Proposed licensing model

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:45 am

I think a lot of people are missing an important point here: C2 was written so that they won't ever have to make a C3. C2 should be well written enough that they can incrementally improve it without having to do any sort of major rewrite. As such, that makes the normal model of paying for a new version obsolete.

However, I think when used with something getter77 said, it might work. I like the idea of having paid members get access to all of the stuff that's in development for the next version.

Imagine this: each year, construct has a new version released for users of the free version that includes all of the newly developed features over the past year.

People who have paid get access to the features as they are developed. Users of the free version have to wait for the next free version.

The people using the free version will hear about all of the cool features in development and want to use them, so you get a constant cycle of enticing people to buy.

Also, I think the nag screen should display an ad. Not anything that you have to wait through, or at least no more than 5 seconds, but that way you can still get some revenue from users off the free version as well. The important thing is to keep the nag screen from being annoying enough to make people pirate C2.

I also like the ideas above about the second two years costing less than the initial purchase, and "choose your free version" since people can't agree on what they'd like from the free version - have a nag screen or splash screen, take your pick. The problem there is if what if they change their minds when they're done with a game? But it's an interesting idea.
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:57 am

[quote="Arima":3q68ja4k]The problem there is if what if they change their minds when they're done with a game? But it's an interesting idea.[/quote:3q68ja4k]
Pay the percentage they saved or wait until their license has to be renewed for updates and pay full price then?
B
73
S
20
G
10
Posts: 524
Reputation: 9,896

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:12 am

What if with free version you couldn't make game bigger then, for example, 15mb ? :>

edit@ and the free version wouldn't work offline.
My professional Royalty Free Music at Scirra Assets Store
--------------------------------
Specs: i5 2500, 16gb of ram, gtx 770, win 7, Focusrite Scarlett 8i6, Mackie mr8mk2, Alesis 320, browsing the net on chrome.
B
71
S
19
G
19
Posts: 1,919
Reputation: 16,910

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:19 am

[quote="Arima":2r2qw2q7]I think a lot of people are missing an important point here: C2 was written so that they won't ever have to make a C3. C2 should be well written enough that they can incrementally improve it without having to do any sort of major rewrite. As such, that makes the normal model of paying for a new version obsolete.

However, I think when used with something getter77 said, it might work. I like the idea of having paid members get access to all of the stuff that's in development for the next version.

Imagine this: each year, construct has a new version released for users of the free version that includes all of the newly developed features over the past year.

People who have paid get access to the features as they are developed. Users of the free version have to wait for the next free version.

The people using the free version will hear about all of the cool features in development and want to use them, so you get a constant cycle of enticing people to buy.

Also, I think the nag screen should display an ad. Not anything that you have to wait through, or at least no more than 5 seconds, but that way you can still get some revenue from users off the free version as well. The important thing is to keep the nag screen from being annoying enough to make people pirate C2.

I also like the ideas above about the second two years costing less than the initial purchase, and "choose your free version" since people can't agree on what they'd like from the free version - have a nag screen or splash screen, take your pick. The problem there is if what if they change their minds when they're done with a game? But it's an interesting idea.[/quote:2r2qw2q7]

People are not going to try free version if features are being held back for along period of time.
and [quote:2r2qw2q7]No new comer will buy C2. It is in it alpha stage right now, you really have no great games to show off the product. It is prone to having bugs with each new up date.[/quote:2r2qw2q7]No one and, I mean no one in their right mind would pay for that. I know I wouldn't. if you are just going after the current user of construct some may pay for that but
a licensing fee is like murder to C2.
I am looking at this not as a fan of construct but in terms of business person who might be want to make games for money and , willing to pay for the right tool to do that.
B
21
S
4
G
4
Posts: 280
Reputation: 2,934

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:30 am

I was concerned reading the initial post. My desire for C2 has steadily declined since its announcement. First major blow was the html5 only exporter, so I decided to wait until the exe exporter was around before trying it. And then subscriptions...I am more than happy to help support the program and the devs by paying, but a subscription model is a huge turn off for me.

But I am heartened that you are intent on finding a good solution. The idea of buying two years(or whatever time frame) of updates for whatever price you set is one that really interests me. Being able to actually own something I bought and be able to support you chaps too. Would not be against paying for specific exporters either, or specific additional plugins/behaviours etc.

I am not sure what you could do to make the free version less appealing that buying the editor and updates without being so minimal as to be ignorable, or seriously impacting to the point of not wanting to use it.
B
9
S
2
G
4
Posts: 346
Reputation: 2,726

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:09 am

I'd totally love to support you guys, and I fully understand your reasons, so I don't think moving to a closed-source system with payment is a bad thing. However, getting a reasonable system that everyone is okay with, is, of course, a tricky business, hence all this discussion. I think I'll stay out of this one for now, and wait for the updated proposed model.
B
94
S
37
G
11
Posts: 404
Reputation: 11,275

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:28 am

I think some clarification is needed, because people seem to be confused.

[quote="Steven":2pnkwpyg]I am more than happy to help support the program and the devs by paying, but a subscription model is a huge turn off for me.

But I am heartened that you are intent on finding a good solution. The idea of buying two years(or whatever time frame) of updates for whatever price you set is one that really interests me. Being able to actually own something I bought and be able to support you chaps too.[/quote:2pnkwpyg]

That's what the subscription is. A new word is definitely needed, because 'subscription' is apparently confusing and bothering people.

[quote="toralord":2pnkwpyg]People are not going to try free version if features are being held back for along period of time.[/quote:2pnkwpyg]

Perhaps, perhaps not. Game maker permanently holds back features from the free version and people pay for it. People often pay/pay more to avoid having to wait - seeing movies in theaters instead of on tv, paying full price for a game, etc. Paying/paying more for new stuff is common.

As far as I know, the method I described hasn't been tried before. And while I respect your knowledge, there is no one who knows everything about business (since many business techniques haven't been tried) so something new might work better than you expect it to, especially with the sometimes seemingly illogical behavior of consumers that can be at times difficult to predict. That said, I might be wrong too, but it might be worth a shot. I mean, who knew people would pay hundreds of dollars for smurfberries?
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:32 am

Why is this becoming so complicated?

What's wrong with a 30-day trial w/nag screen & limitations, solid price on a full version of C2, and paid add-ons/exporters? There's still plenty of profit to be made.
Image
B
225
S
27
G
13
Posts: 1,774
Reputation: 18,024

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:34 am

[quote="Arima":qgt7suhn]I mean, who knew people would pay hundreds of dollars for smurfberries?[/quote:qgt7suhn]
As Valve have proved, people will pay for hats that can be gotten without paying.
B
94
S
37
G
11
Posts: 404
Reputation: 11,275

Post » Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:40 am

@ Tokinsom

Because C2's no major versions, lots of little ones' development model makes that pricing model not work the same way, because people wouldn't need to pay for new versions.

I suppose every once in a while Scirra could say "HAY new version time, you all gotta pay to upgrade and get updates from this point on" which is basically what other companies do with a +1 to the program version number, but that's not really much different from the "buy it and get two years of updates" model.

I suppose they could have yearly version numbers... C2 2011?
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests