Business needs money, even ours, that's the rule :p, unless the virus opens a new capitalism era, but I doubt it will.Well, just random thoughts for the moment, just saying that F3 might not get as many free updates as F2.5.
Business needs money, even ours, that's the rule :p, unless the virus opens a new capitalism era, but I doubt it will.
I thought the master plan was to write a game that would go viral and then to buy / support Clickteam from the proceeds of that...
I'd do it - but you know, people will happily steal my games, they just won't pay for them. (I think Clickteam might have a similar problem.) Oh well, I'll start saving.
That's a solution too
Sorry for that one, still runs awesome thoOriginally Posted by Yves
especially considering the Switch has a 1.02 GHZ CPU
I think the hands on approach to push F3 components and test them on real console market products is the best QA you can get for a game engine in development.
I'll be happy to pay for updates. I don't work for free, so I don't want that CT do different.
Uh! Come on, Clickteam! We're anxious for Fusion 3 :-)
I like to play a mental game sometimes where I try and predict which will be released first: Half Life 3, Fusion 3, or Spryke. I'm never sure.
Ooh - glad to hear you took the plunge and got it, and are enjoying it!Of course 2.5+ is way cooler than I thought it would be and I've only just briefly played around with it. You should've named it Fusion 3 undercover.
I've been on 2.5+ since Day 1 and it's a serious game changer.
Uses 1/5 the RAM of 2.5.
Child events are incredible.
Microsecond timer is godlike.
I could go on but like, damn, it's impressive.
If and when we get Fusion 3, I hope the business model makes sense. Like I certainly wouldn't mind subscribing to individual modules like multiplayer/social backend, GIT/SVN integration, and learning resources. Or even paying a subscription cost for the engine itself, as long as it makes sense in the context of 2.5's costs. I think Unity does a lot right in this regard, particularly with the structured setup, so finding the right balance while being able to attract as many customers as possible at a reasonably priced high tier is the key. But charging just for patches seems disingenuous. Once I've spent a decent chunk of money on a product, I'd kinda like to not have to pay more for expect bug fixes.
Plus a subscription model would give users the opportunity to continue to upgrade their engine without having to pay premiums. So if they're already paying like $15/$20 a month, then you can more easily turn Fusion into a living engine, rather than keeping it mostly static for several years while new features get held off.
I haven't been too long on the paid version. I Tried the free for more than a year until I outgrew it. I dislike subscription pricing. A major reason I chose Fusion over other engines was that I can pay pay once; then use as long as I need. If I take a break from programming; I don't feel bad that I'm paying for something I'm not using. Please don't go to a subscription service.
Business needs money, even ours, that's the rule :p, unless the virus opens a new capitalism era, but I doubt it will.LOL
I think the Fusion 2.5+ DLC was a wise move. Not everyone needs it, but those who need are happy to pay. People don't sit at a restaurant and complain about the prices, but for some reason are quick to complain about software update, even if there are many free patches before that. I'd be happy to see more DLC's coming out that enhances the Fusion core features like 2.5+ did, like.. maybe... a TEXT PRO DLC. wink wink
I'm on board with payable upgrades. Updates are fixes for a current paid version and should be free. New features and new gadgets to me would be an upgrade, like from 2.5 to 2.5+. Subscription seem to fail and have been attempted by other large companies. Pay for what is wanted like Clickteam has formulated.
Posting Permissions
