Understanding subscription

Post » Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:40 pm

We don't implement features exclusively based on what people ask for, although that is a very important part of the process. For example people frequently ask for 3D, but there are good reasons why we're not going to do that. So it's not as simple as simply following what people ask for, we weigh it up with several other factors.

BTW - what are some of the features you perceive as being asked for twice as many times daily? Just curious what specific features you're thinking of there. The main one I can think of is the mobile app build service, which we've already announced.
Scirra Founder
B
387
S
230
G
88
Posts: 24,251
Reputation: 192,464

Post » Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:55 pm

Ashley wrote:We don't implement features exclusively based on what people ask for, although that is a very important part of the process. For example people frequently ask for 3D, but there are good reasons why we're not going to do that. So it's not as simple as simply following what people ask for, we weigh it up with several other factors.

BTW - what are some of the features you perceive as being asked for twice as many times daily? Just curious what specific features you're thinking of there. The main one I can think of is the mobile app build service, which we've already announced.

I've seen a lot more requests for non-solid tiles without a second tilemap, for instance, than I've ever seen anyone ask for a web editor.
B
41
S
12
G
14
Posts: 1,117
Reputation: 11,253

Post » Mon Feb 27, 2017 3:12 pm

Zebbi wrote:
Ashley wrote:We don't implement features exclusively based on what people ask for, although that is a very important part of the process. For example people frequently ask for 3D, but there are good reasons why we're not going to do that. So it's not as simple as simply following what people ask for, we weigh it up with several other factors.

BTW - what are some of the features you perceive as being asked for twice as many times daily? Just curious what specific features you're thinking of there. The main one I can think of is the mobile app build service, which we've already announced.

I've seen a lot more requests for non-solid tiles without a second tilemap, for instance, than I've ever seen anyone ask for a web editor.


I'll just leave this here:
viewtopic.php?f=146&t=163584&p=990341&hilit=construct+online+editor#p990341
Image ImageImage
B
168
S
50
G
164
Posts: 8,239
Reputation: 105,597

Post » Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:23 pm

I think with the half dozen threads related to C3 in the forum we have probably given Tom and Ashley enough feedback and things to consider both in pricing, subscription and features we would like to see.

I have faith in them that they will do their best to provide a great product and while it might not please everyone hopefully it pleases the audience it is intended for.

Releasing a new product always requires adjustment to what the market demands so let's not stress them any more and let's see what they come up with.

The sky will not fall and the world will not end regardless!
Banned User
B
23
S
6
G
58
Posts: 1,229
Reputation: 34,540

Post » Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:58 pm

Zebbi wrote:I've seen a lot more requests for non-solid tiles without a second tilemap, for instance, than I've ever seen anyone ask for a web editor.

That's on our todo list, but I'd qualify that as a fairly minor feature (especially since it has a workaround - use a second tilemap - so it doesn't really make anything possible that was previously impossible). One of our other considerations is the impact to the business, and supporting all these other OSs could potentially double our userbase - which in turn helps development of the product, such as hiring more programmers and building even more new features, which in turn even helps Windows users. It's hard to see a tweak to the tilemap plugin having the same impact. It's not to say that's not important, it's just to show how we weigh up these ideas.
Scirra Founder
B
387
S
230
G
88
Posts: 24,251
Reputation: 192,464

Post » Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:14 pm

Ashley wrote:
Zebbi wrote:I've seen a lot more requests for non-solid tiles without a second tilemap, for instance, than I've ever seen anyone ask for a web editor.

That's on our todo list, but I'd qualify that as a fairly minor feature (especially since it has a workaround - use a second tilemap - so it doesn't really make anything possible that was previously impossible). One of our other considerations is the impact to the business, and supporting all these other OSs could potentially double our userbase - which in turn helps development of the product, such as hiring more programmers and building even more new features, which in turn even helps Windows users. It's hard to see a tweak to the tilemap plugin having the same impact. It's not to say that's not important, it's just to show how we weigh up these ideas.

Not really sure a web editor makes anything specifically possible that wasn't possible before either, just the smoosh 'n jab version. How about selective solids with the platform engine? I know it's supposedly immensely complex, but it was a feature of CC, and it makes many a scenario impossible currently when the world solid on/off is the only adjustment available.
B
41
S
12
G
14
Posts: 1,117
Reputation: 11,253

Post » Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:06 pm

Zebbi wrote:Not really sure a web editor makes anything specifically possible that wasn't possible before either, just the smoosh 'n jab version.

Ashley wrote:One of our other considerations is the impact to the business, and supporting all these other OSs could potentially double our userbase - which in turn helps development of the product, such as hiring more programmers and building even more new features, which in turn even helps Windows users.

Am I missing something? Ashely explicitly answered what's possible with the web version, didn't he?

I have near to no experience in Construct but support for multiple platforms sounds a hell of a lot more important for business growth and thereby software progression (and ultimately new features) than something that seems to be annoying but solvable by a workaround.
B
8
S
2
Posts: 15
Reputation: 576

Post » Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:31 pm

Hoodloc wrote:
Zebbi wrote:Not really sure a web editor makes anything specifically possible that wasn't possible before either, just the smoosh 'n jab version.

Ashley wrote:One of our other considerations is the impact to the business, and supporting all these other OSs could potentially double our userbase - which in turn helps development of the product, such as hiring more programmers and building even more new features, which in turn even helps Windows users.

Am I missing something? Ashely explicitly answered what's possible with the web version, didn't he?

I have near to no experience in Construct but support for multiple platforms sounds a hell of a lot more important for business growth and thereby software progression (and ultimately new features) than something that seems to be annoying but solvable by a workaround.


Yeah, I agreed that was a workaround, solids being dependent of individual platform behaviours has no workaround. And we were talking about web editors not multi-platform which I agree, has had a LOT of requests.
B
41
S
12
G
14
Posts: 1,117
Reputation: 11,253

Post » Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:58 pm

Going web based is a far smarter decision business wise than porting the engine to multiple OSs; you get a single code base that's instantly deployable.

Whether it not it works well has yet to be seen - Chrome is terrible for memory usage and I can't imagine C3 runs at all well on mobile devices, given Chromes penchant for nuking mobile batteries.

That said, some of the most ambitious games made in C2 have been shown running in C3; and I doubt Scirra would commit to something that didn't work - I'm excited to try it out.
B
57
S
19
G
9
Posts: 639
Reputation: 9,533

Post » Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:45 pm

Elliott wrote:Going web based is a far smarter decision business wise than porting the engine to multiple OSs; you get a single code base that's instantly deployable.

Whether it not it works well has yet to be seen - Chrome is terrible for memory usage and I can't imagine C3 runs at all well on mobile devices, given Chromes penchant for nuking mobile batteries.

That said, some of the most ambitious games made in C2 have been shown running in C3; and I doubt Scirra would commit to something that didn't work - I'm excited to try it out.

I've actually never doubted it would run well at all in Chrome or any browser, really, I honestly don't believe they'd work on doing this if it had even the most remotest signs of being slow or unusable; on the contrary, I expect the browser-based editor will run like a dream. If you like web-based editors (and subscriptions).
B
41
S
12
G
14
Posts: 1,117
Reputation: 11,253

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AndreasR, Brendan2007, el3um4s and 3 guests