OFFICIAL GameMaker changes and Publishing

TsukaYuriko

🌠
Forum Staff
Moderator
Being held to a deadline, using trial software? Sounds like a very silly business move for any developer.
What I meant is being held to a deadline by the trial software. Not by a client expecting them to finish a project, but having a definitive cut-off date by which you need to have decided that you either don't want to use GM and forfeit anything you created with it up to this point or make a purchase. Kinda like that clerk in the tech store you keep asking questions about the product you're considering to buy which he can't simply read off of the sticker on the back and instead lets you try it within the store, then gets really fed up with you when you keep testing more and more things and seems like he's about to yell at you to either get off his lawn or throw money at him already. As unpleasant as such a situation may already be, another key difference here is that previously, keeping a "test" version of said product and using it indefinitely was a viable option.

Common business practise. Adobe, Microsoft, Autodesk...
Definitely for those. It's not a common business practice for game engines, though. Many of the current big players in this industry are free to use for hobbyists or in some cases even indie studios that are producing commercial games, all of which are direct competitors which now look more attractive in this regard without them even having to do anything. Applying this business practice to this field and this target audience sounds like a self-KO since you're making your own product appear less appealing than that of your direct competitors.
 

Lonewolff

Member
It's not a common business practice for game engines, though.
Not common, but does still happen.

RPG Maker, for instance. 30 day trial, costs more than GMS, and is a rubbish piece of software. But, they manage to keep the lights on with this model.

In the end, I'm not really arguing for or against the model. There are obviously pro's and con's either way you look at it. And at the end of the day it's not going to affect me anyway, as I have always been happy to fork out the asking price, right from the beginning.

Everyone's view is different. I understand that. :)
 

Misty

Member
I already own GM, so this doesn't affect me directly. However, it affects me indirectly, because I want GM to have a future, and if people move on to other engines, that is not a future I want to be in. I wish to preserve a future for GM and the overwhelming majority says, 30 day trial is not good.
 

TsukaYuriko

🌠
Forum Staff
Moderator
It may also negatively affect anyone who's selling assets for use with GMS, as those can be purchased (if not from the Marketplace, then from other asset stores) even by Trial license users. Asset creators are surely not going to be content (pun not intended) with this - I know a few people who make a nice amount of side income by making assets that are primarily bought and used by new users. It's also gonna be fun if there's anyone who was actively using the Trial license to make their game, purchased some assets for it and is now unable to open their project and use the assets they purchased.
 

Yal

🐧 *penguin noises*
GMC Elder
Applying this business practice to this field and this target audience sounds like a self-KO since you're making your own product appear less appealing than that of your direct competitors.
I strongly agree with this statement. Currenly Yoyo is in a situation where they're the Microsoft of their field - there's plenty of free alternatives, but GM is a lot more "easy" than them, so people that aren't savvy prefer rolling with GM. Anything that makes GM more "difficult", whether to use or to deal with, is going to undermine its main selling point.
 

Misty

Member
I strongly agree with this statement. Currenly Yoyo is in a situation where they're the Microsoft of their field - there's plenty of free alternatives, but GM is a lot more "easy" than them, so people that aren't savvy prefer rolling with GM. Anything that makes GM more "difficult", whether to use or to deal with, is going to undermine its main selling point.
So true.

It may also negatively affect anyone who's selling assets for use with GMS, as those can be purchased (if not from the Marketplace, then from other asset stores) even by Trial license users. Asset creators are surely not going to be content (pun not intended) with this - I know a few people who make a nice amount of side income by making assets that are primarily bought and used by new users. It's also gonna be fun if there's anyone who was actively using the Trial license to make their game, purchased some assets for it and is now unable to open their project and use the assets they purchased.
True as well. I tried to like your post, but then it sounded like I was liking the thing in the post. Wish there was an agree button instead.
 

EvanSki

King of Raccoons
During the video game crash Nintendo rised to power and was famous, still to this day they are but not as much as they were back then, you wanted a game published? Nintendo. How did they fall from this golden throne? They started charging every tom dick and harry, for everything, and people didnt like it, more importantly David Rosen, James Humpert, Otavio Good, Martin Bromely, Irving Bromberg, Jeremy Gordon, Josh Adams didnt like it, and made one of there biggest competitors at there time SEGA, from those decisions we have the game market we have today (where heading for another game crash but thats a story for another time)

point being Game maker is nintendo right now, and to go and change there formula and make one of there biggest sources from income (Hobbyist, random people wanting to make a video game) any one who is not an experienced coder and have never touched code before. Giving them a rushed experience to then slap them in the face like, "did you do what you wanted? no? well buy a license. yes? well buy a license." is a major turn off for them. They will go to another engine, not because its free. but because they can use it and not be pressured into it. going back to my example Sega fell but there still kicking making games, there just not as famous as nintendo is still, the problem being if game maker falls, its gone.

YoYo can do what ever they want its there product. I just hope they see what there fan base is and what they want, rather then only looking at what YoYo wants.
Thank you.
 

MilesThatch

Member
Hey @rmanthorp I tutor kids in programming and game dev and I've been using the Free Version with my students. The asset limit was just the right thing for us as it would offer enough for them to learn about programming, make a small game and by the time they hit the upper limit of the free trial they'd already shown interest in purchasing a license.

I know of no less pompous way to put it but I've gotten you guys at least 2 Full licenses and 4-5 Creator Licenses by getting my students parents to buy the software. Most my students have 1 class per week. Now that there's a 30 Day trial, that's basically 4 classes and that's it. Usually takes 8 - 10 classes to ignite the students interest.

Do you have an educators program? Otherwise I'll have to switch to Godot or App Game Kit as both of these engines offer the unlimited trial or completely free all together.
 
Last edited:

rmanthorp

YoYo Games Staff
Admin
YYG Staff
Hey @rmanthorp I tutor kids in programming and game dev and I've been using the Free Version with my students. The asset limit was just the right thing for us as it would offer enough for them to learn about programming, make a small game and by the time they hit the upper limit of the free trial they'd already shown interest in purchasing a license.

I know of no less pompous way to put it but I've gotten you guys at least 2 Full licenses and 4-5 Creator Licenses by getting my students parents to buy the software. Most my students have 1 class per week. Now that there's a 30 Day trial, that's basically 4 classes and that's it. Usually takes 8 - 10 classes to ignite the students interest.

Do you have an educators program? Otherwise I'll have to switch to Godot or App Game Kit as both of these engines offer the unlimited trial or completely free all together.
Hey, we do have an educator program. Please contact our helpdesk about it here: https://accounts.yoyogames.com/contact-us#education
 

MilesThatch

Member
It looks like the only alternative you guys offer is educational license purchases, I've sent an email but I don't think this is the same.
 

FrostyCat

Member
Hey, we do have an educator program. Please contact our helpdesk about it here: https://accounts.yoyogames.com/contact-us#education
I don't think you fully understand the concern that MilesThatch and Regina Game Dev are raising.

In addition to larger formal institutions like post-secondary schools or school boards, there are also smaller agencies like the ones I mentioned who often teach GM on a social work or volunteer basis. They have cost constraints on how much they can spend per student they accept, and thus far only the current system allows them to comply with the constraints. At the very least, these educators want the assurance that prospective students won't be double-surcharged for a license, once to help cover the institution's licensing costs and another time to buy another full license on their own after the course is over.

And then there's the issue of what happens when students return home and can't use what they were taught and licensed to use at school.

The on-site lab part of the use case has been taken care of by the educator's program. But give what I repeatedly hear from educators, the homework part of use case has not. The registered-at-lab-free-at-home model (sometimes even free-at-lab-free-at-home) is common among your educational clients, and MilesThatch is an example of that. So is Regina Game Dev. They may not show up directly on sales figures, but they do show up in other communication channels like here. The shift to the 30-day timed trial jeopardizes their curricula and forces them to migrate. They can't and won't go from start to finish in 30 days and still teach properly. These educators need the assurance that students can still practice what they learn, at least while the course lasts.

Please answer these concerns before proceeding with the 30-day timed trial policy. If there's a 50% uptick in educational sales and it's becoming a growing part of YoYo's clientele, complaints like what MilesThatch and Regina Game Dev raised should not be taken lightly and definitely not with a stock sales line.
 

Bentley

Member
I agree with everything that has been said.

When I started out, I didn't know a thing about programming. If I got kicked at 30 days, I would not have bought GM.

The decision was not just about money. It was also about the time I knew I would invest. I just can't imagine someone in the position I was buying it. To be honest, I'd probably be really annoyed and look at other options.
 

MilesThatch

Member
Just out of curiosity. How bad is the Free Limited Edition of GMS hurting your bottom line? You couldn't even make a publishable executable in the free version of GMS2. It's virtually unusable when it comes to making games commercially, however it's ideal for learning. You gotta have some analytics to back this decision up. Your community is everything and Educators like me have been slowly growing your audience from a young age. These are the developers who grow up on your software, they're the loyal customers.
 

JeffJ

Member
When I started out, I didn't know a thing about programming. If I got kicked at 30 days, I would not have bought GM.
Same here. This is coming from someone who's initial $20 purchase many years ago turned into the $800 Master Collection (and no, not at any insane Humble Bundle deal - close to full price) and then what is now a yearly $1500 shellout from me - plus whatever single licences I bought before that. I'd estimate between 2011 and 2018 I've probably spent around $2500 on GMS. That's not a completely insignificant amount of money, and I'm likely not the only one who went from free to fullblown Ultimate licensee. But I wouldn't have gotten to a point of spending an average of more than $350/year on this if it wasn't for the free trial way back when - and that's a fact.

I'd probably be really annoyed and look at other options.
That's probably the biggest concern about this entire discussion. More than ever, there are serious, direct competitors. It's not just Unity any more. There are other, direct 2d competitors, that are nearly as easy to get into, are just as flexible (in fact, even more so) and are free. That is competition that needs to be taken very, very seriously.
 

Kezarus

Member
If I got kicked at 30 days, I would not have bought GM.
Me too!

Look, I just would like to have more devs on Game Maker side. There is plenty using the free stuff. When people come to me and ask "What engine can I use?". I said: "Game Maker have a free license for you to get the hang of it. If you like it, you can buy it.".

What am I supposed to say now? "Rush to be a dev in 30 days?" or "Use the free stuff around?"

Is it possible for, when the trial expires, the person using it could still have acess to the OLD trial?
 

Yal

🐧 *penguin noises*
GMC Elder
Agreeing with everyone that is like "nobody would even try to get into GM with a 30 day hard limit", I've used it since the GM5-GM6 transitional period and I didn't make anything good enough for a public release until 2008. I also stuck with the Lite version of GM8 for a really long period since it fulfilled all my needs, even if the splash screen was unprofessional, I felt like I displayed a mark of pride showing fellow Sandbox members what you could accomplish without all those cool advanced features if you just were smart enough. Different days, different use case, but my point is... not everyone is in the target audience for a commercial license, so removing the "babby's first game maker" edition entirely is gonna remove the only thing big swathes of people is interested in. Not necessarily paying customers, but people that could recommend GM to their friends, become paying customers in the future, report bugs, or at the very least keep the community alive (not just making GM stay on top of the google results, but also being an important part of GM's identity).

I mean, look at the selling points of the other engines.
  • 3D room editor + native model support (Unity, Godot, Unreal)
  • Copypaste C++/C# code from StackOverflow instead of learning a proprietary language (like, every one of them)
  • Compiled performance (like, every one of them)
  • Living, properly working asset store (Unity, not sure about others)
  • Opensource and free (Godot)
What has GM got?
  • Really easy to find by googling
  • Fast and easy to make stuff in
  • Living, constructive community to help you learn how to use it
As a long-time GMCer I'm worried not only about GM, but also about the GMC... if we stop getting an influx of new random people that just like coding and only get commercial devs that think about the money/time ratio of everything they're doing, the forum will change for the worse.




