glerikud's Forum Posts

  • I suggest you wait with that purchase. Let's see what Scirra has to offer in the business licenses topic for C3. You might get a future discount if you wait a little.

  • At first I didn't notice but yes, I think it can be hard to see which one is a top level event and what's a sub event if you have lots of them.

    I think we can ask for those lines to be back. Or to have an option in the properties to enable them if there's not one already that we don't know yet.

  • Why not take the same approach to using cheat tools without scripting to make games at all? Learn c# for 2d.

    C#? Don't be a noob. Assembly is the way to go.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • Since there will be an offline version, there must be an offline export option as well I think.

  • Nope. C3 is a game engine not a multi-tool. You'll find great free sound/music editors on the internet that are specialized on that task.

    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.

    Of course this only was an example, but could expand on why its a bad idea? At least the concept of adding extras?

    There's nothing wrong in the concept of adding extras. I was talking about the extras you listed. I don't think people would pay the subscription just for free assets, templates, etc.. They would need something more solid. Like exporting options, collaborating functions, etc.. While I think there are better ways to sell a software than paid extras, your idea would be more sustainable if they offered features, instead assets. Also, please don't take this in the wrong way. I meant no offence.

    - When your subscription ends, you have full access until the date your next billing was meant to be taken

    I guess we'll find out more about this as new features are being announced. I sincerely hope that one will be able to use C3 offline forever when they cancel their subscription without updates, fixes, cloud access and support. I know, I'm repeating myself, I wrote about this in about 3 posts.

    For what it's worth, I think you did good presenting the subscription based model first, before the features and hype and being transparent about it. This is what many of us love about Scirra.

    Everade Well said.

    They could have a basic, but fully functional standalone version of C3, and a subscription based C3 with free assets every month, free plugins, free templates, etc. Just think of something. Like a season pass of a game with dlcs.

    I'm sorry, but that's one of the worst ideas I read on the forums in the past days.

    While I think this topic is useless, here's my opinion: subscribe. Subscribe and let the developers of your favourite software eat.

  • I chatted to Ashley about this, and it's not an option as the previous poster mentioned it would be a maintenance nightmare. There would be loads of branches to update and maintain and ultimately would slow progress down of Construct 3.

    I think the best way would be what matriax suggested:

    Is something that not was clear, i mean, if i pay $300 for 3 years... after cancel the subscription, i can't code in C3? or i still will can develop in C3 with the exports,etc... as normal but without no more Bug Fixes/Features?

    I also think that people who cancel their subscription should be able to keep the product for use. But they shouldn't be able to make money from a project that has been exported without a subscription. And they wouldn't get any updates and fixes. That way you'd only have to support the newest version of the engine which the subscribed users get instantly.

    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.

    - 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.

  • matriax I agree, I posted a very similar idea here:

  • If you're worried about how it will work offline, think about how C2 handles previews when you are offline.

    You are right.

  • I'm also fine with the pricing. It's very reasonable for such an engine. But we'll yet to see the feature announcements.