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

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

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

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?

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)!

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.

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.

Right, so there's nothing we can do right now to reassure you?

Also, I edited in a question to the other post which I think you might of missed:

• 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?

> 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)!

But the argument to this in the community in general is: " that it's like blaming the users for your technology choice".

i.e The Phonegap build is pricey, but competitors don't need to use Phonegap everytime. They have their own solution that you pay for once.

Playing Devils advocate, but it's also an attempt to preempt going in circles.

I always made it clear if we made our own build system we'd have to charge for it, and people still seemed to be in favour of that.

I always made it clear if we made our own build system we'd have to charge for it, and people still seemed to be in favour of that.

I'm sure they understood it as a downloadable 1 time purchase system. Thats why they where in favor.

Personally I'm fine with how its going to be done now, as it works pretty well. Provided that issues I might have doesn't get blamed on PhoneGap or whatever 3rd party. Because then it's again, nothing I have a choice in, but I still pay Scirra monthly.

Stating on the website that it exports to all these platforms by paying monthly puts a certain expectation in the users mind.

Imho Scirra should take some ownership of the problem even if it's a Phonegap or (place your chosen 3rd party exporter here) to help the Renting user resolve that issue on behalf of that user.

I'm not saying you do or you don't - just explaining.

Hello;

I just have to smile at people even thinking that phonegap matters here. The vast majority of customers don't care about this kind of thing because 99% will never complete a game. RPG maker makes big money by giving their users a positive experience in the first 30 minutes. While it is nice to pretend we are all going to become

game developers it is so far from the truth as to make just about every post on this forum laughable.

The Devs should be spending 90 percent of their time worrying about what a typical user will do in the first

hour using their environment--mostly how easy is it to install and run the first time through. If they can make a non-programming 12 year old happy with that first experience the world will beat a path to their door regardless of the subscription method.

With that in mind they need some canned animations and sounds (like rpg maker) more than any kind of run-time optimizations.

yours

Winkr7

Hello;

I just have to smile at people even thinking that phonegap matters here. The vast majority of customers don't care about this kind of thing because 99% will never complete a game. RPG maker makes big money by giving their users a positive experience in the first 30 minutes. While it is nice to pretend we are all going to become

game developers it is so far from the truth as to make just about every post on this forum laughable.

The Devs should be spending 90 percent of their time worrying about what a typical user will do in the first

hour using their environment--mostly how easy is it to install and run the first time through. If they can make a non-programming 12 year old happy with that first experience the world will beat a path to their door regardless of the subscription method.

With that in mind they need some canned animations and sounds (like rpg maker) more than any kind of run-time optimizations.

yours

Winkr7

I guess thats why Unity and Gamemaker and Unreal are so successful? /sarcasm

1% of millions is still a lot. Please...no canned animations and stuff.

> 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)!

If those cost you the money - why are you then locking the editing capabilities of the editor?

Why not instead limit access to the features that cost money to keep running instead?

Use local preview- like in construct2 for the standalone version of the editor and let people export to html5 only if their subscription ran out.

Nw.js is free right?

I dont even use multiplayer.

Right now you have absolutely no lure to get me on that initial purchase of the c3 license.

We get nothing to keep out of it - even the projects we make in it will be limited time access to edit. It is basically like paying to download what is considered to be a (very long) trial version of the software - it may be called standalone - but still is probably dependent on contacting your server to check the license in order to run

I guess the reason people post these threads is exactly the request to get more purchase choices - they are not happy with the one that is offered, so they ask for more choices - even suggesting to pay more just to get out of this one

As long as all exporters work as intended, then i'll be signing up for at least the 1st yr, i've got a few projects i'd like to retry on ios/android, hopefully the exported apk's aren't big for relatively small projects.

$99 works out at roughly £76 per year or just over £6 per month... i'm sure some people spend more on fast food on a weekly basis

When will the Cordova exporters be available to try on C3?

I have read a lot of threads about the C3 and been quiet. I was excited but I not only use different game engines... I collect them. People rebuttals to people against subscription is that it is no more than a fastfood meal a month. But miss the fact that some of those people have an issue with of lack of ownership.

Subscription will never give anyone the luxury of owning something. And continuously paying to use

software is not ownership. Kinda like a when your making payments on a car and you miss a payment your up for repossession. When it's paid off you don't have to worry about the bank taking it from you.

So maybe look at the fact it isn't about how little it is to pay yearly/monthly more of the fact that people like me need to own. This year I have gotten Gamemaker 2, Leadwerks Engine and recently added a Coppercube. C3 has been scratched from my list because it is not possible to collect. I haven't even wasted my time tinkering with C3 being that I know I will never subscribe.

I understand their reason and it is what it is. So for me it isn't about money and more about ownership which I feel is the same concern of the ones saying no to subscription.

Subscription will never give anyone the luxury of owning something. And continuously paying to use

software is not ownership.

some other subscription type licenses out there let you keep the software, you just lose access to updating it after the year runs out.

Not construct 3's alas. It might work out just fine for scirra. It seems a lot of people here have no problem with it.