What payment option would you like to see for Construct 3?

Post » Tue May 16, 2017 10:45 pm

Havok wrote:Lets take Fusion or Gamemaker.
To get all the export ability on all platforms it will cost you $400-$500


But you do have exporters.

And after the five years in your example, you own everything.

Havok wrote:In GoDot i'll take a lot more time than what my $400-$500 is worth to me.


I does take a bit to get used to a new product, but only a few months. After a while you will get the hang of it. And again you have the exporters many have been asking for around here for years.

Havok wrote:What can you do in 4-5 years? What can Scirra do in 4-5 years?

I can Rent it and throw $500 at it.


But what export options will you have. And you still own nothing. . . . . .


A few points to consider :
1) Subs are hated by the majority (and I am not just talking about the Construct community)

2) Scirra is taking a new and yes risky direction, and regardless of what anybody thinks, they want to try it - it may pay off, it may not.

3) Scirra customer base will obviously change - many of the old customers will not buy it, some of the old customers will buy it, and the future may well rest on new customers supporting it.

4) If you like the deal go for it - after all it is an excellent HTML5 tool.

5) If you don't like the deal it is time to broaden your skill set and learn a new tool. Scripting is not that hard - it is just different. The trade-off is export options and ownership of the product you invest in.
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
35
S
13
G
7
Posts: 363
Reputation: 7,283

Post » Tue May 16, 2017 10:50 pm

pixelink wrote:Well... I don't like Godot.
Looks to complicated and it's all scripting.

Even though I know scripting (php, python, pascal, js, vb etc etc)
I don't want to do all scripting for a game... I want building to be visual.

That is why I considered Construct 2.... But can't invest in a stand alone I believe will disappear.
And I am not doing a subscription and get nothing for it at the end.

Tried Unity and Real... nice and powerful. But their licensing and splash screen puts me off.
You can only make games with Unreal (per license)... and Unity is going the expensive subscription too. But you can't make non games without getting enterprise license (CHA-CHING $$$$)

These big game giants are making it harder and harder for newbies to obtain... what are these people thinking??!!

I am looking for something that not only designs games, but can also do interactive content (not games) and output to html5 and standalone exe.


Well, you can't have your cake and eat it too ;)
Nothing in life comes for free. Version 3 of Godot will have built-in nodal-based visual coding, but I think even then it is probably too much work for you.

Most Game Maker developers code with scripting as well - it is more flexible - as Havok explained too. You will not get very far without scripting in Game Maker.

Havok wrote:If you want a drag and drop / Event Based system GoDot is not an equivalent or alternative to Construct.
They are building a flowgraph system but it looks even more complicated than the code. If you want this type of thing + 3D then both Unreal and Unity + GameFlow or Unity + Playmaker is much better imho. I've used both and got some gameplay demos out how I wanted it with realistic amounts of effort. a day or two's work with some tutorials etc.


I thought so at first too when I opened Godot the first time; until I created a first small game in it (tutorial). It may look complex, but really is not: just a different approach. For example, you want the camera to follow the player? Just parent the camera to the player. Change some camera settings, BAM! working scrolling.

The animation timeline is a huge time-saver: no need to programmatically control a lot of stuff. And the beauty of Godot's timelines: they are stackable! Anything can be animated. IK boned characters are built-in, with control over animation blending. And the 3d features obviously offer a much greater scope in possibilities.

But yes, the initial investment is much deeper - not unlike Unity (which I also tested, and I even purchased Playmaker for testing). I did not like Unity for 2d game development. I like having 3d options (like Godot), but I prefer to work in a dedicated 2d dev environment (just like Godot, Fusion, Construct).

I also think that the more complex a game becomes, the harder it will become to control in Construct. I read a number of accounts from experienced C2 developers here about how larger projects become much more difficult to maintain. Godot is more geared towards larger game development. You can tell because variables can be exposed to an object's GUI in the editor, and it is even possible to run functions while editing ("tools mode"), and of course the excellent scene-based workflow (which I think is even better than Unity).

I chose Godot because I do not like renting software, and I need good native exporters. And after trying out the visual editors in Construct and Fusion, I prefer simple scripting.

Of course, there will always be trade-offs. The initial start-up in development will take more time in Godot than Contruct, I think - but I am confident that Godot is the better choice for (semi)larger projects, and for my project.

But this is good, isn't it? At least there are so many alternatives, so everyone can make up their own minds. For me, after working for a couple of years in Visionaire Studio, I really like working with Godot. But for others who do not want to learn scripting, Construct, Fusion, of Buildbox (just checked that one out) will be a better choice. But in that case you will have to invest money. As I said, nothing comes for free.
B
7
S
1
Posts: 29
Reputation: 483

Post » Tue May 16, 2017 11:39 pm

blurymind wrote:Can I just mention that Scirra has never offered an indie humble bundle deal?


