Petition to change Construct3 subscription payment

Post » Thu May 04, 2017 4:29 pm

If you're not happy with the SaaS model, the #1 thing you can do is vote with your wallet.

Personally, I use Construct 2-3 months a year, usually for game jams. If there were a month-by-month subscription option, I'd probably give C3 a shot. If it's a yearly subscription, I'll check back when the new runtime is finished.

Regardless, I wish Scirra the best of luck.
B
62
S
19
G
8
Posts: 341
Reputation: 12,075

Post » Thu May 04, 2017 5:13 pm

zatyka wrote:If you're not happy with the SaaS model, the #1 thing you can do is vote with your wallet.


I think the point of this thread is to reason with Ashley before it comes to that. Talking about this afterwards is difficult if everyone leaves. The damage is done.

On a side note, most everyone here are event sheet junkies. And the majority of the vocal community seems to be against this subscription model. I'm curious about how many people are actually bluffing? If there was a better solution for people right now, they wouldn't be here debating about it. And if Ashley doesn't ever come around to what the community wants, which other product will fill the gap C3 leaves? I know of one other game engine that's very interested in angry construct users and are already planning to add features to sway them. That's just how the market works...

Whatever happens, it's very interesting to see what comes of all this.
B
16
S
7
Posts: 190
Reputation: 1,823

Post » Thu May 04, 2017 5:48 pm

Why not make C3 a one time payment.... with no subscription. Plan to release C4 in exactly one year along with a major new feature, and drop any support for C3 and all further updates for it, only offer downloadable last stable for people who wanna cling to it, once the new C4 version is released.

Make a plan to release major new version release on a yearly basis. Make it clear that no further updates and support to old versions will be available once the next version is released. Only a downloadable last stable will be available for old C3 once C4 is released.

If people try to access C3 online once c4 is released, they will get a download link or an option to upgrade to c4.

Maybe even Make the build service a seperate service for C2, C3, C4 users alike for those who wish to use it?

Problem solved?
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
35
S
15
G
17
Posts: 944
Reputation: 12,210

Post » Thu May 04, 2017 10:11 pm

Triforce wrote:
Trx123 wrote:Don't worry guys!

Even though Ashley and Tom have turned out to be liars and assholes we are going to help them out by releasing a C2 clone that will be completely open source so you can use all your C2 plugins and run your existing games and help develop features and exporters that actually work.

It will be completely free and community based development so just watch for the announcement here on Scirra.

Have a great day Ashley and Tom!


Do you referr to GDevelop?

I doubt it :)
Gdevelop is similar, yes. But it is already released , not to be released. it is also not compatible with construct2's plugins or shaders.
Gdevelop uses a number of different open source engines/frameworks under the hood in order to export games- depending on what you export to - it uses pixi.js(html5), sfml (native/android) and even cocos2d(native/android)
Unlike construct, it exports to native, however the editor is somewhat clunky still and has some bugs

Gdevelop is not a clone, it's development dates way back, so you can argue that it is parallel or even predates scirra :)
However it has much less features and the developers are not as active as Ashley and co. The project is very stale atm
If you really want to fund a clone - gdevelop is a good start to make a clone imo.
It's probably possible to make construct's plugins work on gdevelop, with some refactoring to gdevelop, however I am not sure how legal that would be.

If a good clone is announced here on scirra, the thread will be locked and deleted 5 seconds after it has been posted hahaha :lol:
Fortunately for scirra, gdevelop is still not up to that standard (yet!)
B
38
S
14
G
4
Posts: 426
Reputation: 5,686

Post » Thu May 04, 2017 10:53 pm

tunepunk wrote:Why not make C3 a one time payment.... with no subscription. Plan to release C4 in exactly one year along with a major new feature, and drop any support for C3 and all further updates for it, only offer downloadable last stable for people who wanna cling to it, once the new C4 version is released.

Make a plan to release major new version release on a yearly basis. Make it clear that no further updates and support to old versions will be available once the next version is released. Only a downloadable last stable will be available for old C3 once C4 is released.

