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

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 7:52 pm

My gosh .... sounds like some of these hobbyist game developers are actually professional marketeers ....
Who dares wins
B
57
S
17
G
21
Posts: 1,878
Reputation: 19,562

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 7:59 pm

Prominent wrote:But you said these are to help with retention- how does all this help with retention? How do these make people feel more inclined to subscribe?


Retention is for currently subscribed people. Not sure why you don't get why all those things wouldn't help with retention.

Prominent wrote:The other languages might introduce it to more people, but that doesn't address retention.


Yes it would, people native in other languages with be better supported and engaged.

Prominent wrote:I don't think a lack of game jams is a reason why people stopped using C2. In fact, when there were any, there was a lot of criticism the community had over it.


Why are you taking each thing I said as an absolute? It's all part of a bigger picture.

Prominent wrote:People may have loved the 3 games you included, but how does that help retention?


New games/assets being given for free would help with retention. If you don't see that, then it's probably simply because it's not what you're interested in.

Prominent wrote:If you ask a person whether they want custom assets for their game that fit specifically for their use or a copy of assets everyone else is using, people will choose the custom ones because they suit their game more closely.


Good observation I guess, not sure how it's at all relevant. We obviously can't create custom assets for everyone. Or am I misunderstanding your point?

Let me ask you a a question now, how would you improve retention of users?
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,386
Reputation: 53,514

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 8:05 pm

OddConfection wrote:Are you saying the stand alone version will use and be reliant on the current Chrome version rather than be a self contained package?


No sorry, I mispoke. It could be in a self contained package.

That's one of the reasons I was advocating the option to suspend your subscription, so you could put your subscription on hold for several months if you know you're not going to use it, with this option limited to a few times per subscription so it's not abused.


That is an interesting idea I will raise with everyone when we next discuss options.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,386
Reputation: 53,514

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 8:16 pm

Tom wrote:
OddConfection wrote:Are you saying the stand alone version will use and be reliant on the current Chrome version rather than be a self contained package?


No sorry, I mispoke. It could be in a self contained package.



Thanks for the clarification, you had me slightly worried there for a second.

Tom wrote:
That's one of the reasons I was advocating the option to suspend your subscription, so you could put your subscription on hold for several months if you know you're not going to use it, with this option limited to a few times per subscription so it's not abused.


That is an interesting idea I will raise with everyone when we next discuss options.


Thanks for considering the suggestion. I know you can't include everything everyone suggests, so I appreciate your willingness to discuss it with the team.
Vote for all the Construct 2 games on Steam Greenlight - Find them here
B
32
S
9
G
7
Posts: 444
Reputation: 6,731

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 8:29 pm

Tom, It just seems odd that you would use those points in response to the question of how to retain users considering the change to a subscription model. A subscription model might allow you to handle those points, but were the lack of those things the reasons people were not retained with C2- I don't believe they are.
When I speak of retention, I am considering the people who chose not to continue using the product, because if you want to address how to retain more that seems like an important part of the equation.
What evidence do you have that shows that people want to pay Scirra for official game assets/tutorials/gamejams? My understanding is that people want to pay Scirra for a game editor that allows them to make games. I want to be confident that my money is going towards that- not assets that I don't need or gamejams that I won't participate in.
I'm just trying to get a point across here- about how these choices appear to distance people from ever wanting to return.
I'm even more concerned now, based on your response- because I now feel like Scirra is focusing on other things outside the scope of developing a game making tool. It makes me feel less confident in where you are heading.
B
41
S
19
G
65
Posts: 1,085
Reputation: 37,842

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 8:59 pm

It's difficult to figure out what you need before you know what you're doing, even when the tools are made available for trial.
Some people tend to use a "hope for the best" method and pick something reasonably priced.
A subscription may alleviate some issues with buyer's remorse, but I doubt highly that it was a huge issue any way.
It's like that Star Trek sweater you got from your aunt sitting in the back of the closet. Nobody's taking that thing back.
And maybe you'll use it one day, when it's cold at the Treky convention.
Image ImageImage
B
168
S
50
G
164
Posts: 8,236
Reputation: 105,591

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 9:20 pm

Prominent wrote:I'm even more concerned now, based on your response- because I now feel like Scirra is focusing on other things outside the scope of developing a game making tool. It makes me feel less confident in where you are heading.


We have 3 full time engineers working on C3. Don't be concerned there is no work going into the tool itself.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,386
Reputation: 53,514

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 10:32 pm

@Tom Thank you for addressing all my questions. I am still very invested in construct and thus why i keep reading the threads and following any news. I would like to readdress the line of discussion on the standalone version:

OddConfection wrote:
With many other subscription based software, when the subscription ends you stop getting updates but you still have the last available version to access and edit your projects. That's why people are complaining about a edit lockout.

We can't do that with the online version of C3, since Scirra want to maintain a single version which is fair enough, hence my proposal to allow edit access with the standalone version.


I quite like the idea to make the standalone version of construct 3 unaffected by the editing lockout imposed on the user once their yearly license period runs out - in the online version. If you allow to keep edit access to the last standalone version that the user downloaded during their subscription- you will eliminate all the technical problems and uncertainy the license lockout is imposing! This will also make people actually feel that they are purchasing something they get to own when they make their initial investment.

Tom wrote:
As with C2, if someone complains about a bug in an old version, they are told they need to update first, which in this case would mean re-subscribing - which to me is fair enough, as one of the benefits of subscription is updates and bug fixes.

If a breaking change is implemented by Chrome, the old version could be rendered completely useless. So what's the point? I can imagine the uproar from that, bad publicity and a bad taste left in everyone's mouth.


Your reasoning here not to do it is not very justified, and you even negate it yourself in a later post by saying:

Tom wrote:
OddConfection wrote:Are you saying the stand alone version will use and be reliant on the current Chrome version rather than be a self contained package?


No sorry, I mispoke. It could be in a self contained package.


If the stand alone version has no dependency on chrome web browser, that means that the developer can continue to work on their project even if their version of construct3 is outdated compared to the latest version of chrome - as it is standalone and games can be playtested in it.

Please consider removing the editing lockout after a license runs out on the standalone version. You can replace it with a startup pop up that warns the user that they wont get technical support, that they are running an outdated version and that they might have issues with web browsers for that reason.

Once the license period runs out, the user:
- Can continue working on the project with the last standalone version they downloaded while their license was active
- However the user no longer gets updates or technical support from scirra, unless they subscribe again!
- The online version of the software has the editing capabilities limited - they can not really edit their projects in it anyway- unless they subscribe again!

The user still has the incentive to continue their subscription- to update and get the bug fixes + new features and be able to properly export their game as well.

That way the user will be
- Motivated to buy their first yearly license, in order to get the standalone version and updates to it for a year, without the worry and uncertainty of the lockout being present to stop them from making that initial investment in C3
- Motivated to continue working on their project - and continue to be invested - when using the standalone version of the product which they purchased - even after the license has run out
- As a result of opening the editor more often - see that "Buy another subscription" startup banner remind them more often and not move onto another game engine. With the edit lockout they will stop opening the editor
- keep them happy and on your side, keep them producing tutorials and content for the community - keep them from moving to another engine
- There is still the incentive to buy another subscription in order to continue to be able to edit your games on a tablet device via a web browser

Please consider meeting us halfway with this license at least. Many of us love scirra and construct and are still very much invested in it. But the license as it is atm is stopping us from moving forward with the company and the product.
Last edited by blurymind on Fri May 12, 2017 10:56 pm, edited 13 times in total.
B
38
S
14
G
4
Posts: 426
Reputation: 5,686

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 10:37 pm

Regarding retention. I think some of the things Tom listed are good. Despite having been playing around with Construct for years I really enjoyed poking around the example games in C3 so more 'full' games in different genres is a good idea. I also think that more detailed, cohesive and professional tutorials are a must. The community tutorials are great, don't get me wrong and I want to see them continue and flourish. But many of them show very esoteric or downright inefficient ways of doing things and sometimes reading them it's like the blind leading the blind. Good quality tutorials from the devs on efficient and proper ways to do things I think will help Construct's image and bolster the overall quality of the community's output, which will in turn attract new users and retain current ones.

However I don't think these points will be enough to improve user retention and the reason is that hobbyist game devs are pretty transient. We hop between different software, trying new things, experimenting etc. All of those guys that impulse bought C2 aren't going to impulse subscribe to C3, because psychologically buying something and renting something are two different things. I've done a few team based game jams and really it depends on the team, but every time we've used different game making software. None of them have been subscription based, I don't think it would work unless everyone was already subscribed as subscriptions don't really fit into that flexible, spontaneous mentality. The monthly subscription thing might help with this, but it might harm you as well. It's quite a difficult situation.
Last edited by signaljacker on Sat May 13, 2017 1:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
B
64
S
25
G
4
Posts: 204
Reputation: 6,993

Post » Fri May 12, 2017 11:03 pm

Tom wrote:
OddConfection wrote:We can't do that with the online version of C3, since Scirra want to maintain a single version which is fair enough, hence my proposal to allow edit access with the standalone version.


This severely complicates support. If someone on a 6 month old version complains about a bug - what do we do? Or, Chrome introduce a breaking change. We have to go back and update every single version. This quickly becomes a maintenance nightmare. We prefer to just have everyone on the latest and greatest version.


That makes a lot of sense, but could I suggest something to possibly think about:

What if all bug reports are done through C3 itself, forget the forums, e-mails etc and when the user tries to submit a report on a version that is not up to date they are informed that they are using an old version and need to upgrade to be eligible for support. Only the most current version of the software will send the bug report. C3 will just do a quick check to see if it's up to date. You could put it in your TOS etc. That way you will only ever be maintaining the current version of the software, but lapsed users who aren't experiencing bugs will be able to continue to work on their projects if they need to. I think if you had a system like this, and introduced one killer feature a year people would be pretty happy and just stay subscribed anyway. It seems like win win to both Scirra and customers. Am I missing something?
B
64
S
25
G
4
Posts: 204
Reputation: 6,993

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests