Miksu112

I've not looked at your capx but here's a very basic example of a jetpack mechanic that works with the platformer behaviour: capx (r244)

Just hold down space to rise up and use the arrow keys to move the player as normal.

[quote:3mhrvkxp]As with C2, if someone complains about a bug in an old version, they are told they need to update first, which in this case would mean re-subscribing - which to me is fair enough, as one of the benefits of subscription is updates and bug fixes.

If a breaking change is implemented by Chrome, the old version could be rendered completely useless. So what's the point? I can imagine the uproar from that, bad publicity and a bad taste left in everyone's mouth.

I was referring to the stand alone version of C3.

Are you saying the stand alone version will use and be reliant on the current Chrome version rather than be a self contained package?

I mentioned this in the past, and I think it is worth mentioning again since nobody seems to talk about it.. The majority of new users won't spend the entirety of the year using Construct3. They will probably only use it a few months until either a couple things happen; they become tired or frustrated with their game/project, they become distracted by other things in life. There will be several months where they don't use it at all.

That's one of the reasons I was advocating the option to suspend your subscription, so you could put your subscription on hold for several months if you know you're not going to use it, with this option limited to a few times per subscription so it's not abused.

So will C3 make a big or small difference over C2 in performance on a PC desktop? Or is that too early to tell?

Probably too early to tell.

When they update the C3 runtime, there will likely be some improvements.

> We can't do that with the online version of C3, since Scirra want to maintain a single version which is fair enough, hence my proposal to allow edit access with the standalone version.

>

This severely complicates support. If someone on a 6 month old version complains about a bug - what do we do? Or, Chrome introduce a breaking change. We have to go back and update every single version. This quickly becomes a maintenance nightmare. We prefer to just have everyone on the latest and greatest version.

As with C2, if someone complains about a bug in an old version, they are told they need to update first, which in this case would mean re-subscribing - which to me is fair enough, as one of the benefits of subscription is updates and bug fixes.

And I'm not suggesting that Scirra actually maintains old versions either, only that the standalone stops getting updates. If a user didn't download a version before their subscription ended or they accidentally delete it, then they are out of luck and need to subscribe again.

We hear you loud and clear RE monthly option. Right now as someone else guessed we're too close to change anything. We've had discussions in the office which we're all quite positive about where once you've paid for your first year you can then pay monthly.

Again, this is only internal discussions at the moment, and there's no rush to implement this as we've got a lot of other things to be getting on with and if we did implement it it would take a year before anyone could take advantage of it anyway.

Thank you for listening, and that does sound like a reasonable compromise for some of the concerns people have raised.

And it's perfectly understandable that you are too far along with your current plans to change everything right now, so I for one appreciate that you are willing to make changes, even if they are a year away.

My next suggestion is the pay per event type method.

10 cents for triggers

25 cents for if then types

50 cents for an else

50 dollars for each "for each object", or "every tick"

Yeah, some of y'all are gonna be broke.

I know Ashley, Tom and the Scirra team deserve more money, but that would make them instant millionaires if half the capxs people ask for help on were imported into C3

For all those throwing in comparisons with other products .....

Just because my neighbor drives a Ferrari, doesn't entitle me to having one neither.

Half the requests for new features are based on what other products have, why can't that apply to the business model also?

I'm not saying we're entitled to everything others have, I'm just saying what I think is more likely to make people buy/rent Scirra's product.

I will still maintain that anyone claiming "lockout" doesn't really have valid reason to make a fuzz. That's just my personal opinion... I just feel that people claiming "lockout" and then tries drive an agenda to get some kind of "free access" after their subscription runs out, why?

With many other subscription based software, when the subscription ends you stop getting updates but you still have the last available version to access and edit your projects. That's why people are complaining about a edit lockout.

We can't do that with the online version of C3, since Scirra want to maintain a single version which is fair enough, hence my proposal to allow edit access with the standalone version.

All it would really require is restricting the download/update of the standalone version to current subscribers, same way export services are restricted to current subscribers, with the onus being on users to download a version before their subscription ends.

How about if the subscription was just to export your game. You pay once for the software and get exports for a year, then after that you only pay to export your game. You can open/edit/preview your game, but not export unless you pay.

I had suggested something like that previously, but Ashley has stated elsewhere that he doesn't want to go down the paid exporter route of some of their competitors.

On reflection, I can sort of see the reasoning behind this, as there would probably be complaints from some users about why you have to pay for all export options when you only want to export to Android/apk, for example.

#4 - There doesn't seem to be a way to click on an object, then clone that exact object that I clicked on elsewhere.

Like... ON CLICKED ON OBJECT -> Create object OBJECT YOU CLICKED ON on layer XYZ. In context, I'm trying to click on the little dude in the hoodie and have him appear, as a clone, where the little girl in the purple dress sits. Ideas?

I don't think there is an easy way to detect object type and do that in one action (although maybe in C3 since that has Create by Name)

Assuming you have all people in a Family (called People or something), add an instance variable to it called Type and set that for each person, e.g. Type=Hoodie

Then do:

Event

On People clicked

Sub-Events

People.Type = Hoodie -> Create Hoodie on XYZ

Else

People.Type = PurpleDress -> Create PurpleDress on XYZ

Else

etc.

blurymind

While I agree with you that Scirra's rental model for C3 is not the best, I think you are way off base with regards to them locking threads and banning people.

Well they have been locking threads with the same subject , trying to avoid bad publicity pretty much.

Except a lot of those threads were open for weeks and had more than 100 posts before they were locked (not deleted or hidden).

If they really didn't want them on the forum, they could have deleted them much earlier and they wouldn't even be there for you to link to now.

Quite a few of the ones you linked are still open, so they are definitely not locking all threads either.

I don't think that the situation is handled very well by scirra. Some very very valuable contributors to the community have been outright banned!

Apart from X3M, who turns out was hacked, which valuable contributors have been banned?

I know lamar had previously been actively contributing to the community, but he seemed to go bat-crap crazy and definitely deserved his ban from what he posted on the forums, never mind what he posted elsewhere and sent to Scirra.

I don't know why you guys keep complain about price?

It's not the price, it's the model. Lot's have people have even said they are willing to pay more!

I think most of us have accepted that subscriptions are going to happen, and understand the reasoning from Scirra's point of view and the benefits it will bring to all users, but the rental model Scirra are going for only really works IF you are a full time developer and don't mind not owning the software.

I'm sure this model will be somewhat successful from Scirra's perspective because there are a lot of people who fall into that category, so Scirra will still make a lot of money, but as the response on the forums show, there are many more who don't fall into that category.

There are a couple of simple additions that Scirra could make that I believe would alleviate a lot of the concerns raised about the model, getting more people to adopt C3, making Scirra even more money.

Suspend Subscription: allow users to temporarily suspend their subscription, maybe limited to 4 times per subscription period so it's not abused, so those who don't use C3 for months at a time won't feel like they've wasted the subscription.

Lifetime Subscription: allow users to pay once to use C3 for the lifetime of the software, this could be equivalent to paying 3 to 5 years subscription upfront , and coupled with the stand-alone version will give users a sense of ownership of the software.

As to the "editing lockout" issue, Scirra have partially addressed this by saying they are looking into allowing users to do some edits and re-export previously exported projects, which is fine as far as it goes, but I would like to propose another solution.

Limited Standalone Version: for users whose subscription has lapsed (i.e. only those who have already paid something), allow them to use the standalone version to edit their projects, but make it so it can't be updated or use any export method that requires only services, that way these users incur no ongoing costs for Scirra, and when they are ready, they can re-subscribe to get updates and export.

This might cause a delay in re-subscribing for some users, which might concern Scirra, but it's better to have a delay than to drive people away by the prospect of being locked out of editing their projects.

Ashley and Tom are listening, if not necessarily taking action on our suggestions, but hopefully they know that we are only this vocal because we like C2 and the improvements C3 will bring, and we want Scirra to be successful, we just fear they are driving too many of their existing customer base away.

Congrats2u

Use Local Storage for anything you want to persist, like the "playSoundAgain" variable, save it before you reset the variables and load it at the start of the layout before you do anything else.

Ricethin

For #2, try this to simplify things:

Give EmotionIndicator the Pin Behaviour

Conditions

Cursor is over Customers

Trigger Once

Actions

Customers: Spawn object EmotionIndicator at image point 2

EmotionIndicator: Pin to Customers (position only)

EmotionIndicator: Set animation to frame (Frustration < Customers.FrustrationThreshold*0.25 ? 0 : Frustration < Customers.FrustrationThreshold*0.75 ? 1 : 2)