![]() ![]() But that's just another reason why you should consider yourself as a serious alternative to Unity yourself. ![]() ![]() This is why I was happy to see you mention in another comment that you intend to shift the marketing of C3 to a more "serious" direction, where C2 often gave the impression of a "toy". Both concretely and psychologically a subscription model requires a much more serious commitment to the product compared to a one-time payment.Īnd beyond the payment model, I've long thought that Construct offers a serious alternative to Unity for serious development purposes if you're making 2D games, and in fact I'd say in many ways Construct has the edge over Unity in this space since it's built for 2D development from ground-up whereas Unity is a 3D engine first, which makes 2D development in it more cumbersome. Well, you should, because both C3 and Unity using a subscription model vs the one-time payments of many other options makes it the most direct comparison. >We don't think we directly compete with Unity. After all, game IDEs don't exist in a vacuum. #CONSTRUCT 2 VS STENCYL FREE#Something like this is what I would expect to see with the C3 Free Edition as well in order for it to be truly competitive. With Unity, you get a full-featured engine with all the export options that you can make money with (with a revenue cap after which you need to upgrade, similar to C2 Personal -> Business), with the most notable "downside" basically being a "Made with Unity" splash screen. And if you look at what Unity offers in the free tier and compare it to Construct, the latter looks like a complete joke in comparison. But now with the move to a subscription model you're competing more directly with the likes of Unity that also uses a subscription model. #CONSTRUCT 2 VS STENCYL PRO#The one-time payment was a huge pro for C2 and more than made up for the restrictions of the free edition in my books. This is extremely unfortunate from a personal standpoint, and I'm clearly not alone with this opinion, seeing how much negative feedback the move to subscription model has garnered on the Construct forums.īut there is also the business standpoint to consider. The Free Edition is also not an option because it seems to be even more restrictive than the C2 one. I can't justify paying $99 a year for how much I use the program. However, with the move to a subscription-based payment model, this changes completely. #CONSTRUCT 2 VS STENCYL LICENSE#The limitations of the C2 Free Edition were too much for me (as a programmer even my tinkering tends to be event-heavy, and even my smallest toy projects tend to start with creation of more layers than what's available in the free version), but this wasn't really an issue since the Personal License was simply a one-time investment, and I've been very happy with my purchase. I do web development for a living, and game development is something I do for fun on the side mostly for my own enjoyment these days. However, as things are right now, it seems that the time has come for me to part with Construct. I think moving the whole IDE to web was the logical way forward for Construct itself, and I'm glad to see it's working out with C3. Been a longtime follower and user of Construct (all the way back from early Construct 1 days) and the work that's been done in both Construct 2 and Construct 3 has been extremely impressive - I was initially skeptical about C2's move to HTML5, but over time it made a very convincing case for the fact that web can indeed be performant. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |