GameMaker Studio 2 now uses a subscription model, at least for consoles

Discussion in 'Community Chat' started by Mr. RPG, Jun 22, 2017.

  1. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,380
    I'd imagine you'd enter into an agreement to them that opens up their financials to you. If they refuse, they don't get the export. If they refuse, you revoke their license. If they develop for two years with it, and release a game, and then refuse, then yeah, I guess you have to sue them or take a "loss." In quotation marks, because any developer this scummy is just going to pirate your software anyway, or at the very least, they'll just use something free like Unity. I think Unity does it by just trusting that anyone who makes real money with their game will pay what at that point becomes a paltry license fee. It seems to be working for them, somehow. They're pretty popular. Maybe it's because they have more resources to sue people and enforce their licences. I don't think so, though. I think most devs will just pay for their licenses if they're making money with your program.

    Only force analytics on people that opt into the console exports? Seems like a simple solution.

    I dunno. This doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I wish upper management would give you guys more free reign.
     
  2. Posh Indie

    Posh Indie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Posts:
    200
    You're putting words in my mouth, friend. I never said, "Premium Support". It has support. That is not disputable. If the YoYoRegime offered the only level of support necessary to release on Console, no games would be on Console that were made with Unity.

    So why does Game Maker Studio need this level of support? Sounds like it's because it can't deliver when you need it to. Investing in software that needs the owning company's fingers in the pie for deployment sounds like a failure of the software, not the developer that's paying a "Premium" for something that should be possible with standard support. Unity wins this because you can deliver without paying a premium support fee.

    The YoYoRegime is going to start censoring now, too? Pointing out inadequate support in light of the ludicrous fee for that support sounds reasonable to me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
    Brandiin likes this.
  3. Kuro

    Kuro Guest

    Nothing in this world is free. The cost is just offset into something else; time, debt, information, computation, etc. Someone somewhere takes the cost for everything and its ususally the person who thinks they were getting a freebie who ultimately foots the bill.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2017
  4. psyke

    psyke Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    223
    They can actually "censor" you if you keep saying "YoYoRegime". You're using their forums, which also have its own rules.
    We can have a healthy discussion without insulting anybody.
     
    kayjee117, Binsk, Ninja Dodo and 2 others like this.
  5. Posh Indie

    Posh Indie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Posts:
    200
    They can censor me, I am aware of that. It would just further the Regime behavior. The discussion will only ever be healthy if you nod your head and accept what they are feeding you. Look at his title, "Evil YoYoGames Employee". Follow his responses to people (He earns the title). This is the only company that is okay with their employees talking condescendingly to their paying customers. If they can't take the criticism in the same way they dish it out, they should establish a better personal presentation of themselves.

    Honestly, they should wear it with a badge of honor since they try so hard to earn it.

    Anyway, I still have not received a concrete answer to my very first question.

    @Mike: Why should anyone pay more for less?

    And to add onto it in light of recent revelations:
    1: Is it really mandatory that people have the Premium Support for Game Maker Studio to be capable of releasing on Console?
    2: You say the policy can change, so what happens if someone pays for Premium Support and it changes?
    3: It has already been stated that releases for Game Maker Studio will happen faster now (less than 5 years of support), so how long will Game Maker Studio 2 continue to be supported?
    4: Shouldn't you verify that people have releases almost ready and at least let those ones out the gate before dropping support entirely?
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
    Brandiin likes this.
  6. hippyman

    hippyman Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    565
    Oh ffs dude... stop saying "YoYoRegime". You sound like a tool.
     
    Pulstar, Kenjiro, Ethanicus and 3 others like this.
  7. Kuro

    Kuro Guest

    Oh come off it, that title is both perfect and not to be taken seriously. And the responses of any of the YYG's staff have always been human. It's kinda rediculous to expect people to respond like corporate automotons, or angels, expecially when most of the time they are here responding to us of their own free will and not because its part of their job.
     
  8. Posh Indie

    Posh Indie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Posts:
    200
    Let's see how @Mike responds to users attacking other users. Is it okay to personally attack one another just not them?
     
    Brandiin and Sammi3 like this.
  9. Posh Indie

    Posh Indie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Posts:
    200
    But they still represent the company (Welcome to the corporate world, it's not the same as sitting on your couch with friends).

    (Oops, sorry for the double post.)
     
  10. JeffJ

    JeffJ Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    339
    @Mike , I just took a look at the email correspondance with you I referred to in this topic, which was back in january. When I asked about console support and you said you didn't have anyone to spare, I actually made the suggestion of paid support - and you said it was something you were working on.

    Why not make it so that the modules themselves are sold just like the other ones, but the support is what you can subscribe to with a paid yearly or monthly model? That would make a lot more sense - if the support truly is a big part of the financial bottleneck for you guys, then this would do several good things;

    1: You would have a direct visual on how many developers you need to support, making it easier to allocate the right amount of resources to this specific task
    2: The people who needs support will be being for it directly
    3: The people who don't needs support will only pay for the module
    4: It's more of an opt-in/opt-out on a need by need basis
     
  11. psyke

    psyke Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    223
    I like this idea.
    Users could also choose between: Desktop, Web, Mobile or Console support, each support having it's own subscription price.

    This could give them some money for offering support on different platforms.
     
  12. Posh Indie

    Posh Indie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Posts:
    200
    Well... the current exports (minus Console) are pretty straight forward. Monetizing support for them would probably bring in no money at all as anyone can do it.

    Console, on the other hand, is harder. That is well known. The question is more of, "What is Premium Support exactly?" If it is just consultation and other niceties, it shouldn't be a mandatory purchase. If it has anything to do with fixing Game Maker Studio Console Exports for your release... that's bad. I want to sit back and watch as people start missing their Console release dates because an unforeseen bug in their development software puts them at a stand still.
     
  13. inkBot

    inkBot Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2016
    Posts:
    44
    @Posh Indie You were vague about how Unity offers support, so if me being more clear is putting words in your mouth, sure.

    Geez. Are you done with the sophistry act? Free in this situation simply means that the end user isn't paying for it, nothing else. If you want to argue about that, take it to Unity, since that's how they advertise it.

    That's pretty much what I was saying as well, albeit more elaborately.
     
  14. Seabass (The Human)

    Seabass (The Human) Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    357
    I'd like to add to what @Mike has said.

    While everyone likes to throw a fit and complain any time YYG tries to earn some money for themselves... you have to realize that the only people who are honestly going to succeed on consoles are people who already have made a lot of money on other platforms or through a publisher/prior funding.
     
    Edmanbosch and Kuro like this.
  15. JeffJ

    JeffJ Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    339
    That's fine.

    It still doesn't explain why you have to pay for support you won't necessarily need. When most of the cost covers those support expenses, it will literally mean that some developers will be vastly underpaying for support, while other developers will be vastly overpaying for support. It would make so much more sense for everyone involved if you paid for the support you actually used.
     
  16. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,380
    That's not true, though. Plenty of people make money with their first games, nowadays. Not that it's super common, but it is possible.

    Besides that, though, it's just bad business like I said - every new user is going to want the option of seeing their game on a console, whether they "deserve" it or not. This paywall is going to make people rethink starting off in GM, rather than the other engines out there. ):
     
    Kenjiro likes this.
  17. aamatniekss

    aamatniekss Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    98
    Well, you can release your first game on pc first and earn enough money with it to release on a console a little later. Also it's a good way to gauge if it's even worth it to try releasing on a console, cause if the game doesn't earn enough to do that on PC, there's not really a point in putting it on a console.
     
    kayjee117, Brandiin, Pulstar and 3 others like this.
  18. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,380
    You can. Or you can use Unity to develop all your versions in tandem. Instead of developing for PC and then effectively porting to consoles for an extra six months or whatever. The Unity way is obviously better for the customer, right?

    Also, Kickstarter is the way most devs judge interest nowadays, I think, along with Steam Ideas or whatever. No reason to spend five years making a complete game only to find our nobody wants it at the very end, haha! X'D
     
  19. Posh Indie

    Posh Indie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Posts:
    200
    Someone is going to call me out on responding here again, since I said I would stay out of it at this point. In regards to that, I will justify this by saying, "This is a reasonable continuation", haha.

    @Mike : I will apologize for anything I have said that may have offended. (This is not the first time we had these encounters, I am aware!)

    My view on Game Maker Studio is probably being misrepresented, so I will state my direct view myself.

    Game Maker is, was, and always has been a great tool for developing 2D games. I believe it is a very capable IDE/Engine and obviously it is capable of earning its users an incredible amount. I have used it since Game Maker 5 (I was still in grade school), so to say otherwise would be ridiculous.

    My greatest concern (Again, not the money. Pay for it when you need it, not perpetually. I get it.) is once I start making a product, will YoYoGames be capable of promising me the ability to release, as well as granting me a grace period for supporting my game.

    This is where the payment system actually works.

    Let me explain: If I pay for Console exports to release my product YoYoGames could have me as a "Confirmed Upcoming Release". This would give them the metrics they need to determine how long to provide support for (The last Console export purchase date + 1 year, for example). For this to work, though, they would need to curate who even buys it in the first place (Not a bad thing. This would allow filtered flow of "Premium Support", as well). The Ultimate Edition seems to go against that, though, since we will have people buying in and perpetually paying just because.

    My idea (Just presenting it, calm down!) is to let us have the exports. Make us pay for, "Guaranteed ability to support our releases for at least 1 year after release" along with the Premium Support. The payment would lock us in, and when YoYoGames wants to end GMS2 support, just stop letting people buy into it.

    I promise you, I would pay the fee for the guarantee of post-release support on Console. I just don't want to work on something and have it sell strongly enough on PC (for instance) only to find out Console support is dropped. YoYoGames needs money, I get that. Their customers also need a reasonable future.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
    Brandiin and RichHopefulComposer like this.
  20. aamatniekss

    aamatniekss Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    98
    Well, Im not sure actually. There are all kinds of pros and cons with both ways. When releasing on PC first, you know for sure if the time spent on porting to consoles will be worth it and you can get money earlier to better support yourself to develop for other platforms, rather than spending a year more being broke and releasing on all platforms at the same time and then flopping because you had no idea if people were interested in your game. the end result is an extra year and extra money wasted this way.
    And if doing a kickstarter and you really want to go day 1 console release with GM, you can do that too, just include the console port costs in your kickstarter.
    Also it's kind of common to just release on the easier platforms first, as much as I know pretty much everyone does this, except the really big dudes and AAAs.
    But yeah anyway Im just trying to say that it might be smarter(or safer?) to release your first game on PCs first in any case, even if just using Unity, cause surely there will be extra costs for releasing on consoles no matter what software you use.

    Edit: but for sure unity way would be more preferable, but you can't have everything in the world heh. For me GM way would still be more preferable simply because GM is still easier to use for my non-programmer brain
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  21. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,380
    Yeah, that's the thing. I can't say this will scare me away from GM, but it does make Unity more tempting for me. Probably much moreso for new customers who haven't invested in GM yet, too, which is a shame.

    Whether I'd think it's a good idea to develop for consoles alongside the PC version depends on how easy the engine makes it, which is another reason the Unity way is better - customers can decide whether or not console development makes sense for them before dropping money on it.

    I'd agree more with "just pay for the export with the KS money" if they weren't subscriptions. The way they're set up, you could spend three times more developing in tandem than you would if you did all the console work at the end in six months, again sticking customers with a lose-lose situation.

    I understand YoYo needs to make money, of course. This might be the only way they feel its worth their time to develop them. This feels like a misstep that's going to give Unity even more market share to me, though, which sucks, obviously.

    And again, all the competition offers free versions and tiered pricing. YoYo is worried about losing money, but I don't think the people who would use the free version would be paying these subscription prices, anyway. Like I said earlier, it feels like they're throwing new users away before they can grow into successful paying ones. I think they're going to really feel it five years down the road when their market share drops even lower.

    Please think about it some sort of tiered pricing, free versions, a monthly subscription, paid support, or a combo of all four, YoYo!
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  22. orange451

    orange451 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    108
    Remember when Game Maker was like $15?
    Times have changed...
     
    Sammi3 and RichHopefulComposer like this.
  23. Desix

    Desix Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2016
    Posts:
    434
    Good!
     
  24. Mike

    Mike nobody important GMC Elder

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Posts:
    2,356
    @JeffJ We did have a proposal for paid support, but were told we couldn't do it, which is why the pricing is as it is. Support payments have to be built in, we have no choice in the matter. Consoles take up a huge amount of time, so it's no longer something we can "just do".

    By the same measure, we can't do a one off payment for console as that payment will never cover the costs of support in future years. Paid support would have dealt with this, but again, not something we're currently permitted to do.

    Free products have in the past just removed paying customers. The vast majority of our users are bedroom/hobbyist windows/desktop users, and as such would use a free version if they could possibly get away with doing so (and who would blame them). But this is unsustainable for us as it's just too much of a revenue drop, we tried with 1.x and it just doesn't work. We thought users would use the free one then upgrade - they didn't, so we can't do this. Same for console - in fact even more so. There are so few users on console by comparison, that we can't afford a free console version.

    We would love the platform holders to keep paying for it so developers don't have to - they aren't, so developers have to. Simple as that.

