lamar's Forum Posts

  • Please don't take this thread off topic and there is lots of good feedback here for Tom and Ashley to consider.

    There is a topic on Jams for those questions.

    Thanks!

    >

    > Hijacking?

    >

    > Every question I have posed has been directly related to the complaints of the OP and many other people on this thread.

    >

    > No one forces you to read or respond to my posts.

    >

    No, you're repeating the same stuff over and over again everywhere.

    You're a firebug, you're forcing Ashley or Tom to repeatedly read your posts and respond to them.

    The only post I repeated was a post that Ashley asked for feedback on and then refused to answer.

    You are welcome to your opinion but the forum is for people to ask questions and get help from Scirra and other members.

    I haven't seen you around much and certainly haven't seen you helping anyone in the How Do I thread?

    I'm usually only reading on this forum but I'm getting sick of the way you're hijacking threads lamar. Could you please stop with this nonsense. Critique and discussions in a civilized manner are a great thing but you're constantly hijacking threads, mixing up or completely changing the many concerns of the opening or follow up posts to fit your agenda and then repeatedly target Ashely and Tom with an incredible amount of posts that never lead anywhere and finally destroy the whole thread.

    Hijacking?

    Every question I have posed has been directly related to the complaints of the OP and many other people on this thread.

    No one forces you to read or respond to my posts.

    8,000 unique people tried it in the first 24 hours.

    [quote:2nlar7lh]Now how many of those were unique users because I opened C3 at least 10 times that first day trying to get things to work?

    Your questions are posed in an aggravating way.

    Well I don't see how they can be aggravating by telling the truth that I had lots of problems getting C3 to open and run and that has been widely reported in the bugs?

    I think people looking at buying C3 want to know what those numbers are to see if it is going to be popular and have staying power so it will be supported in the future.

    First impression of an engine means a lot so many people will try something that is free but that doesn't meant they liked it or will continue using it or buy it.

    Right?

    > I guess Tom and Ashley could tell us what the unique download or use numbers have been for C3 and that would give us at least an idea of how many people tried the beta?

    >

    > I would be interested in seeing that number?

    >

    > Like how many tried it the first day and how many new people are trying it each day?

    >

    Here's some numbers for you:

    https://twitter.com/ConstructTeam/statu ... 2038028289

    10,000 pretty good!

    Now how many of those were unique users because I opened C3 at least 10 times that first day trying to get things to work?

    How many of those people are still using C3 now after a week?

    >

    > > I would say that getting this community more involved would be a great start. Conducting direct polls and really having a way for supporters to give feedback.

    > >

    > This has worked against us in the past. The multiplayer feature was massively voted for, but from the data we look at, very few people actually use it. So the hype effect is a big distorting factor in polls. I don't regret it, it was a super interesting project to work on, but it's something to bear in mind, and is the main reason I have avoided polls since then.

    >

    > Having said that, we do have a feature-voting system planned anyway but I am going to strongly caveat it with warnings that "votes are not a guarantee of implementation", for exactly the reason we had with multiplayer. Also I can easily imagine things like 3D becoming #1 voted features, and there are a wide range of reasons why we're holding off on that.

    >

    Glad to see that there is a feature voting system planned. Could one possible solution be to have users submit requests, but these be collated and curated by Scirra who then select several which are in line with your objectives with C3 and then the community votes on those? That way you still have control, but we have a good idea of what's coming and are still influencing the direction of the product to a degree. Just an idea anyway, I understand opening it up to everybody would be chaos, but I think that some sort of dialogue between Scirra and its customers on features is still important.

    Would you buy a car because the car salesman says they will listen to you and maybe fix things you find wrong with it or put in features you want later?

    Just sayin'

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

    Having worked with UDK and previously Unreal 3 in the past I thought i'd weigh in on this.

    At it's height, Epic had around 10 programmers working full time on the engine for each stable release and 2 Scripters working on the front end code not to mention the entire team that worked on Kismet function (the visual scripting part).

    Scirra has Ashley and —

    My point being; the amount of time it takes to write new features vs the rate they're expected by the user base is vastly disproportionate.

    Either we have a stable engine that exports to a fair few platforms or we have a largely broken engine that has a lot of features (see the early days of Unity engine or the first few months of Unreal 4).

    There's always going to be limitations to what Construct can do and the guys are simply moving the engine in a direction that will allow Scirra to keep growing as a business and better develop the product we're all paying for.

    With only a couple of people working on the backend nobody can seriously expect everything in this thread to be addressed immediately and in the lifetime of C2 we've had a whole lot of new features and things the community has asked for, but everything takes time.

    Personally I don't like the idea of a browser based system, but that's just it, I don't like the idea of it. Nobody can judge C3 yet and I wouldn't expect it to be in a state where anyone can judge or berate it for at least the next 12 months.

    So are you willing to wait 5 years for C3 to work fairly well like C2 that still has many bugs and exporters that don't work properly?

    Keep in mind many of those features, workarounds and plugins we use in our C2 games were actually created by outsiders not Scirra and those will not work in C3 with out a rewrite and many of those designers have moved on to other engines.

    I don't see many of the C2 plugin designers jumping for joy for C3 and wanting to design for that engine.

    What is to say Scirrra won't decide to abandon C3 for their next big idea in a few years?

    Many people outside of Scirra put time and effort into making C2 workable now feel abandoned by Scirra. Not a good business practice in my opinion.

    So- has anyone started a thread to find out if anyone actually wants a C3 Chrome browser based engine?

    Some of the people on this thread have claimed most people want that but I am sure not seeing it.

    I guess Tom and Ashley could tell us what the unique download or use numbers have been for C3 and that would give us at least an idea of how many people tried the beta?

    I would be interested in seeing that number?

    Like how many tried it the first day and how many new people are trying it each day?

    Of course that isn't going to tell us how many people will buy C3 and lots of people will try anything that is free and considering this is a subscription product it will probably not be something people buy to try.

    Obviously there will be bugs on the first days of release. The whole point of a beta is for bugs like this to surface and be dealt with.

    Oh really?

    Well if that is the case C2 should be bug free after 5 years right?

    Visited the C2 bug section lately?

    These are just the bugs in C3 the first week with no features and only 40 events to work with and not counting the 127 bugs Ashley closed.

    So good luck with that!

    > I feel very disrespected by Ashley and Tom and that is not something I am willing to tolerate from people I have supported with my money and promoted with my games and helped the beginners in their forum.

    >

    Respect goes both ways.

    Do you honestly think your incessant badgering and demands for immediate answers was respectful?

    Auf wiedersehen!

    I expected as much from you!

    A little advice- don't be a suck up your whole life.

    Well guys, I tried and the fact that Ashley and Tom won't answer a straightforward question about a way to keep C2 users happy by actually providing an engine we want with the exporters and features we need and just keeps giving us the old song and dance of how it will be better some time in the future tells me it is time to move on to another engine.

    I wish you all the best and for those of you that like C3 I hope it is everything you think it will be.

    I feel very disrespected by Ashley and Tom and that is not something I am willing to tolerate from people I have supported with my money and promoted with my games and helped the beginners in their forum.

    Such is life and there are more engines in the sea as they say!

    I have Fusion and I will be looking at Unity again if it has a decent visual editor.

    lamar - you have previously ignored my replies and repeated the same question, and you're doing it again, so I don't feel like it would be constructive to reply.

    Ashley, you and I and everyone that has been following this thread knows you did not respond to my question and you asked what we wanted and claimed you were listening. You brushed it off and went on to tell us all the wonderful things you plan for C3.

    So I even started a new thread with that question and instead of answering you had Tom lock it.

    Here is the question again Ashley and I think we all deserve the respect of a direct answer:

    Ashley can I get a direct response from you please?

    > Okay, wow, now a 17 page thread.

    >

    > I'm not sure what anyone here thinks we should actually do. We've already announced things like our own mobile app build service and new IAP/ad plugins for C3, so that is on the way. We've got Xbox One support just around the corner. Mobile support from what I've seen is pretty solid with WKWebView and Android 5.0+, all supporting JIT-compiled JS and hardware-accelerated WebGL. Maybe we could tweak the way we advertise certain things. Maybe some people have bugs, or unoptimised cases, in which case please file reports, or send me .capxs to profile for performance improvements (as ever, I always ask, and either get sent nothing, or just projects with silly performance-destroying mistakes, hence my skepticism).

    >

    > Do you want us to rebuild the C3 editor? I would go so far as to say that would probably ruin us, and waste a brilliant opportunity. Do you want us to build native engines? I've covered that in this blog with our rationale around that, which nobody ever really directly argues against, there's just vague accusations of how HTML5 is "poorly optimised" or something, which really is not the case given the potency of modern JIT compilers and the native-equivalent performance of WebGL.

    >

    > So what have I missed? What do you think we should actually do differently that isn't something we've already covered? If I can't make sense of any specific complaints or clear suggestions on what to do, then I don't see why we shouldn't just carry on as we are - I think we already have a strong plan for the future.

    >

    Ashley after reading the many many comments on this and my thread I believe what people are asking for is this:

    1- Go ahead with C3 as it may at least be useful to people using Mac and Unix even though most C2 users have said they do not want a Chrome browser based subscription engine.

    2- Make an update or addon package of exporters and features for C2 that users have been asking for and fix the bugs you have been promising to fix for years. Put that new team of programmers to work on that along with C3.

    We all understand Scirra has to make money and I believe you understand that if you lose your long time C2 users by not listening to us your chances of staying in business are pretty damn small.

    So this is a reasonable request and you can charge your $99 for a great package of features and exporters for C2 and I will bet you will sell many more of those packages than you will C3 browser versions.

    It also would prove you actually intend to honor your license and advertising that said those exporters would be included in C2 and would probably keep your base happy and maybe they would be interested in C3 later after you get all the bugs worked out.

    It seems to me you would want those long time C2 users to hang around and support Scirra but reading through the comments on many threads they are dropping out and pretty disappointed in Scirra right now.

    So what do you say?

    Can we get a package of features and working exporters for the existing C2 engine at a reasonable price with no subscription Ashley?

    If I get banned for asking you a straight forward question then so be it and I will let the forum decide what to think about that!

    >

    > Ashley after reading the many many comments on this and my thread I believe what people are asking for is this:

    >

    > 1- Go ahead with C3 as it may at least be useful to people using Mac and Unix even though most C2 users have said they do not want a Chrome browser based subscription engine.

    >

    > 2- Make an update or addon package of exporters and features for C2 that users have been asking for and fix the bugs you have been promising to fix for years. Put that new team of programmers to work on that along with C3.

    >

    > We all understand Scirra has to make money and I believe you understand that if you lose your long time C2 users by not listening to us your chances of staying in business are pretty damn small.

    >

    > So this is a reasonable request and you can charge your $99 for a great package of features and exporters for C2 and I will bet you will sell many more of those packages than you will C3 browser versions.

    >

    > It also would prove you actually intend to honor your license and advertising that said those exporters would be included in C2 and would probably keep your base happy and maybe they would be interested in C3 later after you get all the bugs worked out.

    >

    > It seems to me you would want those long time C2 users to hang around and support Scirra but reading through the comments on many threads they are dropping out and pretty disappointed in Scirra right now.

    >

    > So what do you say?

    >

    > Can we get a package of features and working exporters for the existing C2 engine at a reasonable price with no subscription Ashley?

    >

    I asked for a direct response from Ashley thanks!

    Ashley and Tom have said they are listening to the long time C2 users and Ashley asked us what we wanted in the post shown below and I responded- three times asking for a direct response.

    I know Ashley read it and he was online and responded to other posts just ignoring the question. I have been respectful and Ashley asked what we wanted and instead Ashley brushed aside the questions and just went on to tell us all the wonderful things he had planned for C3.

    I feel very disrespected and I think many people following that discussion are probably feeling the same way.

    So here is the question again Ashley and I would like a direct response please:

    Okay, wow, now a 17 page thread.

    I'm not sure what anyone here thinks we should actually do. We've already announced things like our own mobile app build service and new IAP/ad plugins for C3, so that is on the way. We've got Xbox One support just around the corner. Mobile support from what I've seen is pretty solid with WKWebView and Android 5.0+, all supporting JIT-compiled JS and hardware-accelerated WebGL. Maybe we could tweak the way we advertise certain things. Maybe some people have bugs, or unoptimised cases, in which case please file reports, or send me .capxs to profile for performance improvements (as ever, I always ask, and either get sent nothing, or just projects with silly performance-destroying mistakes, hence my skepticism).

    Do you want us to rebuild the C3 editor? I would go so far as to say that would probably ruin us, and waste a brilliant opportunity. Do you want us to build native engines? I've covered that in this blog with our rationale around that, which nobody ever really directly argues against, there's just vague accusations of how HTML5 is "poorly optimised" or something, which really is not the case given the potency of modern JIT compilers and the native-equivalent performance of WebGL.

    So what have I missed? What do you think we should actually do differently that isn't something we've already covered? If I can't make sense of any specific complaints or clear suggestions on what to do, then I don't see why we shouldn't just carry on as we are - I think we already have a strong plan for the future.

    Ashley after reading the many many comments on this and my thread I believe what people are asking for is this:

    1- Go ahead with C3 as it may at least be useful to people using Mac and Unix even though most C2 users have said they do not want a Chrome browser based subscription engine.

    2- Make an update or addon package of exporters and features for C2 that users have been asking for and fix the bugs you have been promising to fix for years. Put that new team of programmers to work on that along with C3.

    We all understand Scirra has to make money and I believe you understand that if you lose your long time C2 users by not listening to us your chances of staying in business are pretty damn small.

    So this is a reasonable request and you can charge your $99 for a great package of features and exporters for C2 and I will bet you will sell many more of those packages than you will C3 browser versions.

    It also would prove you actually intend to honor your license and advertising that said those exporters would be included in C2 and would probably keep your base happy and maybe they would be interested in C3 later after you get all the bugs worked out.

    It seems to me you would want those long time C2 users to hang around and support Scirra but reading through the comments on many threads they are dropping out and pretty disappointed in Scirra right now.

    So what do you say?

    Can we get a package of features and working exporters for the existing C2 engine at a reasonable price with no subscription Ashley?

    If I get banned for asking a straight forward question then so be it and I will let the forum decide what to think about that!