OFFICIAL GameMaker Studio 2 Version 2.3.6 Release & More

Cpaz

Member
My whole point was that there may be reasons that some of us aren't considering. Anyhow this has been addressed by iampremo and confirmed there are potential issues which is why they have you contact customer support.
That's fair, I suppose.

But in that case they just wouldn't charge back? We're strictly speaking in hypotheticals anyway, but charging back subscriptions don't typically happen due to those exploits.

See literally any streaming service as an example. There's no refund if you subscribe and then cancel not long after. Because in the their eyes, you've gotten you money's worth. If you do want a refund for whatever reason, I'd assume you take up your case with customer support.

But as has been proposed, I think needing to file a ticket is a technical limitation at the moment and will hopefully change in the future.
 
Last edited:
But that's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about downloading the free version working for x amount of time until you finish your game, then subscribing to indie or enterprise, exporting your game, then cancelling subscription and do a charge back. Just because you are talking about something different doesn't mean there isn't an exploit. You just chose not to acknowledge the exploit and that's on you. Your Netflix analogy is pretty terrible because the same exploit doesn't apply there so you are comparing apples and oranges.
How does the inability to cancel a subscription without contacting customer service prevent someone from doing a chargeback? Maybe this doesn't work the same everywhere in the world, but if I wanted to attempt a chargeback, it would be done through the credit card company - whatever account management systems the place I'd be doing the chargeback on had in place would be irrelevant.
 

rIKmAN

Member
Again, using the Netflix analogy, it’s not possible to watch all of your favourite shows, cancel after two weeks, and expect a full refund. That’s not how subscriptions work.
There definitely are subscription that work like this, EA Play and Game Pass being the two I know of personally - though EA Play is now rolled into Game Pass Ultimate and not a seperate subscription like it used to be.

Every year members get a 10hr trial of EA Sports games 10 days before release and once the 10hrs are used up that's it and you have to wait until release day.

To allow more play time you simply sign up for a month on another account, play those 10hrs and then cancel the sub and get a full refund, rinse and repeat.

The full refund is offered to you during the cancellation processs so there are no chargebacks or anything going on, it's just how they decided to handle it and yes it most definitely gets taken advantage of. Me and my mates were happy to pay the extra £5 for each subsequent 10hrs as we play FIFA Pro Clubs together but when you cancel and they offer you a full refund as part of the process then why wouldn't you take it?

The way I'd expect YYG to handle it (and from what I've read, this will be the case) would be like other subs I have where you can cancel without any problem but the subscription is always for the full month. So if you cancelled on the 6th Jan then you would still be subscribed all through January but come February you wouldn't be charged and would no longer be subscribed.

This would prevent anyone taking advantage of the system as Cameron was alluding to and like I described above.
 

Nobody

Member
The way I'd expect YYG to handle it (and from what I've read, this will be the case) would be like other subs I have where you can cancel without any problem but the subscription is always for the full month. So if you cancelled on the 6th Jan then you would still be subscribed all through January but come February you wouldn't be charged and would no longer be subscribed.
Exactly!

Same as my Netflix example that Cameron was struggling with.

You subscribe for a month, you get a month, regardless of when you apply for the cancellation. Impossible to abuse under those conditions.
 

rIKmAN

Member
Same as my Netflix example that Cameron was struggling with.

You subscribe for a month, you get a month, regardless of when you apply for the cancellation. Impossible to abuse under those conditions.
It seemed like the opposite to me and you were struggling/weren't aware that there are subscriptions that you can cancel and they refund the cost of the month (which can be and is abused as I explained above) and so were shooting him down like he was talking about some alien concept that didn't exist.

Either way I agree doing the "pay a month, get a month, no refunds" method is better for everyone as all parties know what they are getting and there are no risks.
Hopefully that's what they do and don't mess it up and cause more unnecessary drama down the road.
 

Jason C.

Member
Wow, so i have payed multiple hundreds for a full version of Game Maker Studio 2, 1.4 & 7 but i don't get all the features. Well that is a slap in the face. When I purchased Game Maker Studio 2 I was expecting all features forever.
It makes me really worried for future updates and qhat else is going to be put behind a subscription paywall. I'm thinking after 14 years of Game Maker it's finally getting time to switch my main engine.
And to boot - their Mac support is broken on M1 under the latest OS releases and ZERO comment from YoYo as to 1) how to fix or 2) when it will be fixed.
 

Jason C.

Member
Does a subscription make sense it a world where Unity offers a version of their development environment for free with all platforms freely supported? GM2 only has a free version with Opera support, who the <bleep> uses Opera anyway ! MacOS support appears broken to boot on the latest M1 and OSes. I wonder if YoYo is trying to self destruct?
 

drandula

Member
And to boot - their Mac support is broken on M1 under the latest OS releases and ZERO comment from YoYo as to 1) how to fix or 2) when it will be fixed.
Here is some discussion about M1, so you "zero comment" is false.
Also no need such hostility, you can discuss with more civilized manner.
 
Last edited:

EvanSki

Raccoon Jam Host
And what’s wrong with that? Every other subscription service I can think of works that way.

What you are proposing is that people should be ‘locked in’. Why? It’s a subscription. That’s what a subscription is! Pay when you need it. No different from Netflix.

If YYG wants to play the subscription game, end users will too. Develop the game for three years, subscribe for one month, export, sell the game, and win.

Us perma-license plebs won’t look as second class in the long run.
Not to mention if a user cancles a member ship it can just turn off the reoccurring billing not a instant refund
 

Cpaz

Member
It seemed like the opposite to me and you were struggling/weren't aware that there are subscriptions that you can cancel and they refund the cost of the month (which can be and is abused as I explained above) and so were shooting him down like he was talking about some alien concept that didn't exist.
I don't think "Alien" quite fits the bill. "Outdated" is probably more accurate.
Nowadays most if not all consumer grade subscription models follow mostly the same beats as we've outlined. Reason being is because it works so well and is relatively hands off on the part of the actual business providing the service outside of providing a flat fee for the month.

But regardless, to try and bring it back around, the increase communication is much appreciated. More of this sort of transparency should be included in the press releases from the outset to prevent the wild speculation that's been going on over the past week.
But that's just my take.

Looking forward to the next version!
 
Last edited:

rIKmAN

Member
I don't think "Alien" quite fits the bill. "Outdated" is probably more accurate.
I meant that it seemed alien (ie. strange) to Nobody as the replies they were making about the risk of people abusing subscriptions that Cameron was trying to explain were along the lines of "subscriptions don't work like that" and "you're making things up that can't/don't happen" (not exact quotes but close enough) which isn't true because me and my mates have done exactly that for years with 2 subscription services because a refund was offered when cancelling before the month was up.

It may be in the minority in terms of how most well known subscription services work but that's not what was said, it was entirely ruled out as a being a possibility and he was made out to be making things up, so I posted my own experience to the contrary. 🤷‍♂️

I actually think offering refunds is more consumer friendly but it adds back end complications and as I've proved myself - if it's offered then it'll get taken.
I'd have been completely happy with a "buy a month, you get a month, no refunds" policy as I knew I was spending £5 for 10hrs of game time and was happy to do so, but when you ask me if I want my money back because I only used a week or two out of a 1mth subscription that I'm cancelling then of course I'm going to say "oh cool, thanks!".

People suck (including me lol!) - so hopefully YYG games go with the "no refunds" method, it's what makes the most sense for everyone.
 

Jason C.

Member
Here is some discussion about M1, so you "zero comment" is false.
Also no need such hostility, you can discuss with more civilized manner.
See my posts on M1 and GM2 that have gone unanswered on all the issues I've experienced with the M1. So, not only is my zero comment true, it is patently true. Along with my unanswered posts ("zero comment") in this forum, here is ticket I submitted 2 months go, also unanswered ("zero comment"). I've paid hundreds ($$$) for these licenses, so feel free to interpret my criticism and tone however you like.

Screen Shot 2021-11-02 at 11.48.43 PM.png
 
Last edited:

Jason C.

Member
2.3.6 is working and I'm able to build projects on my M1 Mac (Monterey). Give it a reinstall if you're having issues.
Reinstalling doesn't fix the issue. YoYo needs to fix the issue. My systems are clean.Screen Shot 2021-11-02 at 11.36.55 PM.png

The persistent error when running on MacOS M1 Monterey compiled as YYC:
Code:
/bin/bash DONE (0)
/bin/bash -c "cd ~ && open -n -a /Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app --args -debugoutput \"/Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/debug.log\" -output \"/Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/debug.log\" -runTest"
The application /Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app cannot be opened for an unexpected reason, error=Error Domain=NSCocoaErrorDomain Code=260 "The file “TEST003.app” couldn’t be opened because there is no such file." UserInfo={NSURL=file:///Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app, NSFilePath=/Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app, NSUnderlyingError=0x7fb91a00b610 {Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=2 "No such file or directory"}}

/bin/bash exited with non-zero status (1)

elapsed time 00:00:15.5804960s for command "/Library/Frameworks/Mono.framework/Versions/Current/Commands/mono" /Users/Shared/GameMakerStudio2/Cache/runtimes/runtime-2.3.6.464/bin/Igor.exe -j=8 -options="/private/tmp/PKInstallSandbox.Tq1odY/GameMakerStudio2/GMS2TEMP/build.bff" -v -- Mac Run started at 11/02/2021 23:39:26
FAILED: Run Program Complete
 
Last edited:
The good: This version actually starts up unlike 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 which quit on startup. I can't argue that's not an improvement. Making shaders easier to implement is a good idea that should have come to GMS way earlier.

The bad: Features being locked behind the subscription module even though you paid for a perpetual license for GMS2. The reasonable assumption until recently was that owning GMS2 meant getting new features, just not new export modules, without paying more. I guess some of it will come to perpetual license owners, but who knows what features will never come to them. The only new feature of note can't be tried by anyone outside the subscription module. Not exactly an exciting update for the rest of us.
 

Vertette

Member
We know that our users want game making to be as cheap as possible and we feel that we are providing a competitive and compelling offering and we have been generous in our subscription provision for all perpetual users
I'm sorry Russell, but I fail to understand what exactly is competitive or compelling about this new model.

Game Maker's audience are hobbyists and indie developers. Despite the attempts in recent years to try and expand Game Maker Studio's target audience, the engine just isn't up to snuff to be adopted by the larger professional industry like Unity or Unreal Engine. The reason why Game Maker was still considered a viable option for all these years despite the alternatives was because of its ease-of-use and relatively low price, and now that that latter point is moot when Game Maker has switched to a subscription model you're driving away your target audience and making it a less attractive engine for newcomers and professionals alike. How exactly is this model supposed to be competitive or compelling for anyone when Unity or Unreal Engine are effectively free for most independent developers (and Godot is completely free), and professional developers don't want to bother with subscription models for objectively worse products? A studio like Adobe can get away with it despite grumbling from customers because their products are industry standards, Game Maker is decidedly not.

I don't know why anyone thought this model was a good move and I don't want to assume malice, but typically the model goes "hook in customers first, then price-gauge them". This seems very much backwards. It doesn't matter if this new model makes Game Maker cheaper in practice, nor does it matter that the model is pretty generous* and that you're not technically paywalling features*. People look at the words "subscription model" and "only available to subscribers at launch" and turn the other way because subscriptions are a pain in the ass and people want to avoid them as much as possible, simple as. Even some of the most hardcore Game Maker loyalists I've known are changing engines because of it and I've stopped seeing anyone recommend it to newcomers. That really should be worrying someone at the top at least.

* A bit of better communication there would've gone a long way too :V
 
Last edited:

Mehdi

Member
I'm sorry Russell, but I fail to understand what exactly is competitive or compelling about this new model.

Game Maker's audience are hobbyists and indie developers. Despite the attempts in recent years to try and expand Game Maker Studio's target audience, the engine just isn't up to snuff to be adopted by the larger professional industry like Unity or Unreal Engine. The reason why Game Maker was still considered a viable option for all these years despite the alternatives was because of its ease-of-use and relatively low price, and now that that latter point is moot when Game Maker has switched to a subscription model you're driving away your target audience and making it a less attractive engine for newcomers and professionals alike. How exactly is this model supposed to be competitive or compelling for anyone when Unity or Unreal Engine are effectively free for most independent developers (and Godot is completely free), and professional developers don't want to bother with subscription models for objectively worse products? A studio like Adobe can get away with it despite grumbling from customers because their products are industry standards, Game Maker is decidedly not.

I don't know why anyone thought this model was a good move and I don't want to assume malice, but typically the model goes "hook in customers first, then price-gauge them". This seems very much backwards. It doesn't matter if this new model makes Game Maker cheaper in practice, nor does it matter that the model is pretty generous* and that you're not technically paywalling features*. People look at the words "subscription model" and "only available to subscribers at launch" and turn the other way because subscriptions are a pain in the ass and people want to avoid them as much as possible, simple as. Even some of the most hardcore Game Maker loyalists I've known are changing engines because of it and I've stopped seeing anyone recommend it to newcomers. That really should be worrying someone at the top at least.

* A bit of better communication there would've gone a long way too :V
Very good points you've made. Agree!
 

JeffJ

Member
In YYG's defense, this new package is definitely a lot more affordable overall than the old model. Granted, over a span of several years, the total cost might end up being higher, but as Russell said, the nature of the beast simply means that a onetime payment isn't viable in the long run. Like he said, even if there would be zero new features developed ever, GMS2 as it is now, is still a constantly ongoing maintenance task to keep external SDKs up to date, of which they have quite a few - for Android, iOS, Xboxes, Playstations, Switch, etc.. Just that alone is a significant undertaking that will never stop, which means the income stream has to be more consistent and constant.

Now, I don't have any numbers, but while you're correct that the majority of GM users have - historically seen - been amateurs and hobbyists, we're seeing a rise of commercially successful small - to medium sized indie developer studios, who are seeing this commercial success utilized via GMS2 (and its many supported platforms - one area where their nearest comparable competitors struggle). These developers are likely to be developing for at least one or more consoles, in which case they would have been on the old "Ultimate" license - and with the recent changes, those developers are seeing significant savings (about 50% last I checked) compared to the old license.

Again... I don't necessarily see the model or the pricing as a problem. Because their absolute minimum work requires constant maintenance, it makes sense that they need a constant income. And while I also like the concept of an old school perpetual license, the subscription model does have advantages, too. I honestly think they struck a fair model and price.

I'd just wish we could get some sort of acknowledgement of the stability issues, and how they intend to handle the insane jump in update frequency, when they haven't been able to handle it with 5 times less frequent updates so far.
If we as customers accept the constant income stream as a necessary evil (which I do), then YYG must in turn accept a much higher responsibility of a consistent, reliable stability with their updates. You are trying to cater to a more serious audience now - which is good. But show us that you're up to the task. You can't keep doing what you did before with this model. Or, you can, but I sincerely doubt it will end well for anyone.
 

gnysek

Member
Game Maker's audience are hobbyists and indie developers. Despite the attempts in recent years to try and expand Game Maker Studio's target audience, the engine just isn't up to snuff to be adopted by the larger professional industry like Unity or Unreal Engine.
And here's answer why Unity and GMS need to have different payment models. Unity is so complex, that they can earn money from big fishes which are making AAA games, while Indie devs would be a margin in that case. GMS have totally no interest in AAA studios (except of some prototyping sometimes), so needs different earnings model. Getting royalties from released games would rather reject customers than attract them at this level, and releasing "new" version every 4-5 years and increasing major number just to get new funds is also idea with no future, as even now we can see that many users still uses 1.4 version, cause paying $100,$200 or even more at once was too much for them.
 

Vertette

Member
In YYG's defense, this new package is definitely a lot more affordable overall than the old model.
Granted. I did acknowledge it's (technically) cheaper, I just don't think consumers will care in the context of a subscription model.
Granted, over a span of several years, the total cost might end up being higher, but as Russell said, the nature of the beast simply means that a onetime payment isn't viable in the long run.
The problem is that while this subscription model definitely makes more sense for Yoyo and Opera, there isn't enough incentive for the consumers to actually use it. Game Maker Studio's biggest selling point is being the easiest to use engine, a role which seems to be slowly getting usurped by Godot, and from my (and my peers') experience Yoyo's support and SDKs are among the worst I've encountered in the industry. There's just no good reason for anyone to stick with GMS or make the switch to it.
Now, I don't have any numbers, but while you're correct that the majority of GM users have - historically seen - been amateurs and hobbyists, we're seeing a rise of commercially successful small - to medium sized indie developer studios, who are seeing this commercial success utilized via GMS2 (and its many supported platforms - one area where their nearest comparable competitors struggle). These developers are likely to be developing for at least one or more consoles, in which case they would have been on the old "Ultimate" license - and with the recent changes, those developers are seeing significant savings (about 50% last I checked) compared to the old license.
We'll have to see if this new subscription model will keep this trend going. I'm very curious.
I'd just wish we could get some sort of acknowledgement of the stability issues, and how they intend to handle the insane jump in update frequency, when they haven't been able to handle it with 5 times less frequent updates so far.
If we as customers accept the constant income stream as a necessary evil (which I do), then YYG must in turn accept a much higher responsibility of a consistent, reliable stability with their updates. You are trying to cater to a more serious audience now - which is good. But show us that you're up to the task. You can't keep doing what you did before with this model. Or, you can, but I sincerely doubt it will end well for anyone.
That's a good point. It's certainly bizarre that Game Maker Studio doesn't even have a proper bug tracker anymore (among the other issues I've mentioned before). You'd think a subscription model would be a good justification to improve on those weak points now that Yoyo has a more reliable source of income, but...

And here's answer why Unity and GMS need to have different payment models. Unity is so complex, that they can earn money from big fishes which are making AAA games, while Indie devs would be a margin in that case. GMS have totally no interest in AAA studios (except of some prototyping sometimes), so needs different earnings model.
Which is why I'm not saying GMS should simply adopt the model of Unity/Unreal. I acknowledge that absolutely would not work.
Getting royalties from released games would rather reject customers than attract them at this level,
That's absolutely not an issue if Unity and Unreal Engine's high adoption rates among both indies and professionals are anything to go by, you just gotta do it smartly.
and releasing "new" version every 4-5 years and increasing major number just to get new funds is also idea with no future, as even now we can see that many users still uses 1.4 version, cause paying $100,$200 or even more at once was too much for them.
If your customers think that paying $200 one time is too much, a subscription model will not change their minds, however.
 
Last edited:

Nobody

Member
Just that alone is a significant undertaking that will never stop, which means the income stream has to be more consistent and constant.
In theory anyway.

I remember back when people jumped up and down about the Console exporters being around $1000 for one year. Even then, Mike and Russell were advising people to only subscribe when it’s coming near to time to release. They said it was silly to pay $1000 for five years (over the life of dev for said console game) and to subscribe when closer to release.

I fear the same might apply here, causing the whole idea to backfire. Develop a game for a year or two on the free package, then subscribe for a month or two closer to release.

In the end YYG makes $20 over two years. Whereas the same dev would have been happy to drop a couple of hundred on the perma license.

Anyway time will tell.

Doesn’t really affect me, I’m happy with the perma license. I can’t imagine any ground-breaking changes that would make me wish I was on a subscription.
 

JeffJ

Member
The problem is that while this subscription model definitely makes more sense for Yoyo and Opera, there isn't enough incentive for the consumers to actually use it. Game Maker Studio's biggest selling point is being the easiest to use engine, a role which seems to be slowly getting usurped by Godot
I don't agree with the premise. Yes, that is some of GMS appeal, but it is just as much the relatively ease of multi-platform support for a very good selection of platforms.
Yes, Godot is incredibly easy to use (especially if you're already a seasoned GML developer), and honestly, I see it as GMS most direct and comparable competitor. They do a lot of things very, very well. But console support sure isn't one of them - it is laughable at best, and nonexistent at worst. As someone who has given Godot a serious try, and liked what I saw, but who also develops commercially, my conclusion was that Godot just isn't a serious alternative until / if they get their console support together. If they ever do, then they would make a very compelling case for me to move platform, but for now, this is one major ace YYG has over them (and many similar competitors). This in my perception also makes a stronger case for why YYG should be pivoting to cater to more commercially focused developers, since Godot right now seems to occupy more the hobbyist space that GMS once did.

That's a good point. It's certainly bizarre that Game Maker Studio doesn't even have a proper bug tracker anymore (among the other issues I've mentioned before). You'd think a subscription model would be a good justification to improve on those weak points now that Yoyo has a more reliable source of income, but
I completely agree with this. I remember when they let users report directly to Mantis. Then they weeded out most people's access and reserved only for developers making consistent quality reports, and then ultimately removed our access altogether. I understand that they did it because many people made really bad reports, so instead they had the cheaper QA staff sort of "vet" reports before greenlighting them further into the actual mantis system for the more expensive tech staff. I get it, but it also introduced another layer between "us" and "them", which has negatively affected me more than once (which is something I feel extra because I was one of the last non-YYG developers who had access to mantis before they removed it completely - the difference in response quality now is huge).
One area where I strongly dislike YYGS way of operating is how they consistently treat many of their users as kids. From the closed access to making reports to design decisions that are rooted in a belief that their users are too stupid (see file system sandbox and many more for reference). Especially if they are truly seeking to cater to a more serious audience. And also... Transparency. We lost it when Playtech took over, and we still haven't had much back. It's better now, but not by much. Again, remembering the time from before Playtech, the difference is stark.

I remember back when people jumped up and down about the Console exporters being around $1000 for one year. Even then, Mike and Russell were advising people to only subscribe when it’s coming near to time to release. They said it was silly to pay $1000 for five years (over the life of dev for said console game) and to subscribe when closer to release.

I fear the same might apply here, causing the whole idea to backfire. Develop a game for a year or two on the free package, then subscribe for a month or two closer to release.

In the end YYG makes $20 over two years. Whereas the same dev would have been happy to drop a couple of hundred on the perma license.
I have to believe that this is accounted for as part of their business strategy. I don't think they expect the majority of subscribers, be they indie or enterprise, to be fully subscribed 12 out of 12 months. Some will, but I have to believe they expect that most will try to go for only subbing the months they need.
Not to mention that, as someone who's been through the certification process on several different console eco systems, I know firsthand how that process can easily drag out, and 2 months sub could quickly turn into 4, for example.
 

Vertette

Member
I don't agree with the premise. Yes, that is some of GMS appeal, but it is just as much the relatively ease of multi-platform support for a very good selection of platforms.
That is a good selling point, but not the biggest one for GMS' target audience I imagine. For hobbyists/indies, releasing a game on just one platform is a huge ordeal.
Yes, Godot is incredibly easy to use (especially if you're already a seasoned GML developer), and honestly, I see it as GMS most direct and comparable competitor. They do a lot of things very, very well. But console support sure isn't one of them - it is laughable at best, and nonexistent at worst. As someone who has given Godot a serious try, and liked what I saw, but who also develops commercially, my conclusion was that Godot just isn't a serious alternative until / if they get their console support together.
Oh I absolutely agree, which is the biggest reason why I haven't bothered with Godot ye. The problem is that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft are understandably very reluctant to make their SDKs open source. Godot is stuck for the foreseeable future between having to give up its open source license to obtain proper console support, or having to stay PC/web/mobile only. If they did the former, they'd have to abandon a lot of their current audience in the hopes that enough new people will stick around, which is a large gamble.

That said, I don't think that most GMS customers care that much about a lack of proper console support. Nobody who I've spoken to who made the switch to Godot seemed to, in any case.
This in my perception also makes a stronger case for why YYG should be pivoting to cater to more commercially focused developers, since Godot right now seems to occupy more the hobbyist space that GMS once did.
That would make the most sense, but as sorry as I am to say it I just don't see it ever happening. The higher ups in the AAA industry would gladly agree to a subscription model if it ends up cheaper for them than having to pay royalties, but the only way you're gonna convince a professional developer to stick with your engine is if it's actually competitive. If the updates over the last few years are any indication then it's clear Yoyo is trying to make GMS a (relatively) more competitive engine, but it's still far away from being as flexible and powerful as Unity and UE are. Plus professional devs would absolutely not accept how lousy the exports, support and bug tracking are.
 

Stra

Member
"Unity went public in September 2020, and reported a record year boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic, despite losses. The company's IPO filing, released last summer, revealed that it's not actually profitable, with execs then reporting that profitability was expected by 2023."

Not actually profitable and we're talking about Unity, the engine with by far the most customers.

Now imagine GMS2.
 

Vertette

Member
"Unity went public in September 2020, and reported a record year boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic, despite losses. The company's IPO filing, released last summer, revealed that it's not actually profitable, with execs then reporting that profitability was expected by 2023."

Not actually profitable and we're talking about Unity, the engine with by far the most customers.
"Unity Technologies published its financial results for Q2 2021, reporting a 48% increase in revenue year-on-year, reaching $273.6 million. But GAAP loss from operations was still high, at $149.2 million, representing 55% of revenue."

Unity also gets paid grants by numerous companies including Nintendo. Doesn't sound that unprofitable to me.
 

Ricardo

Member
Reinstalling doesn't fix the issue. YoYo needs to fix the issue. My systems are clean.View attachment 44102

The persistent error when running on MacOS M1 Monterey compiled as YYC:
Code:
/bin/bash DONE (0)
/bin/bash -c "cd ~ && open -n -a /Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app --args -debugoutput \"/Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/debug.log\" -output \"/Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/debug.log\" -runTest"
The application /Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app cannot be opened for an unexpected reason, error=Error Domain=NSCocoaErrorDomain Code=260 "The file “TEST003.app” couldn’t be opened because there is no such file." UserInfo={NSURL=file:///Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app, NSFilePath=/Users/jason/gamemakerstudio2/GMS2MAC/TEST003/TEST003.app, NSUnderlyingError=0x7fb91a00b610 {Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=2 "No such file or directory"}}

/bin/bash exited with non-zero status (1)

elapsed time 00:00:15.5804960s for command "/Library/Frameworks/Mono.framework/Versions/Current/Commands/mono" /Users/Shared/GameMakerStudio2/Cache/runtimes/runtime-2.3.6.464/bin/Igor.exe -j=8 -options="/private/tmp/PKInstallSandbox.Tq1odY/GameMakerStudio2/GMS2TEMP/build.bff" -v -- Mac Run started at 11/02/2021 23:39:26
FAILED: Run Program Complete
Oh, I think this happens to me too, but I never bothered at all as long as the project is created on Xcode. My understanding is that If you’re using YYC on Mac you are basically forced to proceed through Xcode anyways to perform the final tweaks, add the hardened runtime, make the package, codesign, notarize etc.
 
Last edited:

Stra

Member
"Unity Technologies published its financial results for Q2 2021, reporting a 48% increase in revenue year-on-year, reaching $273.6 million. But GAAP loss from operations was still high, at $149.2 million, representing 55% of revenue."

Unity also gets paid grants by numerous companies including Nintendo. Doesn't sound that unprofitable to me.
With all due respect, their IPO filing has all the numbers, their executives stated they AIM to be profitable by 2023, it is irrelevant how does that "sound" to you. They have been in the red practically forever and still are. Do you even know what that "$149.2 m" that you quoted represents?

Try these:

Their revenue went up substantially? Thank god! But so did their losses. I HOPE, FINGERS CROSSED, they steer it to actual profitability in 2023.

And I am hoping for the same for Yoyo/Opera.
 

Vertette

Member
With all due respect, their IPO filing has all the numbers, their executives stated they AIM to be profitable by 2023, it is irrelevant how does that "sound" to you. They have been in the red practically forever and still are. Do you even know what that "$149.2 m" that you quoted represents?

Try these:

Their revenue went up substantially? Thank god! But so did their losses. I HOPE, FINGERS CROSSED, they steer it to actual profitability in 2023.

And I am hoping for the same for Yoyo/Opera.
You got me there. Admittedly I'm in game development, not in finances. If I were, I wouldn't need to worry about a measly subscription model cost.

That does put into perspective what a bad position Yoyo is in though concerning this whole "making profit" thing. I certainly don't envy them.
 

Xennroth

Member
...we can see that many users still uses 1.4 version...
i personally used 1.4 for a long time after gms2 was released, not because of the price but the reason was that i tested gms2 and i hated the new "zoomin-zoomout-pan-UI-workspace"... installed gms2 but changed back to 1.4 the same day.

then i decided to give gms2 a go, and i liked all the other updates, but i still hate the "zoomin-out-workspace", trying to avoid using it as much as possible :D a good old tab based ui is what i prefer, clear and simple.
 

gkri

Member
Download free version of GMS2. Build game for free with the game engine. "Buy" a subscription. Export project. Cancel subscription and do a charge back. Free game export.
This is a guaranteed failure!!! Especially with YYC and HTML5 exports. Those exports are "picky" and you should build your projects with them very often throughout the duration of the development. If you develop the whole project using only test builds, when the time come to make the final build with the above mentioned exports, it is very possible to encounter issues that are either untraceable or issues that might force you to rewrite certain parts of your code. Either cases are BIG hassles, time consuming and risky...
 

Posh Indie

That Guy
Glad to see official responses.

@rwkay: Thank you for the clarifications!
@iampremo: I don't know you yet, so, "Hi! Nice to meet you!"

I do have a question that the Filters and Effects (Coupled with the new Inspectors) brings to my attention: I see that Filters and Effects expose parameters to the IDE (For configuration of them). As we should be able to write our own Filters and Effects in the future (Even though I imagine it will be a lot easier to just auto-expose those parameters or flag them for exposure), I am curious if there is any chance of IDE extension capabilities in the future as well (eg. We can write our own inspectors/windows that the IDE can use). Basically, any chance we could get access to extending the IDE (Not to compare... but think how Unity does it. That is one feature of Unity that I absolutely love.)

The exporting of projects as templates is pretty neat. I used to manually do something similar, but this makes it a bit cleaner which is nice.

In terms of what could be done to stop subscription canceling abuse: Could always put people on "subscription time out" if they have a track history of subscription canceling. If they keep doing it, they get put into a 3 month "subscription time out" to discourage the practice, effectively saying, "Sure, you can do it, but I hope your customers stay happy with you when there's an enforced 3 month window with no support." At that point, if customers complain you can't deflect blame to YoYo Games. They didn't tell you how to run your shop.

In terms of charge back... If you charge back on Sony, they just drop you as a customer. Remember that, haha.
 
Last edited:

Jason C.

Member
Oh, I think this happens to me too, but I never bothered at all as long as the project is created on Xcode. My understanding is that If you’re using YYC on Mac you are basically forced to proceed through Xcode anyways to perform the final tweaks, add the hardened runtime, make the package, codesign, notarize etc.
Appreciate the reply, but this is new, YYC worked before (and it still works on Windows). Also, it is very nice to have all the backend work done in the GM2 editor without having to jump in Xcode to compile and run. That convenience (of running compiled, not virtualized) improves development and testing time.
 

rwkay

YoYo Games Staff
YYG Staff
Thank you for all your feedback and concerns in this thread. As we’ve stated before we are listening to everything and we’re happy to say that we’ll be including the subscription feature for perpetual licence holders.

We initially wanted this delay to make our subscription more compelling but we understand that our loyal users are the ones that want access to all the latest features.

Features and Effects will be enabled for all paid users. We have made this change now, simply log out and in again to GameMaker and you will be able to access the feature.

Russell
 

JeffJ

Member
Wow, that's a very cool move. Again, not personally affected either way, but it is super inspiring to see such a swift change of direction based on the user input. Kudos, well done, great job. Not really much else to say about that! 👍

...

Now, still no response in regards to stability? 😆
 

Cpaz

Member
As most have said, backtracking on filters and effects being sub only was not only incredible, but also unexpected.

I need to take a proper look at them now. They might be more useful than I initially thought.

Now, still no response in regards to stability? 😆
Honestly, I'm not sure what they could say. They recently expanded their team by a sizable degree and have been only recently pushing for monthly releases.

Which aside from a few hiccups that resulted in hot fixes, the releases have been almost entirely stable for me personally. But maybe there are some quirks I'm just not aware of.

I do think that true stability will come with time as the new members of the team properly come come to grips with everything.


..And then maybe, just maybe, we'll finally be able to press enter to trigger the docked global search (which has apparently been an issue since launch?)

I can dream, at least.
 
Top