Serious dev.

Subbing for first year IF export shows to work for mobile well enough. Have games waiting for export from C2.

On the otherhand - if someone could explain how to change zoom level on Chrome android that'd be a help.

Was told this was a solution to the giant GUI, but no explanation online on how to do it in the android app. (Let alone the "app" version of C3 openable from homescreen)

If it works, I can dev on my inexpensive android tablet w/ mouse around the country instead of lugging around my workstation laptop.

Point being, if I'm paying this much for the software, its main selling point better be of use to me. In its current form, the mobile version sucks, usable to me if zoomed out and mouse usable.

To the few people above that said they will get C3 for a year just long enough to export their C2 projects I suggest you look at the bug reports.

I tried loading some of my small C2 games that have no addons or plugins and couldn't even get them to load. If you are using any plugins I will bet you won't be able to use them on C3. At least not any time soon.

The point I have been making all along is if Scirra now has those wrappers and exporters that we have been asking for for years then they can include those in a C2 update or make a package of exporters we can buy as an addon separately without a subscription.

If C3 is just going to end up being an expensive way for people to export our C2 projects that is not something I think many people are interested in and those exporters were advertised to be included with C2 when we purchased our license.

On general principle I agree wholeheartedly, if these exporters work they should be put into an update for C2 to give us what was advertised. Sign of good faith an all.

I am getting C3 for its exporters out of desperation, which sucks but after putting many months into those games, I can't just abandon all the effort.

And following on what lennaert said, yeah *fingers crossed* on it working. I'm certainly not desperate enough to pay for exporters that don't work let alone "bug testing" them during the first year of C3's release. I need to see them working day1.

[quote:2crogtjy]

Can I see those PC games in a video or can they be downloaded ?. I'm making a PC game and I'd like to see if NWjs will work fine. I have investigated some games like pink man and according to the critics of steam it seems that NWjs works well. There are no problems or criticisms about that.

Not sure I can I'm afraid, ones an "adult" game, interactive platformer kind of thing, waiting for a Patreon push if we can get it exported smoothly enough, second I'd need to get permission from the other 2 teammembers, likely a no.

They have more going on in them than pinkman, (not trying to downplay pinkman) and they aren't using many effects, everything is low-medium res for artwork.

Not going to tout that Kyle (main programmer dev on the latter game) is a genius and some stuff couldn't have been done differently, but we have buffed this game down to bare essentials and little improvement.

Continuing a little on what Jayjay said I purchased C2 before the "big devs" were showcasing.

I believed the marketing speil on the front page and thought it should delivered (hint hint, it hasn't)

The recent push of showcase games in the last 3 years, didn't therefore intice me to buy, just motivated me to continue and defend C2, if these guys could do it, I can. (Super Ubie Land was a big one with the Wii-u promises)

Only in the end, they couldn't, no fault of their own. Hindsight I wish it became more apparent that C2 was at fault largely and not outside reasons. It's have saved me the last few years of time on 2 mobile games that failed to export with well enough performance and 2 "PC" games that barely run on mid-range PCs. (Yes optimized to the hilt, lowered the scope to bare minimum)

Every attempt to jump to a different engine has bounced me back to C2 because of "ease of use", but its a ridiculous situation because my time is ultimately wasted in C2.

Think I'll end up using the first year of C3 just to be able to export my 2 mobile games efficiently and jump ship to Fusion 3. Following the devblog, looking real promising.

I'd very happily pay a $100-200 subscription no issue if they made a plugin for unity/unreal that allowed us to "program" using the event editor. Maybe even allow the plugin to do an animation editor (unity/unreal lack simplicity in this regard for frame by frame animation.) and other notable C2/C3 features.

Benefits are that it makes a great stepping stone to Unity/Unreal which personally is like out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Giant audience.

Easy enough to rake in a percentage of game profits as income on top.

Less problems/issues with runtime performance, driver incompatibilities etc because most of that will be Unity/Unreal's issue to rectify. The plugin will essentially be converting your event instructions into C# or whatever.

We'd also get access to 3d and native exporters in the process. Great!

Pipe dream.

Pointless having demos for the mobile version without touch controls.

(Not actually sure if puzzle demo game had touch controls it generated an error on preview (unsure if that was the browser or C3, great start )

My main phone is 5.5inch with 1080p screen, whole UI is enormous. Checked settings and such, no way to change that - shrink font size for example.

I know everything is big and chunky so there are no mis-clicks on buttons, but with such a large phone, I should be able to shrink it down to see more on screen.

Also turning it to desktop mode, everything was still supersized, so not like I could hook up a mouse to my phone, and display desktop mode as if it were a desktop browser version.

First hiccup was with chrome, my phones version was 56, on the play store, I had it updated to most recent version, but C3 was locking me out because it required 57.