. . . . . . .

Problem solved?


Yes! That is pretty much what I saying with the Devcomponents model for their IDE tools.

I hardly use C2 at all atm - but would happily support C3 with this kind of model.

It is obvious Scirra need to fund the New Team and the Tech behind C3 - and who wouldn't want them to be able to do so.- - if they can eat we can play :)

Like Scirra Devcomponents release bug fixes and new tools incredibly often. The upside of their sub model is that if they don't have any new features or bug fixes you need when your sub ends, you can still carry on with your projects with the last build available before your sub run out. But all other support stops. That solves the Lock out issue that most are peeved about, and provides ongoing funds for Scirra.

So new must-have features, and fast turn around on bug fixes = people want to stay subscribed. But is they can't for financial reasons, or just don't need the latest greatest they still have what they paid for up until their sub ran out.
If it can be done, someone on the web will show you how to do it!

CDASI Games Mentality Break Splat-a-bug FlapFleet Challenge
B
34
S
12
G
7
Posts: 356
Reputation: 7,144

Post » Thu May 04, 2017 11:47 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.


Well we all have our opinions - :)

----

Nobody here is stupid, they know exactly what C3 as a service means - they just for the most part don't want that.

I for one would even happily pay for C2 again (even though currently I don't use it at all except with the grandkids now and again) , to help feed Scirra to keep developing that product.

The software as a service thing is becoming more common - but most people hate it.

Currently I have a CC sub, and others - so I don't mind paying for stuff at all.

The worst sub I have is the CC one since if I stop my sub I can't use the software anymore. I even have plugins for Photoshop that cost hundreds of dollars - so there is an incentive to keep my CC sub alive.

But I use it daily so it is worth the outlay.

I do photography as a hobby, and have a fairly expensive camera - I don't mind paying out good cash for upgrades and enhancements - but I don't want to keep paying for the camera.

I just doubt that the Contruct user base is ready to take on such a model - and it seams most hate the Software As A Service model.

It is really that simple.
If it can be done, someone on the web will show you how to do it!

CDASI Games Mentality Break Splat-a-bug FlapFleet Challenge
B
34
S
12
G
7
Posts: 356
Reputation: 7,144

Post » Fri May 05, 2017 12:41 am

yeah... just because a subscription model is becoming more common, it doesn't mean that it is the model everyone will use in the future- it just means that the new model has become more accessible to those interested in applying it. Whether it works for them and is suited for them is another matter. Markets evolve, and new products emerge to fill gaps that get left behind by others that no longer fill them. Construct appears to be changing direction in some way, shape or form- so it's a matter of time to see how that turns out and how everyone acclimates themselves to that. Hopefully it turns out for the better.
B
41
S
19
G
65
Posts: 1,085
Reputation: 37,842

Post » Fri May 05, 2017 3:12 am

I will not purchase C3 while it is on a Subscription-only model.
B
20
S
5
Posts: 108
Reputation: 1,473

Post » Fri May 05, 2017 3:22 am

JaredX wrote:Most people here who use & enjoy C2 are hobbyist, myself included. I will not pay a subscription fee for C3.


i agree, if you do this scirra then i think i'll just use another engine.
B
9
S
5
G
8
Posts: 12
Reputation: 4,920

Post » Fri May 05, 2017 8:04 am

Well if the subscription model that construct3 has at the moment fails,
now @ashley and @Tom have loads of data and suggestions by their users they can apply to the next license approach.

Right now they are ignoring their own community's voice in order to do what is based on marketing research by an unknown entity :)
But that is ok, the community here is used to that and can take it. I am sure that C3 will sell loads of subs in no time and there will be no need to amend the license that so many people here can't stand

Vote with your wallets guys ;)
That is the only thing that can change it, not these petition threads. Threads are just voicing opinion, but sales figures are the only thing that can drive change. While a lot of us don't buy it, many others might. Who knows
B
38
S
14
G
4
Posts: 426
Reputation: 5,686

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rhg1968, skymen, TheRealDannyyy and 1 guest