Frankly, Whats the point of c3?

> we don't charge per-exporter

>

How would that work if you wanted to, with html5?

Perhaps Ashley is hinting at "other" in house exporting that Scirra hasn't announced yet?

Aren't you Ash....aren't you????

We've never done the pick-and-choose thing (e.g. you get all exporters bundled in the basic license, whereas many other companies charge you repeatedly for each), and similarly we just want to put everything in the one option.

Thanks for the above explanation!

Would you consider doing a different style of pick-and-choose, for different user bases?

For example, a "Tinkerers" package, with just the engine, upgrades, bug fixes, and a single exporter, for a lower subscription price? An "Independent" package, with all exporters, IAP, etc.? A "Studio" package, with the full monty? A "Classroom" package based on their specific needs?

The subscription model seems based on the revenue people generate; perhaps this can be expanded to include the different services people would use?

Upgrades can be offered, the way mobile phone companies make phone plans, for example (license upgrades for multiplayer, etc)

Personally, I'm hoping for lock-out of cloud services (to spare Scirra from additional server load from non-paying users) and updates (users will need to update to keep up with the evolving C3 and HTML5, and also for getting bug fixes) till the users renew their subscription, but letting them edit and in some form, export their projects. But that's just my opinion.

I think this would be the most ideal solution (for users anyway), if C3 is built in such a way to accommodate this. If development is as frequent is as hoped most users will stay subscribed anyway, but it's important for us to have that safety net of being able to still open our files if not subscribed, even just for personal reasons. Some of the other proposals such as small fees for quick fixes etc are not appealing and miss the point.

I know scirra have built their reputation on innovation, but I think a lockout subscription is just a bit too radical for both their current base, and generally the kinds of people that use these sorts of high-level tools.

Maybe the subscriptions system is due to the fear they have because the tools are getting better and already has little room for improvement ...

I kind of agree - but in a different way, I don't feel like a team the size of scirra, can actually bring the rent price worth of features every year...

>

> > Well there you go folks.

> > Another reason they don't share is that the members get to call them greedy, but people get all triggered if they respond as negatively.

> > The positive side to that is that those members will go away.

> > Of course those that can't deal with it will stick around to try to disrupt things.

> > Or is that already happening?

> >

>

> You do realise you are in the minority of actually being pro-subscription, don't you? I'm not sure what kind of brownie points you're trying to score here?

>

I'm not pro anything.

Just anti-hypocrisy.

I do think being vocal about about ones displeasure before leaving should be of value though. Scirra is making a product. It is a product I thought I may want but I don't think so- Given the huge amount of negative feedback, I would hope scrirra would respond in a way that addresses those complaints... if they value those customers - otherwise they are playing poker, assuming we will buy it either way. Other companies (like photoshop) did this too, but they had all of the cards - Scirra doesn't have all of the cards, thats part of the reason I think everyone is so negative about it.... imo idk

newt

watch this (Financial Summary)

https://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/scirra

Believe me they are not poor, they have been doing very well selling software

There was no reason to switch to subscriptions model

Just to win more money

But wanting to win more money can lose everything

Well, half a million pounds isn't necessarily that much working capital for a software company... I don't know what there income/ expedentures was, but a million can fly out the window if you have to contract others, etc...

But given their small size of team, the asset store, the new asset store for c3, I shouldn't think they need to go rental model. If they said they are going rental for financial security, then I would say there needs to be an argument of semantics.

Please tread carefully, folks.

Some posts are skimming the 'no personal attacks' rule a little too closely.

Cheers

For the purpose of academics, which posts are you referring to?

I got the impression C3 came into being because C2's editor was too tangled up with an outdated codebase or somesuch. So, to get rid of that limitation they had to rewrite the whole thing. I was perfectly happy to pay full price again for an editor overhaul, but now that it turns out to be subscription-based (wha??) I'll be needing some hefty incentives to switch from C2.

The Construct community simply isn't the right market for this kind of payment model. Businesses will just roll with it, but hobbyists won't. Unity ltd recognizes this with their pay-to-own variant. Keeps hobbyists satisfied knowing they can "own" the software if they wish while businesses will keep on subscribing for updates and support regardless.

I think this, in a nut shell, is spot on. I agree 100%

When users with promising projects begin to dislike the direction of the engine, I think it should be taken into account.

In my years of experience in game companies changes were made to make the community happy, after all, companies wouldn't survive without a user base.

In this case, I was quite optimistic using C2 and quite happy with Scirra work, but their lack of response to my comments made me believe that they simply dont care about their user base.

During GDC Unity announced Unity 2017 and promised features for Artists and Designers which leads me to go into that direction if changes arent made sadly. It represents a lot of work in the current state but business are business.

I switched to Unity this summer, it was about 2 months of solid work getting my project ported and that didn't count the time learning unity. It was a huge investment and difficult choice. I wanted to release as a c2 title, but I didn't feel scirra was sincere in terms of addressing a portion of the communities issues. That is fine, but I feel they pitch and advertise c2 as being a fully capable game maker when it simply isn't. It can make good games, of a certain scope... beyond that, things get complicated super quickly. While I like c2 workflow and found it to be better than unity (for a basic 2d game), I just couldn't make my game in c2. I also, obviously like the c2 community, which is why I am still here on the forums from time to time...

I just want Scirra to take their game maker as a serious game maker. By pandering to the simple they will have nothing but mostly hobbiests... and you cant use the rental model with hobbiests. I would have bought it, even though I rarely use it these days, but I WILL not rent under those conditions.

[quote:21u6n1r1]Random idea ( U know what would be awesome ?, Scirra to make a unity plugin with their visual approach charging 150 per year. No problem there. I would happily depend on unity's devs faults rather than ludei, intel etc..)

This is not too random at all, look what other users did when they didn't like the editor in Gamemaker they made their own:

http://parakeet-ide.org/

[quote:21u6n1r1]When users with promising projects begin to dislike the direction of the engine, I think it should be taken into account.

True dat

parakeet looks pretty neat,

> When users with promising projects begin to dislike the direction of the engine, I think it should be taken into account.

>

> In my years of experience in game companies changes were made to make the community happy, after all, companies wouldn't survive without a user base.

>

> In this case, I was quite optimistic using C2 and quite happy with Scirra work, but their lack of response to my comments made me believe that they simply dont care about their user base.

>

> During GDC Unity announced Unity 2017 and promised features for Artists and Designers which leads me to go into that direction if changes arent made sadly. It represents a lot of work in the current state but business are business.

>

Hi Fraktal

I don't know if It's ethical to say it here but the C3's dissapointment was enough to start learning Unity and I have to say that I'm amazed with this engine already. It's way more complex but It's not super hard. With enough will and patient I can learn it. Also It can natively export to any platform you can imagine and It's free until you generate $100k per year.

Seriously, based on all of this the only reason someone wouldn't make the transition to unity is the lack of will to learn c# and Unity and they do an amazing job in this subject by teaching us through great official tutorials for complete beginners.

If you want a partner to discuss it and help each other feel free to send me a PM.

^ I think thats a theme worth addressing (Like c2 but unity beats c3). It takes more time to learn, but currently the investment of time seems worth it to me... imo of course

I have a similar feeling. I'm not against the pricing and the devs have plans to offer a desktop version later, but yeah, even though I like the features announced up till now, I was hoping for some advanced features (timelines, empty game object, parenting, etc.)

After praising C2 and trying to shove it to friends and employers, I feel I cannot stand behind it for much longer. I've actively started looking for a replacement. Not Unity but something similar, like Godot and Superpowers. I really really like the event editor and I don't think I can ever find a replacement for that.

I will no doubt buy the first year though to see where C2 is heading.

I do agree that if the event editor was a separate scripting language plugin it could be a popular alternative to something like blocky.

I used to send people to c2, but seeing as you have to preogram to make it do what you want anyway, I just tell them to learn to program if they want to make games.

I used to teach a c2 class for middle schoolers, it was a lot of fun. But at this point I wouldn't probably use it.

Off and on I've been trying to get myself to "like" Unity but each time....ugh......also recenlty trying out GMS2 and that has potential. But basically, nothing beats the simplicity and ease of C2 so far. Haven't tried the Fusion stuff yet though.

I felt like that for sometime- what actually got me there was developing behaviors in c2. I was forced to code in javascript to realize my game in c2. If I was going to do that, I would much prefer c#. Plus unity orients itself to coding where c2 didn't. Unity still seems clunky in comparison, but it takes much longer to learn and become effecient.

I really like the speed of most things in c2 though,

Can I write in this topic one more concern I have?

I hope you will let me ^^

What if the price of the subscription (for hobbysts) goes up (with more than 50)?

Scirra Blog Post december 2018:

Happy new year everyone!

ps: price goes up from 100 to 250.

(I am not trying to set a negative vibe. I like C2 and Scirra^^)

And if you are already struggling at the tail end of a dev cycle, you have no choice. Its like Rayek said, you have to be somewhat crazy to hitch your boat to a rental model, unless you are guarenteed to be financially sound. Most indies take a risk, most won't find success, but most also have money issues on their first few projects unless they maintain another job (thus increasing dev cycle time and cost of rented tools...

Once you hitch your wagon to c3, its hitched. I use c2 every now and then to look at and edit old projects, but don't do any real work with it, should I have to pay every month for that??? no way. That's like reading a textbook after buying it and then after a year not being able to reference it unless you pay more.