Also, just as a completely unrelated idea... if there's a need for Yoyo to make more money, how about doing what RPG Maker is doing and start producing tons of high-quality art assets / code extensions and sell those? Both new users that lack the skills/funds to produce custom art and professional indie devs that need to increase throughput could be potential customers. The RPG Maker guys produce these things at a sickening pace, there's already over 250 things and the news feed is completely swamped with new DLC releases all the time... but it's evidently working for them, or they wouldn't keep doing it, right?
upload_2019-6-6_21-10-9.png
 
Last edited:

Pfap

Member
Agreeing with everyone that is like "nobody would even try to get into GM with a 30 day hard limit", I've used it since the GM5-GM6 transitional period and I didn't make anything good enough for a public release until 2008. I also stuck with the Lite version of GM8 for a really long period since it fulfilled all my needs, even if the splash screen was unprofessional I felt like I displayed a mark of pride showing fellow Sandbox members what you could accomplish without all those cool advanced features if you just were smart enough. Different days, different use case, but my point is... not everyone is in the target audience for a commercial license, so removing the "babby's first game maker" edition entirely is gonna remove the only thing big swathes of people is interested in.

I mean, look at the selling points of the other engines.
  • 3D room editor + native model support (Unity, Godot, Unreal)
  • Copypaste C++/C# code from StackOverflow instead of learning a proprietary language (like every one of them)
  • Compiled performance (like every one of them)
  • Living, properly working asset store (Unity, not sure about others)
  • Opensource and free (Godot)
What has GM got?
  • Really easy to find by googling
  • Fast and easy to make stuff in
  • Living, constructive community to help you learn how to use it
As a long-time GMCer I'm worried not only about GM, but also about the GMC... if we stop getting an influx of new random people that just like coding and only get commercial devs that think about the money/time ratio of everything they're doing, the forum will change for the worse.




Also, just as a completely unrelated idea... if there's a need for Yoyo to make more money, how about doing what RPG Maker is doing and start producing tons of high-quality art assets / code extensions and sell those? Both new users that lack the skills/funds to produce custom art and professional indie devs that need to increase throughput could be potential customers. The RPG Maker guys produce these things at a sickening pace, there's already over 250 things and the news feed is completely swamped with new DLC releases all the time... but it's evidently working for them, or they wouldn't keep doing it, right?
View attachment 25087
I completely agree with your assessment on the other engines. GameMaker is a great buy to own product that comes with a more; for lack of a better term, laid back and fun atmosphere. There's no taking a percentage of sales at launch or anything like that, it's literally about making games; soon to be making games in a 30 day time period.
If anybody actually uses GameMaker they will eventually buy at least a desktop or creators license I feel... I wonder how much it costs to run the backend for the free trials, are they spending money to keep people on the free trial?
 

Lonewolff

Member
As a long-time GMCer I'm worried not only about GM, but also about the GMC... if we stop getting an influx of new random people that just like coding and only get commercial devs that think about the money/time ratio of everything they're doing, the forum will change for the worse.
Seen the of topic forum lately? Might be a completely different section if it were limited to paid users. :p


Also, just as a completely unrelated idea... if there's a need for Yoyo to make more money, how about doing what RPG Maker is doing and start producing tons of high-quality art assets / code extensions and sell those? Both new users that lack the skills/funds to produce custom art and professional indie devs that need to increase throughput could be potential customers. The RPG Maker guys produce these things at a sickening pace, there's already over 250 things and the news feed is completely swamped with new DLC releases all the time... but it's evidently working for them, or they wouldn't keep doing it, right?
I like this idea. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that company makes more from the assets, than they do the engine itself. They seem to guard their assets with their lives over there.


It may also negatively affect anyone who's selling assets for use with GMS, as those can be purchased (if not from the Marketplace, then from other asset stores) even by Trial license users. Asset creators are surely not going to be content (pun not intended) with this - I know a few people who make a nice amount of side income by making assets that are primarily bought and used by new users. It's also gonna be fun if there's anyone who was actively using the Trial license to make their game, purchased some assets for it and is now unable to open their project and use the assets they purchased.
Not really. Once the sale has been made, it has been made.

People unwilling to pay for GMS, generally won't be paying for Marketplace assets either. Nor should they be allowed to really.
 

Yal

🐧 *penguin noises*
GMC Elder
I like this idea. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that company makes more from the assets, than they do the engine itself. They seem to guard their assets with their lives over there.
Yeah, every asset they release has a clause that it can only be used with their products. I find it a bit counterproductive since they're just turning down potential customers, and I've got some personal beef with it after getting an "game dev bundle" from HumbleBundle and half the stuff in it had that license (so thus I couldn't use it), but it's probably objectively one of the most effective vendor-lock-in strategies I've seen. The starting assets are in the same style and are really pretty, but they're so limited you can't make a whole game with them. Then the RPGM company happens to sell more assets in the same style... so you can either throw out EVERYTHING and start making stuff in a new style... or just buy some more asset packs. Can't hurt, right?
*cue feedback loop that makes it impossible to EVER use assets from anywhere else*

Seen the of topic forum lately? Might be a completely different section if it were limited to paid users. :p
I never go there. There's plenty of other places to discuss memes and very few others to discuss game design in general and GM in particular.

I wonder how much it costs to run the backend for the free trials, are they spending money to keep people on the free trial?
They're already running the "always online except not literally always because that's obnoxious so we only check every X days" DRM backend, checking if the license is 30 years old is probably just a single more if statement to run.
 

TsukaYuriko

🌠
Forum Staff
Moderator
Not really. Once the sale has been made, it has been made.
Yeah, and the one who made the purchase is going to be understandably outraged about it. Imagine them downloading a free, time-unlimited trial of GM, wanting to make a Flappy Bird clone as their first game and purchasing one of the readily available Flappy Bird engine assets out there. They never intended to purchase a paid license in the first place because it's just a spare time hobby, so they're not going to.

Halfway through development of this absolutely undeniable masterpiece, with no prior warning, these licensing changes roll along.

After the Trial period is over, they lose access to GM, their project and their asset is now unusable to them. They walk away feeling frustrated and probably cheated.
YoYo Games doesn't get a sale either way.
The asset publisher has no chances of follow-up purchases from this user.

... and worst of all, I probably get to clean up a "friendly" feedback topic on the GMC. Okay, maybe not. :p

Sales are not everything. User relation doesn't show up directly on figures, but cumulative word of cases like this hypothetical one have the potential to spread like wildfire and cause much more indirect damage in regards to PR (and therefore also future sales) than the costs a user that's continuously using the crippled version of the Trial license could ever incur.


People unwilling to pay for GMS, generally won't be paying for Marketplace assets either. Nor should they be allowed to really.
They aren't.
Marketplace EULA said:
3.4. In order to access Assets and Services, you first need to access the Marketplace, which you can do by following the process explained in the Terms of Service, which includes having an activated GameMaker: Studio Professional licence
I'm not talking specifically about assets sold on the Marketplace, but also on external sites like itch.io, hence the mention of "other asset stores". Such assets can be bought by anyone, even people who don't own any license at all (whether they are useful to them is another story).

Therefore, anyone who has any amount of side income from such sites could be negatively affected by this change, as no matter how small the percentage of Trial users who purchase assets this way may be but are now either locked out of shying away from giving GM a try in the first place due to the recent changes, any amount greater than 0% is technically income those asset creators could have had, but now won't have.
 

Lonewolff

Member
They never intended to purchase a paid license in the first place because it's just a spare time hobby, so they're not going to.
I suspect this is the exact reason for the new model. There would be a massive user base that fit into this category.

If YYG even twists 1% of these people's arms into buying GMS, then they are financially way in front.

Is YYG a team of people that like to give away free stuff and feel warm and fuzzy inside? Or are they a business, with employees, with families, with real life costs?
 

TsukaYuriko

🌠
Forum Staff
Moderator
I suspect this is the exact reason for the new model. There would be a massive user base that fit into this category.

If YYG even twists 1% of these people's arms into buying GMS, then they are financially way in front.

Is YYG a team of people that like to give away free stuff and feel warm and fuzzy inside? Or are they a business, with employees, with families, with real life costs?
Maintaining good customer relations is not "giving away free stuff". No trial or free license of any paid software is. It's a part of marketing - and therefore a part of business - too, and sales directly depend on it, especially for smaller companies. Market leaders like Microsoft or Adobe can surely get away with inconveniencing customers in various ways, because the customers are bound to the leading product to continue to run their own business, but for YoYo Games, sales at the expense of customer relation, new user flow and screwing over "big focus" educational users sounds like a bad trade-off to me.

Lure a fish with bait and a squirrel gets to eat (drink?) more than just a feckin' strawberry milkshake that day.
Catch a boatload of fish using a net that separates the few big fish from the countless sardines, trash the latter because it would waste more resources to process them into food than trashing them does and serve the former... you'll have a feast, but what's left in the sea after a while of doing that? The fish population is not going to survive more than they die if this is kept up.

We'd need exact figures to say anything for sure, but I doubt that some conversions will be enough to outweigh the negative PR this has generated so far. Great care needs to be taken when weighing the potential losses against the potential gains - like I said before, sales are not everything - as trial users are a growing user base, not a static pool. New users will only keep flowing in as long as the offer on the table is enticing enough to motivate them to hop on board.


To add another entry among the lines of @MilesThatch's example, I'm periodically teaching how to use GameMaker to select individuals in my spare time. (This is of course a very personal example, so this is not my general stance on the subject, just another personal experience story.) I was mostly the one who introduced them to GameMaker in the first place and have been showing them how to find their way around when they started out. They wanted to make a game, so I was like, hey, there's this thing I use for that, it's intuitive enough to get into without any prior knowledge, there's a free version you can use to see if you like it. If an opportunity like that comes up again now, what am I supposed to tell them? There's a free version you can use for 30 days, then you have to decide if you want to lose access to your project or purchase a license?

If we both have time around the weekends, I can have a few sessions with these people where I show them the basics in that time frame. In between, busy schedules can get in the way, some are learning slower than others, some just want to take their time... it's likely that not many of the people I was teaching would have ended up with a purchase (either through them or because I gave them an unused one I had lying around from a bundle) if these lessons hadn't periodically taken place over the case of a few months each.
 

TsukaYuriko

🌠
Forum Staff
Moderator
Do you and Miles do your teaching for free?
I do. It's not a side business or anything like that for me, so I'm not negatively impacted by the changes through that venue. The prospect that I won't be able to introduce people to GameMaker as fluidly as I used to still saddens me, though, because I like both the product and the team behind it and would love to see them grow even further. GameMaker has been part of a great deal of my life, and I love to share the joy of creation with others by introducing them and seeing them grow from dreamers with big ideas to creators. This is why I'm being so vocal about this - I'm familiar with the existing user base to a certain extent and fear that the changes will ultimately do more harm than good, hindering both the product's and the company's further development. I can imagine that other long-time members who have voiced their concerns in this topic share the same sentiment.
 

Pfap

Member
I suspect this is the exact reason for the new model. There would be a massive user base that fit into this category.

If YYG even twists 1% of these people's arms into buying GMS, then they are financially way in front.

Is YYG a team of people that like to give away free stuff and feel warm and fuzzy inside? Or are they a business, with employees, with families, with real life costs?
Exactly, so keep up with the times... Yes I'm irritated... as a knowledgeable programmer I know I can tell Yoyo to get blanked.. and guess what... WOW... I'm fine... There is so much available.. actually blanking available... and if anybody edits this since it is a moderated forum I will know... and honestly I am pissed off. Not just pissed off I am really pissed off and cannot wait to get away from GameMaker; not only because it is easy and freeing, but because it offers me better opportunities.

So, consider this war. @Nocturne ban and delete all my information per the user agreement or wisen the blank up!

Edit: I chose GameMaker for a reason... at least my current project. Keep it that way!

Edit1: Or I am gone!
 
Last edited:

Pfap

Member
Ummm... is this an official request to delete your account from the forums? Or what? I have no idea what you are trying to say here or why you've dragged me into this...
Get rid of the 30 day limit.
Edit: What did you think it was?
Edit1: As the community manager... otherwise; sorry for dragging you into this.
 
Last edited:

Electros

Member
I have to agree with a lot of what has been said here. I just don't understand this move - if your model is converting a proportion of trial users to paid versions, you should be trying to grow your potential user base, and this has the serious potential to cut it off at the legs.

If you want to encourage early conversion, why not keep the current feature limited version, and offer x% off if you buy the base version (or whatever versions you deem intro discountable) within 30 days as a welcome offer? Those that want to develop their skills further before taking the plunge can then pay the going rate or any applicable offer at the time.

I personally appreciated the space to develop, and did quite a bit of running through tutorials in my lunch breaks whilst working a full time job before making my first purchase, and have made multiple subsequent since. I think there is a fair chance I may not have gone on the journey if this time limited trial had been in place at the time.
 

Nocturne

Friendly Tyrant
Forum Staff
Admin
If you want to encourage early conversion, why not keep the current feature limited version, and offer x% off if you buy the base version (or whatever versions you deem intro discountable) within 30 days as a welcome offer? Those that want to develop their skills further before taking the plunge can then pay the going rate or any applicable offer at the time.
Maybe YYG have the hard cold stats to prove that this just not happening and that 99.999999% of people never convert, even with discount offers and sales? I'm not saying that this is the case (I honestly don't know), but keep in mind that the company is the one with the actual user statistics and conversion rates, and if they are doing something like this its because they've studied the situation and consider it the best way to go. Time will tell, but I can safely say that this is not a decision taken lightly or quickly, and will have been under great consideration for quite some time and will be based on actual real-world numbers, unlike a lot of the more personal and heated comments in this thread.
 

Electros

Member
Maybe YYG have the hard cold stats to prove that this just not happening and that 99.999999% of people never convert, even with discount offers and sales?
Sure, I don't have the figures - my main point was on making an introductory / welcome discount offer for new starters within the 30 days, do YYG do this? I see the general email sale offers to everyone, but I wouldn't know about intro offers as I've been paid up for a while. I think the benefit of that is that it would incentivise early conversion, but not disproportionately hinder those who need more time to assess the product before making the purchase (time poor), or need more time to acquire the money to buy (cash poor). This 30 day trial could put off users from both those sectors.
 

Pfap

Member
As a user I want to say that if Yoyo makes this decision, whether lightly taken or not I am gone.

@Electros anybody that knows code or can figure it out is gone...
Edit: if you can speak GML you can speak others...
 

Nocturne

Friendly Tyrant
Forum Staff
Admin
Sure, I don't have the figures - my main point was on making an introductory / welcome discount offer for new starters within the 30 days, do YYG do this? I see the general email sale offers to everyone, but I wouldn't know about intro offers as I've been paid up for a while. I think the benefit of that is that it would incentivise early conversion, but not disproportionately hinder those who need more time to assess the product before making the purchase (time poor), or need more time to acquire the money to buy (cash poor). This 30 day trial could put off users from both those sectors.
This is why Creator exists. It's incredibly cheap at about $40 (which is less than most people spend in a month on junk food, games, cinema, etc...) and gives you a whole year to continue using the product restriction free, AND gives you a discount on the other licences.
 

Pfap

Member
This is why Creator exists. It's incredibly cheap at about $40 (which is less than most people spend in a month on junk food, games, cinema, etc...) and gives you a whole year to continue using the product restriction free, AND gives you a discount on the other licences.
Then make your main license more expensive? Just because, I would like to make chocolate $20 a bag doesn't mean it will happen.
 

Pfap

Member
Yeah, and you guys are just going to LOVE that.


I'm not sure what you're trying to say here... If that $20 gave you a bag with infinite chocolate for a year then there's nothing stopping you?
I'm talking about child labor. In regards to the chocolate market.

I am willing to pay what a product is worth. In regards to the engine market.

Not more; not less.
 

Lonewolff

Member
I'm talking about child labor. In regards to the chocolate market.

I am willing to pay what a product is worth. In regards to the engine market.

Not more; not less.
Child labor? Not even going to ask. o_O

YYG has made somewhere around $2500 give or take from me. Was it worth it to me? Hell yes. :)
 

Kezarus

Member
Maybe YYG have the hard cold stats to prove that this just not happening and that 99.999999% of people never convert, even with discount offers and sales? I'm not saying that this is the case (I honestly don't know), but keep in mind that the company is the one with the actual user statistics and conversion rates
Yeah, I don't think anyone here is an speciallist on sales or have the numbers. That's a good point.

However, on the consumer side, it's quite a no brainer if you are about to start coding games and have to choose between lots of free engines or a trial of 30 days, isn't it? Same thing on educational side, you deny the student to do "homework" because the license only works at the school.

And those people can help the conversion. At the end of the day, I really hope that Yoyo knows what they are doing...
 

Misty

Member
As a user I want to say that if Yoyo makes this decision, whether lightly taken or not I am gone.

@Electros anybody that knows code or can figure it out is gone...
Edit: if you can speak GML you can speak others...
I made a game with C++ before, and C#. GM is way easier. I want to use GM and GM only. Its hard for me to learn other engines, since I am over 25, which corresponds to the science of how brains after 25 losing the ability to be fluid and learn newly. GML is what I know and what is good for me.
 

Kezarus

Member
I made a game with C++ before, and C#. GM is way easier. I want to use GM and GM only. Its hard for me to learn other engines, since I am over 25, which corresponds to the science of how brains after 25 losing the ability to be fluid and learn newly. GML is what I know and what is good for me.
Well if this eases your concern, I learned Python with 38 and started with Java this week (last time I touched it was 2005) after 14 years of C#. Already made a performatic code for a huge integration. And I am really not that good, pretty average tbh.

Just made some research on best engines for indie devs, GM make very shy and few appearences when it does. That's not good... =/
 

Misty

Member
Well if this eases your concern, I learned Python with 38 and started with Java this week (last time I touched it was 2005) after 14 years of C#. Already made a performatic code for a huge integration. And I am really not that good, pretty average tbh.

Just made some research on best engines for indie devs, GM make very shy and few appearences when it does. That's not good... =/
I learned Python too. GM is superior.

If I was made CEO like I asked the GM would be top dog once more.
 

Rattlejaw

Member
During the video game crash Nintendo rised to power and was famous, still to this day they are but not as much as they were back then, you wanted a game published? Nintendo. How did they fall from this golden throne? They started charging every tom dick and harry, for everything, and people didnt like it, more importantly David Rosen, James Humpert, Otavio Good, Martin Bromely, Irving Bromberg, Jeremy Gordon, Josh Adams didnt like it, and made one of there biggest competitors at there time SEGA, from those decisions we have the game market we have today (where heading for another game crash but thats a story for another time)

point being Game maker is nintendo right now, and to go and change there formula and make one of there biggest sources from income (Hobbyist, random people wanting to make a video game) any one who is not an experienced coder and have never touched code before. Giving them a rushed experience to then slap them in the face like, "did you do what you wanted? no? well buy a license. yes? well buy a license." is a major turn off for them. They will go to another engine, not because its free. but because they can use it and not be pressured into it. going back to my example Sega fell but there still kicking making games, there just not as famous as nintendo is still, the problem being if game maker falls, its gone.

YoYo can do what ever they want its there product. I just hope they see what there fan base is and what they want, rather then only looking at what YoYo wants.
Thank you.
I think what happened to Nintendo was they screwed over Sony years ago. They were going to partner up with Sony to make a console, then backed out of it. Sony was upset and decided to make their own console; thus, the Playstation was born, and has been dominating ever since.

I do get what you're saying though. I was more of an artist and musician than I was a coder when I first jumped into GMS2. I played around with the trial version for I guess around 6-8 months before buying it. The reason why it took me that long to buy it was because it took me that long before things with GML started to click for me. Before that, I wasn't sure if it would "click" for me, so I didn't want to waste my money on something that I wasn't confident I could get good at. It wasn't until I got better at it is when I decided to buy it.

I see a lot of people saying Unity and Unreal are the main competitors to GM, but I think it's more likely that Construct 3, Clickteam Fusion, and I guess Godot are. I think a lot of people looking to jump into this are like me. An artist looking to jump into the world of coding. They don't care about being coding experts. They just want the smoothest way to get a game up and running and something that is easy to learn. I've messed with a lot of engines. Gamemaker does have a higher ceiling than other 2d game engines, but Gamemaker does take more time to get things going when compared to engines like Construct, GDevelop and Clickteam. I'm concerned that many new people might not see the full potential of GM in 30 days, so they'll gravitate towards something that is very easy to get a project going.
 
Last edited:

XanthorXIII

Member
I’d say leave it at 30 days and make a really strong tutorial that anyone trying it can get through in 30 days or less that really shows off GMS potential. 30 Days is a long time and you can make pretty quick small games in that time span. I’ve made two games, each done in Two Weeks.
 

8BitWarrior

Member
What if after the 30 days it then reverted to the super limited version? If people have done anything substantial with the engine at the point, I don't think they'd want to cripple their progress and would be willing to pay for the license to keep their project's progress intact.

After a taste of the full meal, I don't think they'll want to return to the crumbs... but you could still offer the crumbs anyway! ^.^
 
Top