Everything looks good to me.

I hate to admit it, but I'm in the wishy washy stage as well until OpenGL or WebGL support comes on board with the matching exporter, though. Construct 0.X was awesome because shaders allowed visuals better than something akin to ArmorGames (not to discredit Armor... they make fun online flash games!).

I'm excited for Construct 2 though. I think down the road, when it's more full-bodied, it'll be one of the best 2D game makers out there. I know it will. Best of luck to you, business wise!

Scirra

home of Construct, the partially family owned multi-format game creator

Friendly competition, like brotherly rivalry. "My sand castle is better than yours!" when both are good

That said, don't ALL the indie gave development tools have a very very very very very very very very similar logos? It's like there was a convention between the devs and they all decided they like Pacman and gears.

Intruder, that's awesome you made that with C2!

Thank for the clarification Ashley. Not sure where I got my "Can't make games after license expires" idea from. All exporters free sounds great, as well I might be on a small list of people how wouldn't mind spending a little bit of money on them.

By the way, I finally got to downloading C2... it's 100x times better than I expected in my weeks of reading about it. Keep up the great work!

#1: Usability: We need animations but we don't need the bells and whistles just yet. Just enough to create frames, animation speed, and something to set hot spots/image points. A full-bodied image editor can be created latter.

#2: Play Time: ONE flexible behavior such as custom movement, 8 way, or platform, as they tend to be the most popular and robust. One is just enough for people to start getting their hands dirty!

#3,4,5...: Functional tools: Global Variables, global objects, event groups, Intellisense/autocomplete for expressions...

The problem with a flat fee is the incremental small updates. Construct isn't going to be "Construct 3" or "Construct 4" every year like Photoshop or similar. There needs to be a "subscription" of some sort. The problem with the proposed model is the limitations on publishing rights if I choose to stop upgrading. This would be like Adobe disabling my Photoshop CS2 because it's old. That sucks and wouldn't ever by any program like this, especially an indie one.

Make Construct 2 a one time purchase and charge for the incremental upgrades. I buy Construct once, I pay for upgrade periods. Something like this feels most logical and most enticing, while not making things complicated. For example:

Store Products:

1. Construct 2 + 2 years free Incremental Upgrades: $4X

---Includes the most recent edition of Construct 2, the ability to export to A, B, C systems, and free regular upgrades to Construct 2/exporters for the duration of two years.

2. +2 years Incremental Upgrades: $2X

---Add two additional years of Construct 2 upgrades to ensure uninterrupted updates of the newest Construct 2 features

3. Additional First-Party Exporters: $1X

---Broaden your user base by exporting to more systems.

4. Commercial License: $15X

---Ready to mass market your game? Buy the Construct 2 commercial license when your game sales are $2,000X or more.

Future Store Products:

1. Construct 2 to 3 Upgrade: $2X

---Ready to take your game making experience to the next level? Already own Construct 2? Save 50% on Construct 3 by upgrading. The remainder of your free incremental upgrades period on Construct 2 will be transferred and you will receive addition year of incremental Upgrades for Construct 3 free

2. Additional First-Party Exporter Upgrade:

---Already own several Construct 2 exporters? Upgrade them to their Construct 3 versions and receive a 50% discount.

If you imagine X being ~$10, this would seem very reasonable to me, while still allowing the dev's to profit. Publishing rights would always be available, even after Incremental Upgrade periods were finished. People could make unofficial exporters still, while dev's could make a little money on first -party exporters if they wished.

I don't think people mind giving the recognition; but I think they'd like to control how the recognition is given.

I'd love to make a custom splash screen with the C2 logo in the style of my game. A generic splash screen at the intro reminds me how I power mash the escape key through all those "Nvidia" "Havok Engine" screens at the the beginning of big budget games. I hate when I can't do that. I mind less when they make those inline with the game (and sometimes really like it!)

That being said, I'm just playing devils advocate. I'm going to call my game "Construct 2" and make all the characters and platforms little green C-gears.

Kind of hard for me to conceptualize, but it's sounds incredibly interesting. Can't wait to play with a new toy!

I'm going to give a thumbs up to the Unity way of things. You could still make the free version "Pay what you want" and then apply that payment to the "Pro" version should us humble customers ever decide to go that route.

I think you'd put yourself at a disadvantage, though, if there wasn't an in-house windows .exe exporter that wasn't either 1) free, or 2) really cheap.

2 cents!

If close sourcing is better for you guys, by all means, go closed source. Some things I like to see stay:

• it's cheapness (right now it's free)
• it's community and their ability to create plug-ins and customize editor features
• the user being able to do whatever they want with their game after it's compiled.

I think the last point is most important to maintain your indie crowd. One of the things I love about Construct right now is that nobody is putting up any licensing barriers, nobody is putting their hands in my pockets looking for change. My game is my game 100% through and through that I just so happened to make with this awesome tool named Construct and their community that supports that.

I think you guys will make a good decision though. I think we want to be a part of this as much as you want it to succeed.

Edit: the English: my personal opinions are not universal facts Though that might make for an interesting day...

So... Question! With HTML5 as the base and other exporters available down the road, how will C2 manage runtime specific elements? For example, say I'm making a game and I want versions both in HTML5 and OpenGL, will shaders be implemented into C2 so I at least have the option to use them for my OpenGL version? If so, what will happen if I use shaders and decide to export to HTML5?