We were offered inclusion into a Humble Bundle but turned it down for a variety of reasons which we thought quite long and hard about.

- Often in our opinion is a market signal for product end of life
- We'd get a tiny amount of money from each sale (even big sales numbers transpire to fairly mediocre final amounts for a business employing several people)
- It opens up secondary markets which threatens your revenue streams indefinitely (eg resellers)
- Construct 2 sales were and continue to be strong - strong market value

For us, not a good business decision because we're still confident in the value of Construct 2 going forwards. This is evidence based as sales from Construct 2 have shown no signs of slowing down even since the Construct 3 announcement.

blurymind wrote:Also scirra has an upfront fee if you want to sell items on the scirra store


Again, a business decision for a couple of reasons:

- Having a credit card fee to open a seller account gives traceable accountability when someone breaks the law and tries to sell illegal goods
- It serves as a good barrier of entry preventing lower quality goods

The revenue from the sellers fee is not simply just to get more money.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
173
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,379
Reputation: 54,143

Post » Tue May 16, 2017 11:59 pm

Tom wrote:
blurymind wrote:Can I just mention that Scirra has never offered an indie humble bundle deal?


We were offered inclusion into a Humble Bundle but turned it down for a variety of reasons which we thought quite long and hard about.

- Often in our opinion is a market signal for product end of life
- We'd get a tiny amount of money from each sale (even big sales numbers transpire to fairly mediocre final amounts for a business employing several people)
- It opens up secondary markets which threatens your revenue streams indefinitely (eg resellers)
- Construct 2 sales were and continue to be strong - strong market value

For us, not a good business decision because we're still confident in the value of Construct 2 going forwards. This is evidence based as sales from Construct 2 have shown no signs of slowing down even since the Construct 3 announcement.

blurymind wrote:Also scirra has an upfront fee if you want to sell items on the scirra store


Again, a business decision for a couple of reasons:

- Having a credit card fee to open a seller account gives traceable accountability when someone breaks the law and tries to sell illegal goods
- It serves as a good barrier of entry preventing lower quality goods

The revenue from the sellers fee is not simply just to get more money.

Ah I see. Thank you for explaining.

This begs more questions.
How dedicated is Scirra in supporting construct2? If the sales continue to be as strong, while construct 3 sales are not as strong - what will you do with it? Will you continue to release updates and continue to offer license sales for it?

How can you entice construct2 users to upgrade to construct 3, when the majority of them don't agree with the rent license model?

If you charged for major construct2 upgrades - I bet people would be willing to purchase those, but people probably wouldnt be willing to abandon a lifetime functional product in order to get a discount on a paid trial of a similar product :?

Discouraging people from buying construct2 would be bad for business, however having it's better licensing model offering is obviously going to make it dificult to make construct 3 license sales.

Scirra has painted itself in a very tricky corner with this - construct3's biggest competitor is really construct 2!

As to the credit card - you could have lowered the initial fee to use the scirra store 5$, instead of 50$
When I want to start selling items on a brand new store - I am not sure if my product will even make 50$, so if it was more in the impulse buy range price - that would have given me more incentive in trying to make and sell products for c2. It might have stopped me , but obviously many people did make really good products for the scirra store - so your approach was obviously good.
B
40
S
15
G
4
Posts: 426
Reputation: 5,843

Post » Wed May 17, 2017 12:17 am

blurymind wrote:How dedicated is Scirra in supporting construct2?


As we've said, we're going to continue updates into the future as we have been for the last year or so.

blurymind wrote:How can you entice construct2 users to upgrade to construct 3, when the majority of them don't agree with the rent license model?


1) We've got the upgrade deal - 50% off your first year
2) Signals from these forum threads might indicate to you that the majority don't agree with it. We have ~50,000 monthly active users of Construct 2 (mix of free and paid). Forums are a small representation.

blurymind wrote:Discouraging people from buying construct2 would be bad for business, however having it's better licensing model offering is obviously going to make it dificult to make construct 3 license sales.


Yes, it's a difficult transition we're being careful about.

blurymind wrote:Scirra has painted itself in a very tricky corner with this


I don't think so at all. All our decisions have been thought out carefully over a period of many months. New product launches for small businesses are always risky and difficult. Yes it's risky, but no we don't think we're painted in a corner at all.

