Originally Posted by SiLVERFIRE Don't forget that the reason Construct is free and open source if I'm not mistaken, is because Clickteam brought the banhammer down on them.
There was some legal badblood between scirra and clickteam about the nature of construct. alleged broken NDAs, Copying of source code, and extreme similarities in the look of the products (which is no longer the case). That was the reason construct is 'open source' NOT the reason it is 'free'(although it probably didnt help). If Ashley hadnt worked for clickteam in any capacity they most likely never would have brought any of it up. And the fact that clickteam brought it up before construct was even a viable commercial product, let alone out of any sort of alpha or beta stages (it didnt even work at the time iirc, plagued by crashes) is absurd.
Originally Posted by Robot Cecil for someone in their 20's with a job, none of these prices are too expensive as software is concerned.
My university offers game design courses as a general education thing, for like non-comp students to make games. It's a pretty pricey university... the course itself costs about $1500. Anyone who can afford that can certainly afford MMF. But they use Game Maker because the lecturer thought that Game Maker is more cost-effective.
MMF2 is a good piece of software, and they shouldn't give it all for free. But prices are certainly not competitive. I hope they've got a good business plan, because I'm certainly not buying MMF3 at those prices.
BTW, I didn't know that Ashley worked for CT. Now their claims of IP theft makes more sense
Edited by Muz
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I think it would be a good idea to give away TGF2, but that's easy for me to say since it's not my product.
Nice information on the clickteam vs scirra issue.
Why do you wanna create a game with a free TGF2 when you can't build the game? Does't that mean you cannot play the game? That's not really useful. Or does it just mean that you cannot build a standalone version from your game but you can play it inside TGF2? So everyone who wants to play your game should just download the free TGF2 and play your game. So where is the point in disabling the build then?
They should consider lowering the price of their products in my opinion - but certainly shouldn't give them away for free. People can download the trial versions if they want to know what the product is like.
The price is something that has always put me off getting the best versions of their software. MMF2 is about 4 years old now, so I think lowering the price of the developer version would be welcomed.
Current Prices without SWF export
TGF2 - £34.99
MMF2 - £74.99
MMF2 Dev - £229.00
Current Prices with SWF export
TGF2 - £83.99
MMF2 - £123.99
MMF2 Dev - £278.00
My first gripe would be that the SWF exporter is £49 standalone. Firstly I think that is too much - there may be reasons it is that price which I am unsure of, and I'm sure other people may value the exporter to be that price. But for me personally it's not worth it. A neat idea would also be to reduce the price of the exporter if you purchase it with TGF2/MMF2. Say, you could buy MMF2+SWF for about £110.00 or something.
I'm pretty sure MMF2 is the same price as it was 4 years ago. Sure they've added features over time, but I think a £39.99 or £49.99 price point would attract more people now. I'd scrap TGF2 altogether as I see no use for it.
Also the price difference between the standard and developer version is too big in my opinion. I see no reason to spend an extra £154 for some extra extensions and whatever else the developer version offers. I'd spend an extra £30 maybe, but no way would I spend over £100 more for the developer version. I understand they may be aiming it towards those who want to develop games professionally, but is it really working?
I just worry that they value their products themselves and stick a price tag on it, rather than looking at the market they're in and possibly researching how much people would pay for their products. It'd be interesting to know how well their products sell.
Still the fact remains that when schools want to run gamemaking courses they are more likely to go with Gamemaker because:
- Gamemaker doesn't cost, which also means the students can use it at home as well. There is no way a regular school will pay more than $200 for a set of TGF/MMF licenses, especially when there is a free alternative.
- There is good educational material for Gamemaker, including very clear step-by-step plans for both students and teachers. CT products lack that support.
This way a large part of the potential audience (this should not be overlooked) gets in contact with Gamemaker, not CT products, while CT products make more sense (as in students can actually make games in it). Even I will have to use Gamemaker now.
Is what suggesting this on the CT boards would look like
and?
i love ct, but they can be a bunch of pricks sometimes.
imo it was absolutely unnecessary to make a legal ordeal out of it.
im not 100% sure but i remember ct getting ashleys parents (i think it was his mom) involved. not to mention he was over 18 and not a dependant, as i remember him scolding ct for doing that. as if they had nothing better to do than harass his family. i would love to find the post about it, but i doubt it as it was either locked or most likely deleted as everything about construct was back in those days.
I think the problem is marketing and distribution. In the UK KNP was given away in about 2000 on a magazine called PC Planet (I think) on their first issue. Then in about 2003 or 2004 TGF Pro was given away on the cover disc of Game maker magazine (first issue too as well I think).
I just dont see things like this happening anymore. Surely TGF1 should be free (version with the made with TGF splash screen), get people interested then if they want to make advanced games they will progress onto MMF2.
Also you could buy TGF in Toys R Us or game shops over here some time ago, this has also gone.
I think the problem with having TGF1 for free is that it's not a very good advertisement for the more recent products. I am starting to wonder though, would it be legal to use TGF1 at schools since it was given away for free once anyway?
Originally Posted by Jenswa If you obtained that free that was given away, sure it is
But don't they have a special educational program?
Yes they do, I've informed about those. I needed at least 30 seats, up to 120. We were kind of disappointed with the special educational program and we decided to go with gamemaker instead. Porblem is that the initial price is way to high, so even with any reduction you will still pay too much.
I've mentioned this to CT also and how they're loosing money because of their pricing policy, but they didn't care.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by Hayo
jenswa.neocities.org
. but yes it does still apply.