SO as I feared a few months ago, there are going to be issues outside of Scirra to contend with and how will they be rectified - I had to download chrome beta from the play store to get version 57...

Now you may say, well that wasn't that difficult but chrome beta has issues, it crashed for me when trying to web browse twitter while it worked perfectly well in version 56. I load up C3, try to make my game and an error appears, who can I blame? Scirra or google beta? (puzzle game error I referenced)

Now all this is just 30 minutes of use.

Will want to spend some more time on the desktop version before I comment on that.

Not happy with the restrictions on the "free version", I hope that is just for the beta and not fo

r the final release free version. Way to shoot yourselves in the foot, already had people "worry" and fret over that in the discord dev groups i'm a part of.

> The license change to a subscription model (Raaaa SERIOUSLY !!!!) + the lack of real think news about C3 (yes ok the editor is new and portable but engine is the same) and the most important part for me the lack of NATIVE EXPORT WITHOUT THIRD PARTY PROGRAM is my main frustation.

>

> I keep on your position since many years Ashley and yes since the years and years past HTML5 wrapper and mobile support is really better and better.

> But i don't want to wait 5 years to build a simple game with 40 mo of packing garbage cause of export.

>

> The only think i agree 400% with you is for 3D, Construct 2 is a 2D product and is doing those thinks very very well and very very simply.

> You could make very nice and great game with some knowless about GPU and Shader (the best thing you've added in).

>

> I prefer paid a price for something i've better than a subscription.

>

> For me, for now (maybe this could change) i'm sad to say but i won't be a Construct3 User. :'(

> i've buy GameMaker Studio 2 and it's really perfect, fun and easy : https://www.yoyogames.com/gamemaker/studio2

> and have all the point i need.

> I've never go with the first version because of the editor and the workflow.

> The new version is really good.

>

Holy cow, look at those game's numbers and quality! <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_surprised.gif" alt=":o" title="Surprised">

https://www.yoyogames.com/showcase

And then you go back to Construct2's games showcase, 4 years in making...

https://www.scirra.com/

Makes you think eh?

I know right.

I was looking to see earlier how the clickteam community is doing for a potential alternative to C2/3, browse youtube, typed "clickteam fusion showcase"

Many many videos and well made looking projects.

Did the same with "construct 2 showcase"

Essentially bugger all.

Pretty eye opening.

Do not pressure them, and their decisions, not ours.

Let them try, if all goes wrong, they will learn their mistakes.

What is the purpose of encouraging discussion, "listening" to a community in that case.

Who are you to dictate what I can and can't express pertaining to this subject?

I care a great deal about Construct 2, and have put far too many hours into it to watch it crumble along with its community.

pointless discussing it among the community at this point guys, Tom's all but confirmed they are sticking to this model no matter what.

[quote:3hnhv4i8]But just one question, while the decision is already made, lets say this model of subscription don't work as intended, would you guys be whilling to reconsider it and go back to pay-once model? Or at least that kind of discussion between you could happen?

Well yes, if the model fails we'd of course have to re-evaluate otherwise we'd be fools!

I think you are being foolish now.

You have such a large audience but seemed to have completely failed in monetizing them.

Should release Construct 3, in the same manner and pricepoint as Construct 2.

Don't offer a discount any higher than 20% off for existing customers.

Make the next incremental version of Construct (4) in 2.5/3 years from now.

The money should tide you over during that time.

The length of time C2 has been out with free updates released has been far too long, most businesses would hemorrhage money in that situation.

2.5/3 years seems to be the rate a lot of software releases new increments at.

just my 2 cents.

Buy

(or sub if priced at $50-60 - no cloud storage/nonsense, should reduce load on servers etc hence cheaper price)

—, I'm out of the loop here, but if you don't like C2, why are you even here in the first place? I'm hoping that was a joke on your part.

C2 benefits from being cheaper than everything else. It works great, I've never ran into any more problems with it than I have with other engines. Especially Unity.

Game Maker and UE4 are both very well made engines. Eiher way, if canceling a game is something to complain about, you either didn't plan out the development of your game at any point, or you're wasting your time developing games altogether. You should be learning how, rather than actually making them, if you don't know the limitations of almost all engines available to you.

I could list hundreds of free game engines' limitations to you right now, and even with the experience of knowing them all, I still come back to C2. So, I personally see no reason for Scirra to change.

It's not cheaper than anything else bar a few.

Well, i think exporting will be easy if they use a vm in their servers to make directly the apk file and the xcode project.

About the pricing model, we need to consider the server maintenance costs, etc.

Think about server costs for a feature so few of us want/need and they haven't demonstrated why we need it. (unless you are a Linux/Mac user, which is a very small group)