It's very easy to criticise from a distance, but when you're in the trenches on a daily basis there's an abundance of information and decision making going on that you're not aware of.

blurymind wrote:As to the credit card - you could have lowered the initial fee to use the scirra store 5$, instead of 50$


I mean yeah, we could also charge $1. Also it's not $50, it's $25.

blurymind wrote:When I want to start selling items on a brand new store - I am not sure if my product will even make 50$


It's $25. And if you don't have the confidence you will make $25 in sales then don't pay it. It's entirely your choice.

blurymind wrote:so if it was more in the impulse buy range price - that would have given me more incentive in trying to make and sell products for c2


We're not interested in impulse buys for store fees. We're interested in people who want to stick around and sell for the long term.

You seem completely set on not using Construct 3 which is fine, it's your prerogative. My questions to you are:

- Why don't you move on and stop worrying about something so much you have no interest in? If it's not for you, that's fine - that's your prerogative
- If you're worried about Construct 2 support, what reassurances are you after specifically that would satisfy you?
- I believe you've mentioned that you don't think we're listening or engaging with the community well enough - what else do you think we could be doing better with regards to communications?
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
173
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,379
Reputation: 54,143

Post » Wed May 17, 2017 12:27 am

Tom wrote:My questions to you are:

- Why don't you move on and stop worrying about something so much you have no interest in? If it's not for you, that's fine - that's your prerogative
- If you're worried about Construct 2 support, what reassurances are you after specifically that would satisfy you?


Ah sorry, I must have remembered it wrong. 25$ is not as bad I guess, but still higher than clickteam's

On the questions:
- I have interest in construct's future, as I still believe that it is a great product. That is why I do worry about what it would hold, as I will surely miss it the way it is - as a standalone app that doesnt expire after a year
- Construct2 is still great, but I have the feeling that Scirra will slowly extinguish it in favor of construct 3 for a number of business reasons. The reassurance that would make me happy is that you keep updating it and adding new features to it for as long as it makes sales. Number of sales should = number of updates.

You cant develop 2 products that compete with each other - so it is probably just a matter of time c2 becomes irrelevant compared to c3.
As stated by @ashley you will put out some bug fixes for it, but all the new features will be going to c3
B
40
S
15
G
4
Posts: 426
Reputation: 5,843

Post » Wed May 17, 2017 12:33 am

@Tom
* no disrespect, just a hoping outsider.

A great assurance would be that you kept a downloadable C2 and then kept upgrading C3, C4 etc in a stand alone app
Why can't you offer a C3 as a downloadable perpetual and still do subscriptions?
Just have 2 different pricing plans.

I realize in the long run you can make good income.
But how about offer a subscription that has bonus content or benefits that the stand alone exe doesn't
You can keep charging for upgrades to stand alone.

For example...
A subscriber gets access to all plugins
While a standalone has to purchase plugins

I just don't get why you would alienate potential customers as myself.

I know that new technology is arising such as Electron/Node.Js that allows a developer to code a stand alone exe but still have a web based app... the best of both worlds. An Electron App can communicate to a web server too.

Not sure what you use to code, but there must be a way to service subscribers and non-subscribers.

As I said before... I am a current Adobe CC subscriber, because I needed to for the freelance work I do.
I am eventually going to dump Adobe because I am spending money and getting nothing when I decide to cut ties...
I hate renting software.

You guys can do what you want... but you are throwing away money on potential customers
B
5
S
1
Posts: 7
Reputation: 339

Post » Wed May 17, 2017 1:38 am

Since the store has come into the conversation, what are the plans with it?
Transfer over to Construct.net, or just leave it here on Scirra.com?
Image ImageImage
B
169
S
50
G
174
Posts: 8,327
Reputation: 110,798

Post » Wed May 17, 2017 10:11 am

pixelink wrote:Why can't you offer a C3 as a downloadable perpetual

I suppose you'd also still want to use the on-going services we provide such as the app build service, remote preview, multiplayer etc.? Those cost us money to keep running.

Just to pre-empt the going in circles again, usually the next suggestion is "so make them separate services" - but the entire Construct 3 subscription is already less than a build system alone (PhoneGap Build)!
Scirra Founder
B
398
S
236
G
88
Posts: 24,428
Reputation: 194,625

Post » Wed May 17, 2017 10:19 am

newt wrote:Since the store has come into the conversation, what are the plans with it?
Transfer over to Construct.net, or just leave it here on Scirra.com?


Everything will be transferred over to Construct.net, current plans are to make the store one of the first things to move. It's extremely difficult and will be time consuming though of course.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
173
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,379
Reputation: 54,143

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests