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

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 3:22 am

An excellent, well thought out post - thanks for taking the time.
B
64
S
25
G
4
Posts: 204
Reputation: 6,993

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 7:53 am

+1 on that, although a pricing model based purely on simply being cheaper than your competitors is widely regarded as a mistake in tech. I think it's worth stepping back a little as well, as we have orders of magnitude more users and customers than post in these sorts of threads - the financial viability of the way we've chosen is largely going to depend on the silent majority and it would be a mistake to extrapolate from these threads any commentary on our wider audience.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,387
Reputation: 53,516

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 10:57 am

@CannedEssence

I'm afraid no amount of reason or logic will change their minds on this. You can always hope for the best, but it hasn't worked so far. The bottom line is that they don't care about your opinion. Of course they'll tell you otherwise, but they have proven as much to us already.

Point being:
Tom wrote:+1 on that, although a pricing model based purely on simply being cheaper than your competitors is widely regarded as a mistake in tech. I think it's worth stepping back a little as well, as we have orders of magnitude more users and customers than post in these sorts of threads - the financial viability of the way we've chosen is largely going to depend on the silent majority and it would be a mistake to extrapolate from these threads any commentary on our wider audience.

Basically, the jury is still out until the silent majority has spoken with their wallets. That's all they really care about at this point. They are betting everything on C3 being their cash cow with every intention to milk the subscription model for as long as they can. Until they know what they majority decides, they are just biding their time defending their ideas to us on this forum.

I'm really just biding my time too, if I'm being perfectly honest. I'll continue to use C2 until Fusion 3 is released. At that point, I'll decide if Construct 3 or Fusion 3 is the best game engine for me. It seems likely though, the longer it takes me to see the value in C3 the more likely I'll chose Fusion 3 over it. We'll see what happens though. Scirra has an opportunity to turn it all around. By the end of the year, I'll either have one really good option, or two of them. I think I'll win regardless. :)
B
16
S
7
Posts: 190
Reputation: 1,823

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 11:30 am

Moot wrote:The bottom line is that they don't care about your opinion.

I'm just baffled how you could come away with this view after both Tom and I have put so much time and energy in to explaining our position and our concerns with the proposed alternatives.
Scirra Founder
B
387
S
230
G
88
Posts: 24,251
Reputation: 192,464

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 12:12 pm

@Moot, this is why it's so difficult and frustrating to engage both from our end and yours as well I imagine because what you write is logically inconsistant, for example:

Moot wrote:Basically, the jury is still out until the silent majority has spoken with their wallets


OK, so it's still to be seen if the model we picked will be viable/accepted by our wider customer base.

Moot wrote:I'm afraid no amount of reason or logic will change their minds on this.


OK, so now we're ignoring logic common sense and the model won't work?

Can you clarify what your position exactly is?

I'm afraid no amount of reason or logic will change their minds on this. You can always hope for the best, but it hasn't worked so far. The bottom line is that they don't care about your opinion. Of course they'll tell you otherwise, but they have proven as much to us already.


Don't know what we can say at this point. We are reading and responding to everyone at great expense in terms of time. What your actually asking is for us to change the model to your demands - what you're saying you're asking for is to us to listen. We are listening. We're reading everything. We're not changing our model unless there's a dramatic need to do so.

The suggestions in this thread have given us additional ideas (such as pausing subscriptions) which we may look at implementing and getting a better understanding of our customer base.
Image Image
Scirra Founder
B
160
S
41
G
34
Posts: 4,387
Reputation: 53,516

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 1:03 pm

The bottom line is that they don't care about your opinion.

As far as I am aware I have rarely seen a company beeing this engaged with their customers. There´s a huge difference between caring about someones opinions and accepting these opinions. All I can hear is "Wahh wahh why don´t you cater to my needs?!?!?11"

And for all the hobbyists (as myself) who cry that it´s too expensive... It´s not. I don´t understand why some people see a subscription model and instantly think it´s too expensive without even thinking how much they actually end up paying. Just put it in perspective and suddenly it isn´t all that expensive anymore... Don´t think about the cost, think about the cost per hour. If you use construct a whopping 24 hours a YEAR, that´s a little over 4$ per hour. That´s not even close to expensive compared to other activities and we´re still talking about using it 1 out of 365 days.

If you go to the cinema 3 times a year that´s roughly 30€ for ~6 hours, so 5$ per hour. It´s literally more expensive than using your construct subscription 1/365 of the available time. (And I haven´t even factored in popcorn & drink)

And while going to the cinema is fun, using Construct is fun AND........... constructive. *badumm tsshhh* (I ain´t even sorry for this one 8-) )
B
15
S
3
Posts: 65
Reputation: 995

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 1:38 pm

WackyToaster wrote:
The bottom line is that they don't care about your opinion.

As far as I am aware I have rarely seen a company beeing this engaged with their customers. There´s a huge difference between caring about someones opinions and accepting these opinions.

True. Scirra does an outstanding job of being involved with their customer base.

@CannedEssence Nice post. A bit long, but very informative and well thought through.
B
129
S
33
G
17
Posts: 1,552
Reputation: 20,515

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 3:49 pm

Well, I said a few posts ago that I was going which I did, and still do not intend to try and change anything here - it is as well pointed out already - pointless.

But I have been watching the forum here out of interest, and well @CannedEssence nailed it in his post.

@WackyToaster - it is not about the price, it doesn't even matter if the sub is cheaper that a can of baked beans, most of those against this sub model are so because they don't get to own anything - it really is that simple.

Imo the whole setup is just one big nail in C3's coffin - well at least for me.

The problem Scirra face now is not just the sub model itself, but also the willingness to alienate existing customers.

So obviously they will sit back and wait to see how the first year turns out, and maybe it will work fine, but if it doesn't and they rethink their strategy don't expect to win back the customers you alienated. They will have moved on by then, and if they chose a tool that has better export options, you may not even be able to give it to them.

At worst people will feel dumped by Scirra, C3 will be a sour taste in the mouth, and they won't want to return no matter how good the deal is.

The silent majority may not be in favour of the sub model either - but only time will tell.

Unfortunately the way C3 was introduced was almost the same as a train hitting you side on at the railway crossing - not pleasant at all. It would have been a much better thing to engage the community before the sub was in concrete, and try to work a plan that was created along with community input. But yeah, I know 'opening a can of worms'.

Right going away again.......
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 » Tue May 23, 2017 4:01 pm

Well... I have already moved on.

I really wanted to get C2.
What I really like about is that not only does it do games, but I was hoping to create interactive content with it... not just games.
That's why I was looking for a non-coding platform for html5... and C2 works great!

I am trying to get away from Adobe CC and finding an alternative to do all my html5 has been a challenge.
But because of the uncertainty of C2's future and the fact I am not doing subscriptions.

I have found GDevelop.... works fine for creating games and some interactivity.
I decided against GMaker because it's not as easy to use.

I was also able to get Hipanni's Hippo Animator and it does a decent job at interactive content.

But in the end... I would of preferred C2.
It's too bad.
B
5
S
1
Posts: 7
Reputation: 339

Post » Tue May 23, 2017 4:11 pm

Defending your ideas and reputation isn't the same as caring about users opinions about not wanting the subscription model. Don't confuse the two. Your just defending your ideas. What have you actually done to solve the problem? Nothing so far. We either pay it or we don't. Bottom line. If you really cared, you would change it. Saying you're waiting for the response the silent majority of your user base just strengthens my point. You'll only care if it effects your profits.

Tom wrote:OK, so it's still to be seen if the model we picked will be viable/accepted by our wider customer base.


You're just reiterating the point I already made. Why respond with a quote just to say the same thing?

Tom wrote:OK, so now we're ignoring logic common sense and the model won't work?
Can you clarify what your position exactly is?


You misunderstand. I said no amount of reason or logic will change your minds on this topic. So far, I am completely right. You haven't changed a thing.

Tom wrote:What your actually asking is for us to change the model to your demands - what you're saying you're asking for is to us to listen. We are listening. We're reading everything. We're not changing our model unless there's a dramatic need to do so.


I'm not saying you are not reading these comments. I'm saying you don't care about those people who don't like your subscription model, because you are not doing anything about it. You are specifically saying that you are not changing your model unless there's a dramatic change. I don't understand why it's so confusing to you. It's very clear to me.

Ashley wrote:I'm just baffled how you could come away with this view after both Tom and I have put so much time and energy in to explaining our position and our concerns with the proposed alternatives.


Defending your position and ideas is caring about you, and it's not the same as caring about those who don't share the same views. You're not even willing to compromise and change the yearly subscription to something more reasonable like a monthly subscription. And before you say it, telling us you are thinking about it isn't the same as actually doing it. Again, I'm making a distinction there. Actions speak louder than words.

WackyToaster wrote:There´s a huge difference between caring about someones opinions and accepting these opinions. All I can hear is "Wahh wahh why don´t you cater to my needs?!?!?11"


Your entire comment is basically you crying about people complaining about the subscription model. I suppose the irony is lost on you.

WackyToaster wrote:And for all the hobbyists (as myself) who cry that it´s too expensive... It´s not.


Well, yeah... Good logic there, and no arguments here. I didn't say it was too expensive.

WackyToaster wrote:If you go to the cinema 3 times a year that´s roughly 30€ for ~6 hours, so 5$ per hour. It´s literally more expensive than using your construct subscription 1/365 of the available time. (And I haven´t even factored in popcorn & drink)


Now you're logic isn't so good. Renting tools so you can work hard to make entertainment, isn't the same thing as paying to consume entertainment. Apples and Oranges. Just because someone is willing to pay to watch a movie, doesn't mean they should be willing to pay for subscription to a HTML5 game engine. I get your point you're trying to reach though, that it's cheap, but you need to come up with some better logic. Especially when a lot of people are saying it's not really the price they are having an issue with. A subscription model takes all the security away from the consumer and gives it to the company. That's the issue. Work with that.

WackyToaster wrote:And while going to the cinema is fun, using Construct is fun AND........... constructive. *badumm tsshhh* (I ain´t even sorry for this one 8-) )

Nice one. :D
B
16
S
7
Posts: 190
Reputation: 1,823

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Myrnabutler and 1 guest