I would say that they are kind of even(at least for 2D).I'm the opposite. I've been using Unity for years but now GameMaker 2 is superior in every way.
Correct.And now, you can export to Xbox console without subscription, through UWP.
http://gms.yoyogames.com/release-notes-runtime.htmlCorrect.
Did they end up fixing that big ass cursor thing that follows the gamepad that you couldn't get rid of on XBOne?
That was a certification killer right there.
- NOTE: You'll need Windows 10 SDK 10.0.14393 or later installed for this update, and you'll need to specify 10.0.14393.0 as your target platform version in Windows UWP options
- Fixed builds breaking immediately on phones if you didn't have fullscreen mode checked
- Disabled cursor when running UWP apps on Xbox One.
Nice!
Put in a feature request for resolving old tickets ;DWonder if they'll mark my two year old ticket solved now
That's all fine and dandy. Once again, however, I ask: why not offer to pay for the support separately?I don't get all the criticism around this. With console exports, we are most likely talking about a small fraction of the total user base, but most important of all, the target is very specific. You can't simply wake up one morning and decide "hey, let's develop / port a game for the console market!". In my opinion, if your target is the console market, you'll have to consider your business choices very carefully. We are not talking about pacman clones or hit the ball here.
Developing quality games has a price, and although you may not consider your time as tied to money directly, you probably should in this case. There's a reason for all the games you find on crowdsourcing platforms. The price of the subscription for the modules should just be seen as a cost you add to the business plan, and as many others said, it does make sense from a business point of view. The alternative probably is not having the exports at all, which is far worse.
I have to say though that the criticism related to a few major bugs (especially in the HTML5 platform) has solid ground in this context, but it's difficult to tell if having to maintain the console modules has an impact on that or not. I've seen a lot of improvements recently in this aspect, and as long as the trend is positive, I'm not really worried
Hey everyone, I know this is an older post, but I've been reading through some of your comments and I agree with what a lot of you are saying about the console exports being way too expensive for the average indie. So, I gathered some feedback from some polls I did on Reddit about if people think the console exports are too expensive and out of currently 90 votes,
"No, it's too expensive" was voted 63 times
"I would if it was cheaper" was voted 22 times
While "Yes, I do pay the the Console/Ultimate License" only got 4 votes
So, after gathering feedback of the polls and reading some of your comments, I made a petition on Change.org titled "Petition YoYo Games to Change Terms of Their Console Licenses ($799 a Year Each)" If any of you who still agree that a change in the console export price/terms would be beneficial, then please sign the petition post your comments on the petition.
Petition link Petition YoYo Games to Change Terms of Their Console Licenses ($799 a Year Each)
I also explain how a change in price or terms of the console export license would be beneficial for both YoYo Games and the gaming industry in general.
Not to mention a petition doesnt mean its a magical demand to a company, its just a list of people saying an idea, which in the business world 9.9/10 times means nothing.Okay, please, don't do this. No petition from Change.org is going to sway YYG into changing their business practices, which are based on a great number of things, most of which neither you nor I are privy to. Do you know how much support and maintenance is required for developers that are targeting console? I can say that it's a LOT. So, if YYG lower the entry level, then they are opening themselves up to an increase in support requests, which means they would need to hire more developers, more support technicians and more QA personnel. And that's just one aspect of the business decisions that I am aware of... but I would assume (and I stress, I am not privy to such things and this pure supposition on my part as a developer) that they have done multiple cost analysis and this is the price they have come up with that balances the potential income with the required expenditure.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this is something they won't change in the future, or that in principle lowering the price might be a good decision in the long term given how Sony, MS and Nintendo have opened up a lot to independant developers in the last few years, but I do feel it's just a little bit arrogant and presumptuous to think that because 63 people on Reddit want a cheaper licence you can then set up a petition and use it to try and bully or brow-beat the company into making a potentially risky business decision... especially given the fact that you have zero idea of what the reasons for the current price and situation are.
Extremely accurate. There's a lot more to consider than the cost of purchasing a license for the engine you use. 1.5k is a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of what you have to pay to release on a console. The necessary ESRB/PEGI/USK ratings cost hundreds to thousands of dollars. Localization costs hundreds to thousands depending on the amount of text in your game. Almost all the devkit prices I've seen are at least four figures, and one was five figures. Some platforms (I know Xbox for sure does) require errors and omissions insurance to the tune of at least two thousand.YYG is charging $1,500 a year for console exports because any GM user who makes a game good enough for consoles is going to pay it. Yes, it's more expensive than their competition and that kind of sucks, but GM is great, so...oh well. $1,500 is a drop in the bucket if you're making a serious console game.
Also, about Godot being $5,000 to port to Switch... I have a buddy who's using Godot. Cost him about $20,000 to get his game ported when all was said and done.
About ratings, going for an IARC rating is free and it covers many (but not all!) regions, including ESRB, PEGI and USK.Extremely accurate. There's a lot more to consider than the cost of purchasing a license for the engine you use. 1.5k is a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of what you have to pay to release on a console. The necessary ESRB/PEGI/USK ratings cost hundreds to thousands of dollars. Localization costs hundreds to thousands depending on the amount of text in your game. Almost all the devkit prices I've seen are at least four figures, and one was five figures. Some platforms (I know Xbox for sure does) require errors and omissions insurance to the tune of at least two thousand.
It's been about 6 years since I've had any kind of access to console dev stuff, so you're probably right, haha! Yes, Xbox One dev kits are free. That's common knowledge and Microsoft is extremely open with that info on their own website.About ratings, going for an IARC rating is free and it covers many (but not all!) regions, including ESRB, PEGI and USK.
About the devkit prices, without going into specifics, a major one is free and another very major one costs less than $500.
About localizations you are correct, if your game has thousands of words you're in for a rough ride. If your game is popular enough there is the scenario of community/fan translations but you get what you pay for (nothing in that case).
About the errors and omissions license, it does not apply any more. This post could have been more accurate if it was made 6 years ago, heh.
Now about the license cost, indeed it's not much since even if you publish a relatively obscure title you will get your money back from the first day only.
The only drawback is when you need to patch a game after one year. In that scenario you still have to pay that money but if your game doesn't sell that much after one or two years then you are in the minus. The best strategy is to pay the license again if you are about to release a brand new title and take that opportunity to patch your other game too in that time window.
How many of these 63 (+22) people have released anything on to a console? My guess would be zero."No, it's too expensive" was voted 63 times
"I would if it was cheaper" was voted 22 times
While "Yes, I do pay the the Console/Ultimate License" only got 4 votes
Short FAQ:
Well, as EvanSki has mentioned, this is not a "magical demand." I'm just exercising my right as a consumer of a product I use, to hopefully get a beneficial outcome for the both of us by reaching a mutual agreement.Okay, please, don't do this. No petition from Change.org is going to sway YYG into changing their business practices, which are based on a great number of things, most of which neither you nor I are privy to. Do you know how much support and maintenance is required for developers that are targeting console? I can say that it's a LOT. So, if YYG lower the entry level, then they are opening themselves up to an increase in support requests, which means they would need to hire more developers, more support technicians and more QA personnel. And that's just one aspect of the business decisions that I am aware of... but I would assume (and I stress, I am not privy to such things and this pure supposition on my part as a developer) that they have done multiple cost analysis and this is the price they have come up with that balances the potential income with the required expenditure.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this is something they won't change in the future, or that in principle lowering the price might be a good decision in the long term given how Sony, MS and Nintendo have opened up a lot to independant developers in the last few years, but I do feel it's just a little bit arrogant and presumptuous to think that because 63 people on Reddit want a cheaper licence you can then set up a petition and use it to try and bully or brow-beat the company into making a potentially risky business decision... especially given the fact that you have zero idea of what the reasons for the current price and situation are.
Ah, but it is! You haven't contacted YYG personally on a 1:1 basis to reach this "mutual" agreement (at least, if you have you don't mention it). You are relying on peer pressure from a group that your are trying to form by creating the petition first... so it's not "mutual" in any way. Note that I do agree 100% that you have an absolute right to request improvements or suggest different strategies - and people contact YYG daily through the support desk and here on the forums with their ideas... And believe it or not, things have been changed because of these contacts as YYG generally welcomes friendly feedback and reasoned criticism. I know for a fact that a lot of the new features coming in 2.3 are a direct result of people being unhappy about the lack of certain features and contacting the devs to tell them about it.Well, as EvanSki has mentioned, this is not a "magical demand." I'm just exercising my right as a consumer of a product I use, to hopefully get a beneficial outcome for the both of us by reaching a mutual agreement.
Exactly.I don't know why YoYo Games charges developers upfront,
Sorry, but I don't agree. Forming a petition against anything is a measure designed to put pressure on someone or some organisation to do something they either don't want to do or aren't currently doing, based on the sheer volume and number of people who sign the petition. In this case, the fact that a petition is even created automatically seems to me that this is an antagonistic situation, where you are proactively encouraging people to participate in an attempt to pressure the company into doing something that YOU want, and not what THEY want, as they'd have done it by now if they wanted to or were able to.I haven't used any filthy language or try to "bully" them into a decision just based on my experience or reasoning
I love this post.Sorry, but I don't agree. Forming a petition against anything is a measure designed to put pressure on someone or some organisation to do something they either don't want to do or aren't currently doing, based on the sheer volume and number of people who sign the petition. In this case, the fact that a petition is even created automatically seems to me that this is an antagonistic situation, where you are proactively encouraging people to participate in an attempt to pressure the company into doing something that YOU want, and not what THEY want, as they'd have done it by now if they wanted to or were able to.
Don't get me wrong, I understand why people have these opinions and may even agree with some of the points raised, but just as you are free to make petitions, I am free to point out how I feel about it.