A Piece of My Mind

So hype for the news yet with mixed feelings. I don't know about you but I need to be mentally prepared for C3, that's all. If you are like me having these feelings, here is what we should sort out first.

1. Ashley is a genius and I believe that is a fact. (Most probably I'm dumber that's why)

I still remember the days of people bashing on C2 on the idea of just HTML5 export so this is not new either. There is always a workaround when you insist a web technology-based game to work outside of its web environment because it claims to run everywhere, no-brainer. The fact that everything that was announced surprised me (maybe gave me some heart attacks), is a good thing. That shows C3 is uniquely prepared for the future.

2. Multi-platform (perhaps even on a tablet)

Announcing it being multi-platform while able to make use of a small team sounds impossible at first, of course until you knew that the engine itself ran off a browser. THIS IS AMAZING! Have you seen Electron applications? Even itch.io and the likes works off a browser. Trust me, a lot of these tools can work offline and I can guarantee that. Plus, you get updates for the offline mode pretty easily with not much setups and installations than just a quick refresh.

3. Extendable editor plug-ins

For some obvious reasons, if C3 can run offline (which it could), then whatever plug-ins or extensions off the Scirra asset store can be done. So no need to worry about that. Besides, you can even make these plug-ins using the event sheet in C3 and that itself is also possible.

4. SUBSCRIPTION??!!!

This hit me the most. Not because they changed their monetisation model but because people keep complaining that Unity isn't subscription based so why is C3? Ffs Unity is subscription based so stop posting this stupid argument. With that said, C3 comes with a lifetime free license just like C2. And for personal license is just 2 dollars per week. I come from south-east Asia and I still think this is cheap. Very reasonable. I can cancel anytime when I'm broke. This is not a tool that I consume but to generate income, mind you.

5. Cloud services

Dropbox is what I use to keep ALL my projects. I even use it for simple auto-versioning, so I could revert anytime I want. Having C3 to keep my files, compile my project for testing is really fast and convenient. No need to worry about any local storage issues, uploading/downloading times off Dropbox, or even the dreadful compiling times. For me I trust Scirra for storing my projects so I'm fine with it.

Construct 2 is my go to engine besides Unity and Godot engine. I will look forward to C3 and I hope you guys will too! What do you guys think?

P.S C2 has a mechanical cog wheel but C3 has a magnetic gear! Much innovation

Ffs Unity is subscription based so stop posting this stupid argument.

There's a difference. The free version is fully featured which means you can use it for whatever whenever you like and then upgrade to pro once you start making money with it.

> Ffs Unity is subscription based so stop posting this stupid argument.

>

There's a difference. The free version is fully featured which means you can use it for whatever whenever you like and then upgrade to pro once you start making money with it.

I don't mean to bash on Unity but they didn't give a fully featured access to the free version. We only hope that C3's features will be more accessible than Unity in it's so called "fully featured free version". Just look at collaborations, custom splash screen and limited debugger.

[quote:sd5a2z3a]personal license is just 2 dollars per week.

I really do not like when people chop up something like that when it doesn't make sense, It's not 2 dollar/week, it's $99/annually. it's much easier to pay 2 dollar/week, 8 dollar/month, $33/quarterly and even $50 every 6 months. Subscription based payment is bad in itself but encouraging annually is the worst.

Construct 2 was seen as a toy for both hobby as well as serious game developers trying to survives. It gained a user base because it was much cheaper than other competitors at the time and it did it all at the price of $30? I think I paid in the VERY early state... and now $100 or something. Still one time payment and still very approachable.

Going subscription based will kill some of a user-base but it will most likely also gain a new. It's a move that not everyone (including myself) will be happy about but luckily we live in a world where there are so many alternatives, nothing exactly like Construct 2 nor CC though.

I'll be checking out the beta but it's 99% guaranteed that I won't pay for subscription, never has, and never will.

[quote:sd5a2z3a]Ffs Unity is subscription based so stop posting this stupid argument.

Unity personal is free for as long as you wish. When Unity 5 was announced almost all features were made available for free with the exception of source control and collaboration.

Yeah, I actually held an indie license for Unity way back when that existed and was miffed about the splashscreen deal for a license I already paid for

I see subscriptions are becoming a thing all over the board now. It's disappointing to see Scirra jump on that particular bandwagon, especially considering the generous license and update policies they had going for C2. That's part of what pulled me in in the first place.

Not that I don't want Scirra to succeed. I'd happily pay a higher price for C3 than C2 or do the paid update dance or whatever. But subscriptions... Hate em. With a passion. And so many other customers do as well. It's just not convenient at all.

Jaydon +1

So hype for the news yet with mixed feelings. I don't know about you but I need to be mentally prepared for C3, that's all. If you are like me having these feelings, here is what we should sort out first.

1. Ashley is a genius and I believe that is a fact. (Most probably I'm dumber that's why)

2. Multi-platform (perhaps even on a tablet)

4. SUBSCRIPTION??!!!

for 1, I don't mind html5, heck I even encourage it as long as it doesn't try to look like native and sell like it (the guy agaisnt wrapper who likes html5 speaking)

2, I expected that, I mean it was obvious that ashley would go for a web based application, and I think if done right (which needs to be proven but I have faith) can be awesome to work everywhere from any environnement, unless we have browser issues that breaks it... but that is another matter.

as for the subscription (the 4th point), I am agaisnt it clearly, I mean I don't mind it in itself but the way they announced it was just a failure, complete communication fail, also yearly subscription? that isn't quite right, monthly or even weekly would be far better for everyone involved, or perhaps the choice between monthly subscription and yearly subscription, the latter ending up cheaper than the first, but yearly subscription only is just bad, also yeah I use some things that have yearly subscriptions but only when I am sure I'll use it the whole year, which is why the choice between mnthly and yearly would be better for everyone even scirra.

the other points I have no opinions on them yet, hope my post doesn't sound too angry, was not the intention ^-^

I anticipated scirra's move to make it a web app - when they revealed they are working on the next one and that the editor will be multiplatform. I thought that Ashley and co would go for node.js , but electron makes more sense as it's said to be more lightweight. Using web technology for the editor is clever. They can port it over to android if they wanted to.

I support that fully.

The beta sounds interesting and will give it a try if it's offered.

The licensing is something I won't do with. If you ask for 200$ one time, that is still better than yearly subscription fees.

Scirra is no Autodesk. Their tool has not produced any AAA games. Even autodesk has kept the pay once license model as an option.

What will end up happening is alienating the hobbyist userbase without actually getting any pro users- because unity and the other engines are more accessible and there is no timer limit as to how long you can use them or upfront payment requirement for rent.

You can download and use it - all features included - for free.

as stated earlier - Unity offers services to pro users , but those are OPTIONAL and you will have no use of them unless you are working on a project with a huge team anyways. You pay when and if you start earning, not before.

Doing this announcement without any amazing features to back it is pretty cocky

The licensing is something I won't do with. If you ask for 200$ one time, that is still better than yearly subscription fees.

Scirra is no Autodesk. Their tool has not produced any AAA games. Even autodesk has kept the pay once license model as an option.

What will end up happening is alienating the hobbyist userbase without actually getting any pro users- because unity and the other engines are more accessible and there is no timer limit as to how long you can use them or upfront payment requirement for rent.

You can download and use it - all features included - for free.

as stated earlier - Unity offers services to pro users , but those are OPTIONAL and you will have no use of them unless you are working on a project with a huge team anyways. You pay when and if you start earning, not before.

Doing this announcement without any amazing features to back it is pretty cocky

We will have to wait for Scirra to announce more of it's services. Since the beginning Scirra has been really good at making C2 accessible freely with feature that satisfy low level entry hobbyists. Then making things like debugging, unlimited event sheet and commercial publishing as paid options for game developing professions.

Here's the problem that needs to be addressed. They made the editor go cloud and browser-tech based, which means they have to pay for things they never had to pay which is server, bandwidth and such costs. None of this subscription would have been a final decision by Scirra if the editor isn't hosted online and used through a browser. Then again if it wasn't, then the editor will still stay on Windows platform because of the small team.

It's easy to bundle the cloud services with the editor and place a price tag. I believe the price can be lowered by placing optional toggles for cloud services. Then again if the editor was deeply integrated and designed with the cloud services, we still have to pay the price for it. This sounds like a transition from desktop to the internet, which they believe future software should be able to run from anywhere. It's a great concept and a great start for the future 2017 onwards, but there is a painful decision to be made here to go subscription based model just to profit. Scirra might not be Autodesk, but the transition to use the cloud as a platform is another cost they have to deal with like never before.