Please keep it civil. I won't hesitate to close threads if people are calling each other liars or being unnecessarily passive-aggressive.

And antagonistic.

I don't think Scirra is trying to offend existing/past fans and customers, they just need to entice people to continue purchasing Construct 2 until Construct 3 comes out (after all, a sudden hiccup in any income, even if they're doing really well, is not preferred).

The 50% off is a loyalty bonus to existing customers who already are enjoying the product they purchased (C2), the 100% off first year for C2 purchases is to avoid people deciding not to buy until C3 comes out.

Personally, I think it makes sense for Scirra to target new audiences more heavily, as C2 users are probably going to stay with C2 if they're happy with it, and the way Construct has been designed up until C3 has been "get as many people to buy as possible", while C3 will finally have a business reason for keeping existing users using their product (as that will lead to renewed subscriptions every year, and hence a guaranteed income).

It's a whole new audience/market for them to tap into really, but so far it looks like they'll be continuing to appeal to both audiences (past and future)

C3 is an editor-only upgrade, aside from some helpful build services, and so you're not really missing anything to stick with C2. You still get one of the best editors to make games in, and are still at the mercy of third party exporters and runtimes when trying to play said games

Yea but those us sticking with C2 won't get a rounded corners update! ??

Mac Support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Inherently, not specifically.

A few subscription proponents mention the industry is moving towards this model, but besides Adobe and Buildbox, I'm not aware of too many lockout-type subscriptions. Would this even be on the table if it weren't for them, or is it inevitable?

Shoutout to newt and Bleenx

Yeah no speculation needed for the subscription model.

Its service based, meaning you don't own the software, just pay the time to use it.

A lot of users are upset about that, but in the end the price should average out compared to what you pay to use other similar engines.

Speaking of but in the end, the term "butthurt" comes to mind.

Im sure someone calling themselves Moot, would be able to explain that one.

Must feel important to be single-handedly leading the charge (and with such eloquent and elaborate wit, as always). Not even Tom and Ash defend themselves or their product like you can.

Read the blogs here: https://www.scirra.com/blog

Or just make speculations now.

That seems to be the popular thing to do anyway.

The developers haven't given us much choice but to speculate.

>

>

> > Are you also working for free?

> >

> In the year 2017, if you're in any entertainment industry, and you're not a big player, it is inevitable you will be "working" for free. So, yes. Yes, again. Many more times, yes.

>

Yep- I can attest to this. Independent developers often put countless hours into their work without being paid or ever receiving a fair return.

I feel competent enough to invest my money into a tool I know I can utilize well and that I know can provide me with results, but I understand that for others who are new to Construct the subscription will scare them away. For them, they may not even spend the full year using it because focus shifts from thing to thing when you are starting out and learning- you often run into walls that hold you back or discourage progress, etc. I know I probably wouldn't have used Construct2 if they were using a subscription model when I first looked at it- I would have turned to something else that is more forgiving of my time.

So lets say a new user pays up and uses the program, but it takes them a whole year and they still haven't become completely competent with it- due to the subscription model, that might make them question whether they want to pay for another year of potentially the same outcome.

Sure Construct is a tool that looks like it makes developing games an easy thing, and yes it does make it simpler a process, but developing games involves a lot and it takes a lot of time to master. Developing games requires more than just programming/scripting, etc.

It's going to be really interesting to see how the community changes after C3 is released.

The real question is, can Construct survive without third party plugin developers?

I wonder if Magistross easystar could be useful here, if we used tiles instead of solid backgrounds, that might be super efficient for the knife to just pathfind itself all the way home?

As for you and the other small game developers, in my opinion, you all deserve so much more better than instead of have to do it all for free.

I think if you'd seen my sole "release", quite the contrary, you'd probably agree I get what I deserve! <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lol.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing"> https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... bbi.srduke

There are many models in the Scirra C3 subscription and surely you will find the right one for you.

False.

Only the sun comes up freely.

A few other things other than solar light, but yes, I see your point.

When I bought Construct 2 I was happy with the Personal licence and all the updates which where for free. I found it indeed very generous all those free updates.

Correct.

I really do not understand why people still make such problems about the subscription model. Take it the other way around, if you sell a game you worked on for more than a year.

I don't sell. A thing.

Would you like Scirra also give the next updates for free?

Looks like you were happy they did though?

Are you also working for free?

In the year 2017, if you're in any entertainment industry, and you're not a big player, it is inevitable you will be "working" for free. So, yes. Yes, again. Many more times, yes.

I know scirra have built their reputation on innovation, but I think a lockout subscription is just a bit too radical for both their current base, and generally the kinds of people that use these sorts of high-level tools.

we don't charge per-exporter

How would that work if you wanted to, with html5?