Petition to change Construct3 subscription payment

I bought and love Construct 2.

If C3 goes subscription then I will not buy it, the price simply does not matter, its the principle! I want to pay once and own the software to use when and how I like. I will never "subscribe" to any software even if its $1 a year.

Please stop this silly decision and let us buy it. even if its outside my current budget, I can save up and buy it in a month or 2 or 6 or whatever. Go subscription only and I will never buy it and will move to other software.

I agree wtih you all. I use Construct for professional use and if it is over $200 a year and doesnt have any significant upgrades I will keep on using Construct 2.

If enough people do not buy Construct 3 Scirra will have to change their subscription model.

Seriously, I am expecting to sea massive improvements for Construct 3, so far you guys decided to announce Construct 3 pretty poorly to the community.

Most of us don't care if it works on a Mac, next time announce news that is of real interest to the community.

Subscription: NOT IN MY NAME!!!

+1 to OP

I have an expensive (soon to be obsolete?) C2 Business license.

I didn't care much for a multiplatform dev. environment, but I wasn't opposed to it, it's a good thing, I was willing to pay a bit more to "upgrade" (as I thought) to pay for the development of this.

Instead of doing the hard work of making a C3 IDE for Linux, Mac & etc. in addition to Windows, they just come up with a (imo, lazier) web IDE to take care of everyone.

I'm ok with web engine games, I don't want a web IDE. Even if I did, I don't want to subscribe for it.

• Why is this Chrome only? To start, ok.. I'd expect it to also at least hit Firefox.
• $500 C2 business owners get the same discount as $150 C2 Personal license owners? ...

I think this is a much better pricing idea:

• If you want to use the web IDE/cloud save features, pay a monthly/annual subscription (perhaps higher than the current one quoted)
• If you want to keep using a standalone local IDE, pay a one off fee (at discount, for C2 owners) for local C3

&, critically, I can swallow this:

I understand Scirra has expenses/needs to make money, and perhaps the userbase for C2/C3 can only get so big, and they still need to make money, well, then -

• You buy C3 with a one-off payment, like C2, and you own it forever/no more fees, and it gets bug/security fixes forever* (*or say, 10 years, or 8 years, 6 years... a reasonable time frame before the software would be obsolete anyway)

BUT

if you want FEATURE updates to C3, well you get them for 5 years (or maybe 4 years, or whatever), and then if you want new feature updates at that time, pay a small renewal fee (less than the price of the original product), or don't and keep using the product with the old features and still get security updates/bug fixes

• just do all of the above and call the "feature update renewal point" C4, etc., etc. then C5 2/3/4/5 years after that (which is what I think we all expected going from C2 to C3)

• do the above and keep the business/personal licenses. So, still $500 for a business license, maybe even lower the personal license, but charge a fee for annual/whatever time period feature update renewal licenses. Perhaps Business licenses get a business license and 3 years of features, and personal license owners get a personal license and 1 year of features

As it stands, Business license owners are really getting the short end of the stick compared to personal license owners, not even addressing the subscription/WEB IDE topics

one time payment or im not using it. its as simple as that.

the moment there is a subscription im going full time into unity, or gamemaker among others.

- Why is this Chrome only? To start, ok.. I'd expect it to also at least hit Firefox.

No one said it will be Chrome only. We only know that the beta in April will be aimed for Chrome. I don't think the final product would be restricted to only one browser.

> - Why is this Chrome only? To start, ok.. I'd expect it to also at least hit Firefox.

>

No one said it will be Chrome only. We only know that the beta in April will be aimed for Chrome. I don't think the final product would be restricted to only one browser.

"Construct 3 works in Chrome on Windows, Mac, Linux, and Chrome OS."

It doesn't say "Construct 3 will work in Chrome, to start with", "(more browsers will/may be supported in the future)" or "Construct 3 will work in Chrome only during the beta".

And maybe they will support more in the final product, but they didn't say that. I would like to think the final product wouldn't be restricted to only one browser, but given they will still be in beta in April, I doubt that's a priority at launch (even if people weren't already using it, Chrome is free to get, after all).

They also could have said "Construct 3 works in your browser on Windows, Mac, Linux, and Chrome OS." but they didn't, suggests to me that only Chrome support is planned for now.

Perhaps other browser support will come in the future, perhaps not. If they know it will, it would be helpful to clarify that, the sooner the better.

Currently is Chrome only, other browsers need a few feature catch-ups before it will run on them. We remain optimistic that they will be able to run Construct 3 in the future, hard to pin down when exactly which is why we're letting everyone know it's Chrome only for now.

> - Why is this Chrome only? To start, ok.. I'd expect it to also at least hit Firefox.

>

No one said it will be Chrome only. We only know that the beta in April will be aimed for Chrome. I don't think the final product would be restricted to only one browser.

Well the man himself just did:

Currently is Chrome only, other browsers need a few feature catch-ups before it will run on them. We remain optimistic that they will be able to run Construct 3 in the future, hard to pin down when exactly which is why we're letting everyone know it's Chrome only for now.

I buy C2 for $100 and use it for 3 years, it has cost me $100. I buy C3 for $100 per year, now it costs $300 over 3 years.

It's like the Unity pricing debacle a few months ago never happened....

Not a fan of the cloud/browser based engine (I like to feel I OWN what I bought, having it in my PC, being able to use whenever I want, even without internet), but far less interested in the subscription payment (for a similar reason than the listed before).

Unfortunately, unless they change these decisions, not going to upgrade to Construct 3. And I don't even care about how great the software may potentially be, or how many great features it might have (if there is actually huge things still to be announced). These two things are enough for me jumping out of the boat. Hate cloud services, hate rental payment services, I never go for any of them no matter how great the software is.

Just going to migrate to something else. Maybe Clickteam Fusion 3.

Seems like Scirra is completely out of touch with its community.

Well the man himself just did:

Indeed. Well, I guess I have to click 1 more on my computer to open up Chrome to use C3 in it's early days. Of course it would be more comfortable to be able to use it in the browsers users are accustomed to, but I don't think it's a deal-breaker. I think the C2 Community is well aware that Chrome is the leader in browser technologies.

> Well the man himself just did:

>

Indeed. Well, I guess I have to click 1 more on my computer to open up Chrome to use C3 in it's early days. Of course it would be more comfortable to be able to use it in the browsers users are accustomed to, but I don't think it's a deal-breaker. I think the C2 Community is well aware that Chrome is the leader in browser technologies.

Oh wow. No. I have no idea where do you get your intel from, but you are totaly wrong and unaware of dangers and long-term effects of using a 3rd party framework as main (and only?) workspace of your core business software. No offence, but if you don't see the dangers and do not understand the gravity of this current situation then there is no point in explaining.

But by all means - prove us wrong. Met me here again, in 3 years, and tell me how many games you've made and published using C2 or C3. But with facts and actions, not "hippy-talk" and back-patting.

The latter two are exactly what pushed Scirra into this current mess.

There is a reason why people are so pissed and concerned. But as I said - by all means - prove us wrong.

I have no idea where do you get your intel from, but you are totaly wrong and unaware of dangers and long-term effects of using a 3rd party framework as main (and only?) workspace of your core business software.

I think I wasn't clear. I do see the potential problem with this and I don't like the idea of a browser based editor either. I was quite surprised when I read about it. In my post I was just referring to Chrome as target browser now, and not being able to use it in other ones.

But as I said - by all means - prove us wrong.

+1 Let's see what Scirra made.

Most people here who use & enjoy C2 are hobbyist, myself included. I will not pay a subscription fee for C3.

Same with me.

I use Construct for a very long time now and I do not plan to start a subscription service to use it a few times a month.

If making games thought Construct 2 was my work, I woulden't mind it, but it isn't.

It's just another way for Scirra to earn more money and its sad to see that they chosed this path.