    Yes its more expensive now, but I'll say again, if you can't make $800 on another platform first and "save up" for console, you're wasting your time (and it'll be a lot of it) porting to console anyway.

    GMS2 is new, and we expect it to last a considerable time. The code base is much better than the old one, so I see no reason behind the fear than support for consoles will just vanish. GMS1.x has been available for consoles for 3 years, and there's another year to go. Being able to import and run 1.x games into 2.x has been a core feature, so I don't know what the issue is with not doing "on going" support for your game.

    I also said we are always looking at new modules, pricing alternatives etc, and we will continue to do so. If a sustainable model can be made for a cheaper alternative, then we'll certainly try and get one to developers.
     
  25. GMWolf

    GMWolf aka fel666

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    3,441
    Although im gonn regret this: here are my two cents:
    Im more disapointed that time and effort have been put i to working on the console exports, which will only affect a very small portion of GM users (especially with the high, but all things considered, reasonable pricing)
    I would have much rather seen GML mature, or better yet, support for a language such as JS or C#. (As it stands i dont use GM for much else than YT because GML always gets in the way).

    The subscription model is obviously not for everyone. But given the size of YYG, snd the user base, its makes sense to me that it was the only economically viable way to go for YYg. (Though again, would have made more sense to make GM good before tackling more exports. As it stands im finding it harder and harder to call GM the best 2D engine out there, GML being the main reason.)
     
  26. Mr. RPG

    Mr. RPG Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    37
    If priority support is included when buying console exports, how come this has never been mentioned anywhere on the website?
     
  27. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,380
    Booooooooooooo. :p
     
  28. Ethanicus

    Ethanicus Ethan L!

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Posts:
    230
    I just don't understand, even after all the discussion, why a monthly fee is impossible. Even if monthly were more expensive on an annual scale, that would only serve to make Yearly look more attractive.
     
  29. Hyomoto

    Hyomoto Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2016
    Posts:
    1,073
    Can we shut up about Unity? If it is truly such a superior, all around better product then why exactly are you here having this discussion? If it is the better, superior product that is also more affordable then why are you using GM? At the very least I just want to point out there are some people here that may be a tad guilty of a bit of hyperbole. There's clearly some appeal to GM if we have enough people using it while simultaneously speaking on how much better another option is. I think it actually makes your opinion about Unity really suspect because if you are correct, then at best it shows we shouldn't be taking your advice anyways.

    Not to mention that for many years, "MADE WITH UNITY" had the exact same connotations "MADE WITH GAMEMAKER STUDIO" had. The only reason it's where it is, is because they kept after that goal and continued to improve their product which last I checked seems to be the route GM wants to go.
     
  30. kburkhart84

    kburkhart84 Firehammer Games

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Posts:
    466
    The one thing that has gone through my head reading through these posts....how many people here are actually targeted by by the new console export price? I'm betting that the majority of the people complaining here haven't been vetted by Sony or Microsoft in order to obtain dev kits, and therefore aren't truly affected by these prices in the first place.

    I'm not defending the price, and I agree with many of the comments, as there are alternatives with better pricing etc... But the thing is that I'm not part of the console market, and therefore I am not actually affected by these prices in reality.
     
    Kenjiro, Kuro and Edmanbosch like this.
  31. FrostyCat

    FrostyCat Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Posts:
    4,539
    The fact that both GM and Unity started with the same connotations, yet only one has made real progress changing its connotation and come to dominate the market, is exactly why it needs to be discussed.

    GMS is unique among its kind in its forced application of a sandboxed file system. When YoYo was confronted about it, its defence was all about shielding rookies who are ignorant about foreign file systems (see Mike's answer vs. my counter-argument). It's not like GMS's competitors wouldn't get support calls for the same kind of dumb crap, but why is GMS the only one "solving" it with the enforced sandbox?

    In mainstream Unity development, more people use plug-in resource editors instead of or in addition to the ones that comes with Unity. The user and vendor community (e.g. ad providers, animation software vendors, etc.) are enhancing its usability together and freeing the core Unity team's time to work on higher priorities. Now look at how much time GMS 2 spent on the image and room editors compared to the IDE plugin system. Would you like to bet on how much of that time could have been spent enhancing GML, fixing bugs or improving interoperability, for instance?

    When telemetry was brought up in GMS 2 (link to discussion topic), again on YoYo's side there is an air of "I know best" without thorough consideration of skilled developer needs. What's interesting about this example is how a YoYo staff member explicitly looked up to Unity and justified the telemetry this way, but ignored Unity's experience in community resistance towards it. You could say "the grass is greener on the other side" if an average GMS user makes comparative statements with Unity, but what would you say if a YoYo staff member does it?

    You only need to look in these differences to know that GMS is not (yet) going the same route as Unity. One has a paternalistic tinge, the other admits it doesn't necessarily know best and enshrines customizability. The market share says it all about which one is working and which one isn't.

    You might not be affected by the console export's pricing in the short term, but the attitudes that underpin it might hit home sooner than you think.

    Given what happened with the console exports:
    • Will YoYo start force-bundling support subscription costs for Android and iOS? After all, these too have ongoing support costs for vendor compliance, particularly Android.
    • Will YoYo continue to force through new exports that don't have the vendor's blessing, and push out maverick exports that are unattractively priced compared to sanctioned competitors? This is time spent away from addressing bugs and fundamental issues with GMS 2, and would be more likely to have a negative return on investment.
    • Will YoYo continue to start selling new products with unready sales and support policies? When the answer is "XX days" for how long it takes to respond to a showstopper on the console export, it's human nature to expect the same undecided statements elsewhere.
    You don't have to be a particularly high-end developer or vendor to feel the effects of these.
     
    Brandiin, Ninety, Mr. RPG and 5 others like this.
  32. Kenjiro

    Kenjiro Guest

    99 days :p
     
    RichHopefulComposer likes this.
  33. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,380
    "Can we stop bringing up GM's closest competitor and most obvious alternative when discussing GM?" :p
     
    Brandiin, Mr. RPG, Posh Indie and 2 others like this.
  34. Kenjiro

    Kenjiro Guest

    First rule of 'Fight Club' - Never talk about your competitor :p
     
    RichHopefulComposer likes this.
  35. Samuel Venable

    Samuel Venable Time Killer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2016
    Posts:
    1,263
    Support or no support. Unity free and plus can still make console games. GameMaker free can't. GameMaker free can't even build a Windows game, (or anything, for that matter), and with limited resources. Unity has none of these restrictions.
     
    Brandiin, Mr. RPG, Overloaded and 3 others like this.
  36. Kenjiro

    Kenjiro Guest

    Imagine the killing you'd make if you created a YYP to Unity converter. I'm sure it would be do able. Hard work but do able.
     
    sylvain_l and Samuel Venable like this.
  37. Ethanicus

    Ethanicus Ethan L!

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Posts:
    230
    Egads no.
     
  38. Kenjiro

    Kenjiro Guest

    If I get a spare year or two :D
     
  39. Kuro

    Kuro Guest

    I get the impression that most of the people who are obsessed with free, are the sorts of people who don't understand the realities of economics.

    For one they aren't even free. The costs are offset into the time of the people who are unfamiliar with the platform wrestling with all the problems of that platform themselves, with an additional annual bill for 2.5k per seat that comes due when they make over 8.3k per month. And if the small amount required for support is so far out of their budget that they care about free, then what are they going to do about marketing? Or are they just going to take the field of dreams "Build it and they will come approach".

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2017
    Pulstar likes this.
  40. Koohyar

    Koohyar Guest

    This is not a matter of the realities of economics. This is a matter of other engines providing the same services for free (or less fee), and YYG getting more money for less amount of service.

    This is the reality...
     
  41. funkygallo

    funkygallo Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    75
    GameMaker Studio licensed Xbox One console developer here.
    My two cents. I would rather pay 1500/2000 $ once and have the console exporter forever rather than subscription.
     
  42. FrostyCat

    FrostyCat Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Posts:
    4,539
    You can easily tell if someone knows the realities of economics by how they structure their argument.

    The first group keeps saying "I can't afford it" and "it's not affordable to indies". This group is ignorant about economics and can be safely ignored.

    The second group talks about comparative pricing, professional features, industry acceptance, sanctioned funding by the console vendor and the disproportionate edge these confer to the console export's competitors. This group does know economics and should have their opinions heard.

    This topic is almost exclusively driven at this point by people from the second group, whom I observe is able to see the perspective of prospective buyers that YoYo staff still does not.

    Perhaps $1500/yr is the minimum feasible price when the export is sold to a developer. But as it stands, that "when" should be called into question.
     
  43. Mike

    Mike nobody important GMC Elder

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Posts:
    2,356
    Okay, I've explained the position of the company (feel free to read back and read the responses) and while I'm sorry many of you don't like it, I have also said we will continue looking at other possibilities in the future.

    All our pricing is subject to corporate approval, so while we may have had other concepts and ideas, this is what's been approved. We will keep looking at other ideas.

    I understand consoles is the dream target of many, so for those who can't afford this Windows UWP does let you export to XBox cheaply if you need that. Microsoft can promote games from the XBox UWP store to the full XBox store I beleive, so they look like normal XBox titles. So UWP is certainly a cheap way in.

    Again, this is the company position and pricing, it's not going to change in the short to medium term. I can't explain or expand any further than I have already.
     
    Binsk, Storyteller and hdarren like this.
  44. kburkhart84

    kburkhart84 Firehammer Games

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2016
    Posts:
    466
    I agree with this honestly....and it IS a concern. My point was more on the lines of in this exact moment, based on what we know right now. Of course, if they make some of those bad(in my and apparently many others' opinions) decisions, it will have effects on the rest of us that are not doing anything with consoles. The fact is though that if the tool is currently doing what someone needs it to do, then this news doesn't affect them in this moment, on that project. In the foreseeable future, I will be able to create windows games all I want, GMS2 wont stop working any time soon(nothing is guaranteed though). So this news doesn't affect me in that regard.

    Now, there are concerns as mentioned. And if someone is using the tools with the sole purpose of learning with the final conclusion being console export, then this may concern them in the here and now, as with the changed prices(from previous versions) they may be wasting their time with the software since they could be spending it on learning the competitor's tools instead.
     
  45. RichHopefulComposer

    RichHopefulComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,380
    I always feel a little bad for you in these threads, @Mike. It always feels like you're stuck doing damage control for things you have no final say over. X'D

    Thanks for taking the time to go back and forth with us, anyway. Hopefully we've given you some material to show the corporate overlords. I'm not sure what other plans you've shown them already, but hopefully they can be revisited.

    I probably have nothing else to say in this thread. Cheers, Mike. o /
     
  46. Tthecreator

    Tthecreator Your Creator!

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    757
    To be honest, I could not give a damn about the console exports. I mean, I'd first need a console myself, which I don't have. Then I'd need a developer license on that platform. Then gamemaker.
    Yes compared to the first two, the gm price is a bit out of proportion, but c'mon: just the console and license is a pill most here wouldn't want to swallow anyways. Not me at least.
    Besides that, I don't think the console marked is easy to concur at all. A lot of games are still bought physically and the online stores really aren't as vivid as something like steam. Certainly not for indies.

    I guess what went wrong here is that this news was just thrown in here by yoyogames with little anticipation about what the community's reaction could be.
    Then they got themselves into a position where they needed to defend themselves. Aoch. I guess they didn't expect this.
    I feel like these things happens more often, where yyg just trows their decisions out there and then they end up having to defend themselves just because the community had no way of seeing their decisions coming.
    But then again, how could they have brought this news in a better way?

    Another few things, a bit unrelated to the topic, is that I would have liked to see the discount last until we've gotten a stable platform that had multiple reasons for switching that were actually moneys worth.
    I still upgraded nevertheless, but if you look at the extra features of gms2 over 1.x and then to the price of said upgrade, it was a tough sell for me and I can see someone else not upgrading for this reason.
    I practically bought it in good faith of future upgrades, that yyg can actually make it worthwhile. I do hope there will be some awesome additions to gml.
    I don't know if I sounded naggy in that last part. Especially the waiting until "multiple reasons for switching that were actually moneys worth" would probably take a few years. (So not anything reasonable for an upgrade discount XD)
    However, this: https://help.yoyogames.com/hc/en-us/articles/231719448-RoadMap seems pretty promising.
     
  47. Mike

    Mike nobody important GMC Elder

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Posts:
    2,356
    I have passed on the comments given here already, so they are aware of the issue. All I can do right now.
     
    Caio, Sammi3, Ninja Dodo and 8 others like this.
  48. Samuel Venable

    Samuel Venable Time Killer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2016
    Posts:
    1,263
    There is also the occasional Linux fan who strongly believes all software should either be free as in price or free as in freedom. I don't find them particularly ignorant, but that's just me.

    Everyone's entitled to their opinion.
     
  49. Mike

    Mike nobody important GMC Elder

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Posts:
    2,356
    LOL.... funnily enough, these people tend to be folk who make a living through support - as they can't charge for the software they make. :D
     
    Kenjiro and Hyomoto like this.
  50. Samuel Venable

    Samuel Venable Time Killer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2016
    Posts:
    1,263
    Or they could get a job outside the programming world and make money from that to put bread on the table and make software as a hobby.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice