I guess when (if not already) the preview by link option becomes available, you'll be able to open multiples browsers and windows to test your game.

It was not a suggestion I was trying to prove a point why full editing capabilities without subscription is not a good idea. From an exploitability/business perspective. If you read the whole post.

Then I missed the point of your post. I'm sorry, my mistake.

First, I'd like to point out that I like many ideas posted in this topic (even if they are not so viable from a business standpoint), but I'd also like to voice my concerns about some.

What if all bug reports are done through C3 itself, forget the forums, e-mails etc and when the user tries to submit a report on a version that is not up to date they are informed that they are using an old version and need to upgrade to be eligible for support. Only the most current version of the software will send the bug report. C3 will just do a quick check to see if it's up to date. You could put it in your TOS etc. That way you will only ever be maintaining the current version of the software, but lapsed users who aren't experiencing bugs will be able to continue to work on their projects if they need to. I think if you had a system like this, and introduced one killer feature a year people would be pretty happy and just stay subscribed anyway. It seems like win win to both Scirra and customers. Am I missing something?

What if someone want to submit a bug report about the editor not starting?

* Post subscription customer. Full editing capabilities in Standalone version, but no export options at all. Not even html. Only preview option.

How this is different from the so called "lock-out"? You can edit your game but you can't get it out of the editor. You can even finish your game if the current feature set fits you without paying a penny to Scirra and then only resubscribe when you need to export.

*Latest standalone version could probably always be found online, somewhere else. Since every subscriber would have access to it. You would probably need an account status check here. If someone using a standalone version later than they should be allowed all access should be blocked, or limited to 50 events.

What if someone wants to install their post-subscribe standalone version on an offline machine?

Don't waste time on examples etc. Please.

While the examples should not be the highest priority, they are very much welcomed. I had students who looked around in examples, examined how they work and built up logic we haven't discussed in class. So from a teaching standpoint, examples are very good to have.

Secondly, I hope you appreciate me responding to you as it's apparent you have no intention of buying Construct 3 from what I can see in other forums and you seem to be one of only a very small number of users engaging in this vein of questioning.

I don't want to answer in blurymind 's place, but I definitely appreciate your answer. It's helpful and informative for other users as well.

Since the beta is still in the free edition phase, no one tried it yet. You'll have to wait a week or two to get answers to your question. In the meantime Scirra can tell you exactly what platforms will be supported, but I think you can expect what C2 supports.

Idea #1:

- 30 minutes a day

- Time resets every day

- Unused time is not accumulated

Idea #2:

- About 10 hours a month

- Time resets every month

- 20 minutes a day is accumulated until the end of the month.

An other issue with this idea (next to the ones mentioned before this post) is that some bugs take more time to fix than 30 minutes (obviously). When a developer is in a flow state, you don't want to break that by locking them out while they're thinking hard about a problem and trying different approaches to solve it. I would be so furious to be locked out because of time limits while I'm on the right track of fixing something and I would have to come back the next day.

Subscription for updates is very open to abuse. Let's say one user on yearly subscription gets his 12 updates (1 a month), and user 2 who hasn't subbed in the last 12 months, pays 1 month sub and grabs the latest version then unsubs again. Getting the same end result as guy 1 but not really paying enough to support further development

In that case the yearly subscription would be the only sensible idea. I think pirated copies could pose more of a problem. But Scirra seemed to take of this issue with C2 quite efficiently, so I think they could do it as well with C3.

Why not make C3 a one time payment.... with no subscription. Plan to release C4 in exactly one year along with a major new feature, and drop any support for C3 and all further updates for it, only offer downloadable last stable for people who wanna cling to it, once the new C4 version is released.

Make a plan to release major new version release on a yearly basis. Make it clear that no further updates and support to old versions will be available once the next version is released. Only a downloadable last stable will be available for old C3 once C4 is released.

If people try to access C3 online once c4 is released, they will get a download link or an option to upgrade to c4.

Maybe even Make the build service a seperate service for C2, C3, C4 users alike for those who wish to use it?

Problem solved?

That's not a bad idea at all. I'm sure it has downsides as well, but it might worth the consideration.

Check that WebGL is enabled or not in your browser.

How serious people are is not measured by their coding ability. C2\C3 is just a tool like any other, just specialized for those who don't know any traditional coding language.

I might add: .. or don't have time to develop using traditional coding, since the event system is way faster.

Single project= pay per event, billed at the end of each month for additional events, exports cost extra.

It's like paying for minutes using telephone services. Or if you'd pay per minute (or level) in World of Warcraft. A terrible idea in my humble opinion for a development environment.

I think some people are trying to say you're locked out of your project entirely. That's not the case. You mainly have edit and export access taken away.

As I've said before, we're looking in to adding a special option for people who have had exported projects in the past, so they won't have to sign up for another full year just to export again or make a few quick changes. Assuming we have something like that in place, I don't think it's fair to say any work is "held hostage" either.

That should ease users who want to patch, tinker old projects. I'm looking forward what you'll come up with.

So what's stopping them from still using C2 then? Nobody is forcing anyone to buy C3. C2 would be the equivalent of CS6. And C3 would be the equivalent of CC. C2 is still a viable option for people who don't want to pay subscriptions. Why do you have to use C3? If someone really need or want the features in c3 why not just pay up if they feel it's worth it, if not stick with c2.

I agree with your argument. But I think the main problem here is that serious developers want to have full control over their project. And Scirra needs those serious developers to keep the engine rising. I'll hope the solution Ashley posted above will solve this issue.