to justify the subscription.

In order for me to pay a subscription to C3, the value has to be there:

- C3 has to be significantly better than C2 . Otherwise, I'll keep using C2, because it's fully paid for.
- The plugins I use for my previous projects created in C2 have to work in C3. I want that functionality available to me.
- C3 has to be truly cross platform. Working exclusively in a browser built mostly for a platform I don't support, isn't enough for me. That's band-aid to a larger problem. I already have to use Parallels in order to use C2. It works, but it's a pain. Almost everytime I boot up Parallels, I have to wait for Windows to update. Chrome is annoying for other reasons, but it's still annoying.

I think eventually, all those problems I have might be solved, but I imagine it'll take a several years. Now if the subscription was monthly, I would probably opt in sooner, because if I don't like it or I don't think C3 is progressing fast enough, I can always unsubscribe at any time. That seems really fair to me. I pay for C3 when I use it. I don't want to pay for a product I might stop using after a month or two. There are times I haven't used C2 for 6-8 months.

If Scirra is dead set on a subscription model, why can't they meet us in the middle? Take the fear of a year long commitment out of the equation?
B
16
S
7
Posts: 190
Reputation: 1,823

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests