tunepunk

Money is not the issue at all (at least, not for me). I would happily pay five times more than the $99 yearly rent to own a perpetual license, and update the license every year. Renting a game engine for development just makes no sense whatsoever. It is too risky in the mid/long term in my opinion.

Stop paying the rent, and I cannot edit my existing (older) projects or update them. I think not - that is unacceptable to me. Next people will tell me to rent my computer - stop paying, sorry!

I refuse to rent my tools for development. Again, it makes sense for larger teams and game companies (depending) - but not for a single freelance developer. My opinion, of course.

As for supporting Scirra? I have been a Construct user since version one, and and early adopter of version 2. I am a teacher at various colleges and a university teaching web dev and related topics. Year after year I have promoted Construct 2 in my classes, and taught any student who was interested how to use Construct 2 - outside the official curricula - many unpaid hours.

And now you are accusing me and others of being unsupportive of Scirra? Wow. Just wow.

I love the software, and I have always supported it by introducing it to anyone I thought who would be interested. But I ABSOLUTELY HATE TO RENT SOFTWARE. This has NOTHING to do with being so-called "unsupportive of Scirra".

This is not about money. Nor about being unsupportive. Have you thought about why it is that many long-time users here react the way they do? It is precisely because they CARE.

Just provide both options: rent and perpetual licensing. But that is not going to happen, unfortunately.

> Construct 3 rental: you stop paying, you cannot open your older projects for updates/changes.

>

How do you know that?

What if you just can't export without a subscription?

How many times a year do you export?

Would you prefer to pay each time for that?

Well, I just read in another thread that Tom confirmed that

- If your subscription expires, you will not be able to edit the game (but you can open them in read only mode)

So projects can be opened, but cannot be edited (or exported). Stop paying and you are locked out of your own projects.

Now, I just do not understand why anyone (outside larger studios) as a game dev would willingly ever shut themselves in like that. Scirra sort-of holds your projects hostage, in my opinion. Unless the rent is payed.

I have a real hard time understanding how this is a 'good' thing for small developers.

> Construct 3 rental: you stop paying, you cannot open your older projects for updates/changes.

>

How do you know that?

What if you just can't export without a subscription?

How many times a year do you export?

Would you prefer to pay each time for that?

True, I can't be sure whether that is actually the case. I am basing this on other rental software: if Scirra would allow their users to open, edit and save any project in Construct 3 without renting, they would possibly be shooting themselves in the foot: what's to keep users from using the free version to create their games, and only paying a rental fee at the very end of their development cycle? Suppose someone takes 2-3 years to finish their game, and paying the rent only when they need to export? That is, if it is possible to test the game in the free version.

Anyway, it would make the rental service too complicated for Scirra. Better to have a simple limited version that cannot open larger projects nor export to mobile (perhaps just web), and only allow these to be opened when the rent is being payed. Similar to the current Construct 2 situation: the free version is limited in export functionality, and cannot be used to open project beyond the basic limits set by that free version.

Works like that for Adobe, Autodesk, and other rental software. I don't see it working differently for Construct 3.

>

> Isn't it clear by now the majority of people here don't care about paying more, they just want to own it for life? Principle, like.

>

Ok, yeah sure. Just like Windows Xp. You still own that? You can still use that. Somewhere.

At least my old Windows XP license is a perpetual one: I can install it in a virtual machine for testing purposes any time I need to do so.

Would not have been possible if XP had been a "subscription" service (MS stopped support). Let's suppose I need to re-install Construct 2 five years from now to update an older C2 project - no issue. Perpetual license.

Construct 3 rental: you stop paying, you cannot open your older projects for updates/changes. You are locked in a software rental service. And the free version does not support your projects either.

As an indie dev I would never consider locking myself into a rental-based game engine - just makes no sense to me. It is too risky. It may make sense to larger studios, I suppose. But not to hobbyists and small/single member teams in my opinion.

Even if Scirra goes belly-up, I can still use my C2 license. Not so with C3 (although Tom did mention that they would consider open sourcing Construct if that would ever happen - still too risky).

Just too many potential caveats and risks tied to renting my game dev engine. That is my view on things.

Provide both options, and everybody is happy. The thing is, most people would probably opt for the perpetual license in that case. That is one of the reasons why Adobe went digital serfdom only. Software rental always benefits the company more than their customers (aside from mid-size and large companies). No matter how a company may sugar-coat it.

You make the distinction that Windows, and Linux are somehow better.

Steam is the only viable way to distribute a pc game and it's terrible, and $100 dollars to start, well was, Greenlight is going away, and so is your hundred bucks.

Then there is no worth while market for Linux. lol

Html5 works on virtually every modern browser.

Numbers tell a different story.

https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/gl ... rating-37/

Casual webgames are down -7.5%. The PC market is still the most lucrative one, although the report mentions that will change by 2018, and personal screens (phones) will take up the first place instead.

And the competition on mobile markets is by far more competitive than the desktop markets:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2378 ... _facts.php

It's only gotten worse in the past year. The mobile game markets are utterly oversaturated, and hundreds of games are released each day: in 2015 500(!) new iOS games per day were released and the norm on the Apple market.

The odds are against making money in the mobile markets without decent exposure, unless you are very, EXTREMELY lucky.

In fact, all these figures (and there are others, just check out Gamasutra) seem to point at that:

1) web games are in the decline

2) desktop games are still going strong - the most lucrative on a global scale

3) it is easier to earn revenue in the desktop games markets for indie developers compared to the mobile markets

4) personal phones are the mobile game platform of choice for many users.

5) tablets (especially Android tablets) are showing signs of dying

6) overall world-wide games revenue is growing (while web games are declining!)

7) China and the Asia-Pacific regions cannot be ignored - by far the largest games markets

I suppose most users who play on their mobile phone prefer to play games as apps, not as web games.

In any case, the numbers seem to point out that it is smarter to focus on Windows, Mac, and Linux platforms if your intention is to get some money out of your game making endeavours. It does depend as well on how much Valve will charge an indie developer for its new Steam Direct - we do not know yet.

I also think this means that having native exporters for the various mobile (phone) platforms is an advantage in a game engine.

Thanks for posting their response as well to confirm, so it looks absolutely fine and there aren't any obstructive legal issues with not encrypting your files as far as I can see.

Are there any more examples, or is everyone currently satisfied that there are no identifiable legal issues to not encrypting your files at the moment?

I don't think, based on this one case, that no other legal situations will arise where NOT encrypting will cause potential problems.

While I have no knowledge of other instances, I think an option to encrypt assets would be a good thing to have in any case.

At the very least I can say I have worked with artists before who would not like to see their work "out in the open", so to speak. To allay their and clients' fears (which are often emotion based) encryption would be good to have - aside from potential legalities.

Tom,

Yes, their legal department got back to me as well.

[quote:1gsrzoeq]Legal has replied with an answer. The 'You must not permit' restriction in clause 11 is meant to stop a buyer from positively allowing - ie authorising (whether expressly or impliedly) an end user to extract the Item from the End Product.

[quote:1gsrzoeq] "In answer to your question, you would not be in breach of clause 11 of the Extended License for this item if you released the game to the public with the GraphicRiver item sitting in an unencrypted file, however it would be best practice to include a terms and conditions text file with this game, using the wording you suggested.

If it is trivial to do so, we would encourage you to encrypt the game's data files for your peace of mind."

>

> It isn't the only one, it wasn't the first, it's currently the best but it probably won't be when it's grandfather gets a rewrite later this year...

>

Eh..? Tell me more about this....

I assume he meant Fusion 3.

Interesting to note here that three 2d game editors are all to release a new version this year: Fusion 3, Godot 3, and Construct 3.

All three provide visual scripting, offer a good 2d editor, and are being rewritten,...

And all three will be releasing version 3 of their app!

3 direct competitors releasing version 3 - You'd almost think the universe has a sense of Jungian synchronous humor.

I actually prefer the 2d version a lot - it feels nicer to play. The 2d perspective you use with the other three tables looks a bit forced/unnatural.

Some comments:

• again the ball sometimes runs straight through a flipper
• the interaction between balls feels off - too rubbery, and they lack a solid feel. At one point I had two balls caught with the right flipper, and the third ball hit the other two coming down. Result: the balls sort-of exploded, with one ball jumping up.

Have you considered taking this further to create a more digital "Devil's Crush" type like Pinball game?

After some emailing back and forth regarding the actual legal stance related to GraphicsRiver's license and unencrypted assets in released (Windows) desktop games, I asked for a definitive legal answer rather than "should be fine", and I have been moved up to level 3 support - to their legal department! Seems the situation is not as clear cut as it seems to be.

The plot thickens... I'll keep you informed - might take a couple of days.

I am an avid pinball player, real and virtual I play Pinball Arcade and Pinball FX2 tables, and have been playing computer pinball games since the Commodore 64 (Pinball construction set). To me the 'feel' and control of the ball are the most important parts to get right. It does not need to be realistic to be good - for example, I love Devil's Crush, for example, which is not very realistic at all, but still has an excellent feel and level of playability.

I think you are getting somewhat close to a good feel - around 75% there, in my opinion. Still missing is the level of control I would like to see.

Other comments:

• the tables are not that interesting to play yet.
• the ball snaps unrealistically to drop targets.
• I'd like to see lights indicating goals, achievements, etcetera - just like real machines.
• on several occasions balls just went straight through the (left) flipper.
• I think the collision for the tip of the flippers can be extended a bit.
• I'd like to see an option to play in 2d - I rotate one of my 27" screens in order to be able to play in portrait mode. Ideal for pinball gaming.
• perhaps consider a scrolling viewpoint similar to the old Pinball Dreams game on the Amiga?
• I caught the ball with the left flipper, waited for it to settle, and when I dropped the flipper the ball was stuck.
• the ball does not roll very convincingly yet.
• real and virtual tables have many more interesting parts - tunnels, etc. I would also like to see more than one level with ramps and such.

All in all, a good start - perhaps consider creating a pinball game similar to Devil's Crush - I would love to see something similar. Your pinball engine seems more suitable for that type of pinball game.

There's third party plugs you can use to do that already.

Convert your assets to base64, encode them with one of the encoder plugs, add the encrypted text files to the project files.

Load by url already converts the decrypted base64 images, and there's even an audio plug to play base64 audio(haven't tried it in a while however).

Theres also an audio stream plug which has pros, and cons.

If it really is a big issue for you then you can continue down the third party path for easier methods.

In other words there are options beyond relying on Scirra.

Edit:

Supposedly C3 was to make it easier to work with the sdk, and roll our own plugs.

Of course no way to know if that's part of the free version.

I am not sure whether "load image by URL" works with NW.js exported applications. Aside from this, it would be way too much of a hassle to deal with hundreds of assets this way.

Switching to an alternative is indeed the best solution in this case.