Are you able to add a feature to check for updates? I found myself 6 versions behind 
@foodlord Already done 
Since beta 16, an auto-updater feature will let you know when a new version is available, and downloaded in the background. You then just have to restart the app to have the latest version 
Material UI theming is still quite flexible, lots of things can be changed but you have to dig into the source code (see github.com/mui-org/material-ui/ … uiTheme.js for the list of all theming variables).
Note that theming will change in the upcoming new version of material-ui, so I prefer not to spent too much time on this. 
The text was translated with online translator from Russian.
Hello. Don’t know how else to contact so I wrote the first populous topic. I just downloaded your program, so that it does not require programming. However, I was interested in the possibility of importing games on the Android platform. But as I hope you know Intel XDK ceased to be supported. In this regard, I am very interested in how else you can import the game I’m going to create in your constructor ?
In case you mean to export to mobile, you can use the GD build service:
wiki.compilgames.net/doku.php/gd … id_and_ios
You can also use PhoneGap and Cocoon.
Спасибо. Активного развития вашему проекту.
If GD5 Native is receiving networking I would gladly pay a monthly fee for that, if not I am not so sure. I would still support it however was required, one time payment or such. I enjoy the software and think the dev deserves something for his efforts.
On another note is the middle mouse button making a return to scroll the scene that was quite handy and effiecient.
Thanks.
Yes I need to agree on that the build service on it own is not enough to make many people subscribe unless it offer better features than competitors like PhoneGap and Cocoon. The fact it works with a single click is nice but definitely need more features.
My recommendation would be:
–the fact it is strongly tight up with GD could make it possible to delivery native features like reading sensors, access camera…etc more simple than with other similar services.
–make one click game hosting part of the monthly service, no free hosting or games would be hosted for free only for 24 hours or less
–add remote preview for mobile that allow you not only preview the game but use mobile features during the preview like reading sensors.
–networking would be nice especially if a multiplayer server would be included so we could develop and share multiplayer games using GD multiplayer service but maybe it would be too expensive to maintain, alternative option could be to offer playerIO integration. It is allow you to build multiplayer games without need to have your own server. Would be nice to have it integrated with GD so we could easily make our GD games communicate with our playerIO hosting server that would be really nice. playerio.com/
I definitely like the sound of that, I can agree to almost any payment model, as long as, which has been already stated, what premium content will we receive.
I think there is a good opportunity to get more users, as there is dissention in the ranks of construct over there new model of browser only, yearly subscription, pure html5, they are looking at Fusion 3, but that hasn’t come to fruition yet. I think new users could come this way with an attractive pay model, as long as the features are there.
Me personally, I have no use for mobile unless it’s for my kids tablets for fun. I want something quick to prototype and put together for desktop.
I am looking forward to whatever the future brings.
I would throw this up on steam early access and see what happens if money starts to roll in, make the features people want, and then more people will come, if it does not work…leave it as a open source unfinished project. I enjoy this product but a lone dev, with no income from this endeavor is rough. I would get the mobile exporting perfect, add premium features to native and put it on steam, then roll in the digital dollars…have an imagination .
Yes, I was also suggesting to 4ian to setup a business model around GD but 4ian prefer to keep it free and open… Also, selling few copies would not necessarily help the development. To offer paid services and customer support could be also an option.
I only bring this up because the notion of splash GD screens has not been brought up here.
Having a free version with a 2-5 second GD splash screen at startup (quit is useless on mobile devices),
and a Paid version with no splash is a quick, easily obtained way to kickstart a business model.
It works across all platforms, and if you are serious as a developer using GD
you will happily pay for the fee to remove the splash screen before you release to the stores.
Just my two cents worth.
MobileNoob
Well I agree something should be done, but I disagree that selling some copies wouldn’t help, exposure always helps, and as long as there is experienced members willing to help out I believe it would be very helpful.
Someone making a game and showing the splash on something like steam would be incredibly helpful, and if they look on steam and the program is there, winning!
Even set up a Patreon and have a 3$/month, 5$/month, 8$/month options with different rewards…
Payment on a removal of splash is a great idea, at this point anything is.
Personally, I don’t see a problem with displaying the logo of the tools I was using to make a game, in-fact in my opinion if liked the tools you have been using you are going to display their logo on a splash screen anyway.
What I meant by saying “selling few copies would not necessarily help development” is that, if it does not cover the bills, 4ian has no choice but do a full time job and regardless how much money GD going to make, it is going to be developed only in spare time except in case the money GD would be making is enough to hire someone to add 1 or 2 things to GD but it won’t be much for sure if the money is not enough to help 4ian develop GD in full time.
But it is totally up to 4ian and I believe he made the decision already to keep GD free and try monthly subscription for additional features. I think it could work but the build service on it own in it current state, even if additional platforms added in the future may not going to be enough in my opinion to keep someone subscribed each month.
I don’t think that a monthly subscription or payed version of GD would do us any good. Before 4ian made GD open source he already tried to sell licenses which didn’t really work out (I suppose). The community is already very tiny and consists of 99% hobbyists. There are also lots of competitors on the market.
One thing I could think of would be finding sponsors who’s logos get shown on the splash screen of the IDE itself. Similar to the way Godot handles it.
But I think we are running off topic here since the thread is about the new GD5 Beta.
GD need to be developed actively in first place and the key to being developed is money. Of course 4ian can hope for contributions and donations all day long but in case the money is not enough to pay bills, GD won’t be developed. It is as simple as that 
Thanks guys for thinking about any viable business model
No, I never tried to sell licenses of GDevelop, it was always free.
I am trying to setup a business model But I’d like to see how to do it while keeping it open-source.
Here are the existing alternatives:
- Patreon is a nice idea but not sure if enough people would support the Patreon.
- Splash screens inside games is another idea.
- I was also thinking of having GDevelop free, but have splash screens inside the IDE remembering you from time to time to buy the full license/get a subscription for an unlimited use (like Sublime Text). It’s a bit like the old “shareware” way of distributing paid software.
- Fully paid software with a one time payment
- Freemium with some paid options (which is the case for the one-click Android export)
- Free web version/paid desktop or something like this.
That’s another way to improve the monthly service too!
I’m still thinking about all of this - I try hard to keep GD open-source, with a useful free version, and a fair cheap paid option for users using it a lot.
What you all think of “splash screens inside the IDE remembering you from time to time to buy the full license/get a subscription”? The splash screen could remember you to buy GD every 3 times after saving or launching the software.
Regarding the desktop version, I think the best would be to have a free version with less features and a pro version with more features.
The free version would display a message time to time to remind people to buy the pro version for more features like SublimeText.
If you think, you could also keep the free version open source and the pro version closed (may allow access to source of the pro version only if you own the pro license).
You could also consider to make every point release like 5.0,6.0,7.0 require a new license.
Pro features could be:
-dynamic lighting
-fluid physics simulation
-spriter/spine support
-built-in paint tool
-access to online services for a year maybe?
-Javascript event as a pro feature maybe?
-networking, I’m strongly recommend PlayerIO integration, I’m currently experimenting with it and it is relatively easy to setup with GDevelop to send and receive messages but it a bit messy because GD put everything in to the code0.js and need to edit the code after export. It would be nice to have a few events to communicate with a PlayerIO server. It really fun and it also got a free plan.
-in-game purchase: PlayerIO also provide a virtual currency system that allow us to sell virtual items in our games and also coins that players can use to buy items in-game. I haven’t tried yet, but it is definitely something I’m looking forward to.
Also would like to suggest if/when you decide to launch a paid version but you still have a full time job, consider to use any money comes from GD to hire someone to develop few things even if just small bits because the key is active development. If GD is not developed actively, not up to date and missing important features (basic features I should say), people will stop using it. If you spend all the money comes from GD on the development even if it means you make no profit for a while it is going to help to grow GD and may allow you at some point in the future to make GD your full time job.
Regarding the web version, I would personally keep it as a “playground” for now. It would include ALL the features, including the pro for FREE but can not export games, only play around and try things, run quick tests. This is what I use it for most of the time. Many times it faster to run the web version, throw some objects in , add the events than launch the desktop version and create a new project, add the images, create the sprites…etc 
It would be also a nice and easy way to let people try the Pro features for free.
An other option could be is to keep GD completely free and open as it is now but offer premium services such as:
-developing complete games
-developing new features
-optimizing/improving game logic
-in-game bug fixing
-implementing in-game features…etc
People and companies need to send an email, describe what kind of service they require and you would send a quote mentioning how much it cost and when you have the time to do it. If they agree, sign a contract, get paid up front and you can decide to do it your self or hire someone to do it while you are working on something else. The nice thing about it you don’t need to agree to anything that you don’t have the time to do or can not be done in GDevelop and for the money you could charge people for every hour. For example for things like fixing bugs and implementing features in game people need to book your time and in case it was not enough they can decide to book additional time. Obviously you would return all the job done so far with full documentation included… The down side though, probably not many studios using GD so I don’t think you could expect lot of contracted jobs but it would be also a possibility that you can consider to try even instead or together with a paid version.
I wish you good luck.
I think that before doing any pro versions or anything, 4ian should try Patreon and see how it’ll work out for him (obviously advertising it everywhere he can, on every GD-related channel and giving it good few months to a year to see how viable it is). You don’t know if something will work out for you until you try it.
@ddabrahim: There are so many game creation tools with paid versions that adding GD to the mix would only destroy it. Let see, in similar market we have Game Maker (the elephant in the room, so we might just as well put it to rest right now), Clickteam Fusion, Engine 001, Construct 2, Stencyl…
Adding GD to the mix would only remove any advantage it has over above due to it being free and open-source. Not to mention many indie devs simply don’t even know about GD to begin with (seriously, some organized campaign on gamedev forums like TIG or itchio forums would be in order, maybe even a GD jam).
The better way is to either foster a healthy donation system, where e.g. Patreon supporters in certain tier could request a feature with the guarantee it’d be implemented at some point, or go into services such as version control tailored to GD, backup service (or better yet, ability to host your project in the cloud for certain fee so you can work on it from any computer that has GD on it), build service or a game hosting service (last two seem to be already there).
We really need a “click” type of program that is available to everyone, no matter if they make millions or not.
Well, yes it is a difficult to say if would it work for GD or not, but if you think about it most paid tools out there got no truly free version only trials and demos. GD can be different, keep the free version only offer a paid one too with more features. Also, the features I mentioned for a Pro version would probably never make it in to GD if it completely free and developed only in spare time.
From what I see Patreon works for most people if they are dedicated to the job they are doing and do it in full time so they can guarantee people get what they ask for. 4ian never managed to do that because GD always been developed in spare time and it is unlikely to change without making enough money from donations but it is hard to make enough money without being dedicated in full time… It certainly not easy to achieve.
At least this is the way I see it but it a decision that 4ian need to make.
What do you mean? Dynamic lighting is already part of GD. The fact that it’s native-only doesn’t change this.
Also fluid simulation could be faked reasonably well with a lot of small circular Box2d rigid bodies (think of each such ball as a “drop”). In fact, many 2D fluid engines do just that, only thing changing is how it is being drawn (they’re using 2d equivalent of metaballs that merge together if they’re close enough).
As for networking, it’s best to leave it to the devs, providing ability to call REST APIs on the web and create raw TCP/UDP sockets. This way, things like PlayerIO could be still integrated but it wouldn’t be tied to any single service. With enough knowledge user could even make its own server software and then call it over TCP/UDP.
As you said, the paid engines are dime in a dozens and making GD yet another one would be counter-productive.
I see a contradiction here. “Offering paid version, but with more features” would essentially make free GD a demo, because the definition of a demo is a version with less features/content (in case of games) than paid version.
Again, you can’t know whether patreon would work for GD or not until you’ll try it. And not just make it and then forget, but do everything you can to promote the patreon, both within GD and on all social channels. If after a year or so it doesn’t bring any promising growth then you may call it off.
Other thing, as I’ve said is to go into services like custom networking, game hosting, version control for GD projects, and backup services/having projects in the cloud and as such available from every machine with GD on it.
The part about networking may seem to be contradictory with “making networking support as open as possible” I’ve mentioned earlier, but in reality it’s not. User wouldn’t be forced into GD networking if he or she wouldn’t want to, but it would be more convenient to use and as such more desirable.
The thing is to not paywalling certain features and as such making people feel forced to buy paid GD if they want to make a game that requires a specific feature to be available (for example, good luck making a horror game without dynamic lighting), but to make services that are by no means a necessity, but so desirable that people will pay for it anyway.
In short the direction of the business model shouldn’t be “if you want to make it, you have to buy it” but instead “the service we offer aren’t necessary to make your dream game, but they’re so convenient and useful that you’ll buy them anyway.”
Not to mention that services would be more sustainable as they’d be subscriptions instead of a flat fee one would pay for a “GD Pro”.