I can totally see that lite versions would decrease sales, but most people do it the way Penguin Glide was done in that you only get access to a few levels which gives the customer a chance to make sure your app is polished enough to earn the .99. I had a few people that work for me try out this on Penguin Glide and they totally bought the full copy after playing the intro free levels, and let me insure you they are pretty diverse in their interests haha!
I may be in the minority but when I have the ability to increase my knowledge and efficiency through purchasing tutorial based templates from other customers it is difficult to try and learn on my own, especially when I know this could effect my ability to generate revenue and compete mor effectively in the market. This not only to say that everyone thinks like I do, but I it has been mentioned to me offline by more than one GS user that people make more off of templates than actual apps/games with in our community. When this is added to advanced access for said template sellers I think it really cripples the creative process, and supports the sentiments that these people have expressed to me. Making money on templates and tutorials is one thing, but having advanced access to do so is were I have to say something about fairness.
tenrdrmerMember, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-ChefPosts: 9,934
edited January 2012
Hey guys, I don't have a bunch of time so I'll say this cause my game is one being referenced as getting early access.
IAP is a feature that can only be fully 100% tested in a live app. Sure we ca sandbox the hell out of it but they would have been releasing an untested feature if there were not a few trial runs.
So In this particular case GameSalad would have been doing a disservice by releasing with out multiple real world tests.
Also sorry f some already said that I didn't have time to read the whole thread.
That's why they made and released their internal title? No respectable business model would depend on volunteer testing to vet software roll outs, so I see what you're saying but respectfully disagree. The update you received and thus built your release was more than likely tested way before it even became an alpha build multiple times by professional QA testers. Volunteer testers are used as a control group of the consumer base, not app consumers but GS customers. Allowing customers to get paid before others as a result of a volunteer testing hierarchy is just plain unfair in my opinion.
SlickZeroHouston, TexasMember, Sous ChefPosts: 2,870
edited January 2012
I don't think it's fair to say that just because someones opinion doesn't match with another, that they are unfamiliar with the development process. The development process is different for each company. I personally am very familiar with development processes, and they have been different for each client/company I have worked for. I just may not be familiar with the particular development process that another has learned, and has a strong opinion about, and thinks that their process the only way to go about it.
Advanced access is common across all fields in the tech area. How often do you see howto books releAsed the same time a product is out? Or screen protectors / cases ? Plus, if your talking about tshirtbooth having the template available for sale the day it comes out, if he does anything like he has done in the past, he will also have a free, detailed, YouTube video out at the same time walking you through the new feature and how to use it. That takes up a substantial amount of time to put together, for free, and he has been doing it for the past 3 years. A majority of the YouTube tutorial videos out there are his.
That's why they made and released their internal title? No respectable business model would depend on volunteer testing to vet software roll outs, so I see what you're saying but respectfully disagree. The update you received and thus built your release was more than likely tested way before it even became an alpha build multiple times by professional QA testers. Volunteer testers are used as a control group of the consumer base, not app consumers but GS customers. Allowing customers to get paid before others as a result of a volunteer testing hierarchy is just plain unfair in my opinion.</code
People develop so many different ways using gamesalad it's crazy. There is no standards of code, or how to develop certain functions. Every single time a release comes out, people scream bloody murder that their products broke.
Can you imagine the uproar if iAP wasa released with only a single test application? There would be mutiny. There are still going to be a ton of posts saying that it doesn't work for people, but at least we have multiple examples from multiple people with different ways of programming showing it works.
Trust me, they might have inapp purchase a few days or a week ahead of you, but the rest of the world has had it for a lot longer. You ain't missing out.
I apologize if you felt I was suggesting the you personally were not aware of development processes, but let us also be clear in the fact that we are talking about software development cycles specifically. This is executed by Software Engineers and done so based on the understood best practices taught to them during their pursuit of a degree in the field. I am not personally a Software Engineer but have had them reporting to me in previous positions so I am pretty familiar with industry driven and accepted "Best Practices". I do not think my opinion is the only one here or is the best, I just feel that I do not have a fair advantage and wanted to express my opinion to the community and GS.
@ Jon
You touch on a very interesting topic, if you were in business as a case manufacturer and found out someone had advanced knowledge of a new release spec that would put them weeks ahead of your production would you not feel the need to speak up? And I do appreciate TSB and his tutorials, they originally led me to GS. However, now that I am a peer I can see how powerful it is for him to have advanced access to upcoming releases thus giving him a huge competitive edge. His videos also give him free advertising for his business, so let us speak about it for what it truly is which is a very effective business model. Just this week I saw him offer a template before giving free help, after another member offered help he did come back and talk a little about the problem which was helpful, but he offered a paid service first. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, but I want us to be honest about what we are talking about which is the ability to make money.
Having enjoyed this conversation … my empathy is always with the rights of us members … time to bury the bone;
and state that I agree with @jonmulcahy! … iAP is a bad idea … just another attempt to bilk the public … if a game is promoted as free, but requires spending money to play/complete the game, then you haven't download a game; you have downloaded junk … and you might as well go sit on a stick, cause you are a (I'll be nice) lollipop.
iAds I like, if they give me a game that is free … and, I do make a conscientious effort to click on the ads!
Lite version, I like … cause then I'll know if I want to spend money.
if the iAP is in a completely playable game and offers purchase of continuing episodes … that I don't mind because I can make or not make the purchase.
so what if the big guys are giving their things away; then making users pay to actually play … the public isn't gonna fall for that ruse for very long.
I personally want to download all those crippled games and post very,very negative reviews.
There are deep rooted issues here when it comes to testing.
Let it be known that I'm speaking from first hand experience and am also not under a NDA of any kind with GS, nor would I be disclosing anything that would be covered by a NDA. That's not professional and that's not my style. I am hesitant to type this out, but reading everything here is making my innards spin.
As of about the third quarter of last year, the way testing was done in house at GS via QA was an automatic process. As it was explained to me, the new builds go through thousands of tests to ensure quality. That is of course to be expected because you can get through a ton of different scenarios extremely quickly through scripts, and new scripts can be added at any time. This is standard in program testing. The internal game team will no doubt find some issues and pre release beta testers find some issues as well. One major problem I saw, which I hope has been resolved by now, is that ALMOST NO ONE at GameSalad actually used the software on their own or had anything more than a basic understanding of the user development process. This shocked me when I encountered this. Now, they did tell me that they were hoping to bring someone in to train other members of the GS team on how the software works, but this was still a huge red flag for me. I also heard that one of the reasons that bugs get through is that most pre release beta testers spend the majority of their testing time on the apps they've already built, trying to get them ready for the next update and once things work out, they usually stop. If they find a bug in that process, then it's a good thing, but there are a million other possibilities left out. I can't speak to how much truth there is in that statement as I am not a pre release beta tester, this is just what I was told. Even if this were true, I can't wag a single finger at any pre release beta tester for their actions since they aren't getting paid and because it's really GameSalad's responsibility to ensure the highest quality testing occurs. From what I saw with my own eyes, there were gaping holes in the kind of quality assurance a product like GS requires. GameSalad is filled with highly intelligent people who do a great job at what they know, without a doubt, and I believe fully that they have the best of intentions with their releases, but nothing would beat a full time in house tester that was working on projects not intended for release. Just a person who is highly familiarized with GameSalad user development making simple and complex projects, trying out anything and everything they could from every angle to see what comes up in real world scenarios. I couldn't imagine something like the "otherwise" bug getting through human testing like that. This would also help remove a lot of the "grey area" bugs that require advanced knowledge of GS Creator to overcome. For example, timing issues which require a very short timer to ensure a process goes through as intended by the user. This is frustrating to new users, and is unclear how to resolve unless you've experienced it and overcome it on your own, or were lucky enough to have found someone who ran into the same issue as you and resolved it on their own. The result would be a tighter experience for the users in a shorter period of time.
Beta testing is about playing normal and playing weird. Since GS has so many variables to it, and there are so many styles of development possible, the "playing weird" is way more important than it would be for a product like photoshop. Human brains can play weirded than any scripts, and when there isn't money on the line for finished products, there is no reason to hold back.
As I said, this was as of about the third quarter of last year as I experienced with my own eyes, and it's completely possible that this is no longer how things are run over at GS HQ.
Now as to my opinion on allowing pre release beta testers to release new features onto the market: I don't think it's a good idea at all. I understand the idea of rewarding your testers, but this is not a good way of going about it. Let me explain my reasoning.
SSS said "They do this testing on a purely voluntary basis, and for this they were allowed to submit games with this thoroughly tested feature (tested by both our internal teams and these voluntary testers) only a short time before it's official release"
From this statement it sure sounds like GS is confident that IAP is working as it should. I can't imagine you'd allow your trusted testers to release something that would potentially tarnish their reputation had the feature not worked properly. At this point of confidence, you should have released it to the rest of the paying community. The feeling I get from reading this is not that the pre release beta testers get a head start, rather that we (paying users) are being held back from being able to implement IAP.
Let me repeat that. I don't feel that the pre release beta testers are getting a head start here. I feel the rest of us are being held back from using a "thoroughly tested feature."
Leave the live testing to the actual GS Internals. I sympathize both sides. Non GS employee testers will have a advantage to be able to create and sell pre-released templates. That should be the advantage, and nothing more. Non GS employees who are volunteering their time to test new release updates shouldnt be allowed to publish anything cr to the store until after the release is officially public. They however can create templates for sale that will speed up other developers understanding on how to use new said release features.
Im refering to GS volunteers. Not internal game releases, released by GS itself.
Volunteers Advantage: Making Videos and Templates that will be needed minutes after a new update release.
Volunteers Not allowed: To create and early publish products that have features not accessible to all customers of GS.
GS proved that it doesnt need volunteer publishing to do live testing. They have their own internally created games to test live in the Apple/Android Markets. Leave that to GS Internal. Volunteers... get a headstart on creating teaching content for sale.
This is my opinion based on fairness. Nothing more.
Woah , Thank you "Speech" feature in lion , there is no way i could read all of this , Hmm i don't know.. i agree with both sides arguments , personally its not bothering me that some users where able to publish with the new build , but i can understand the fact that it will disturb some members.
Jeffnichols brought up some good points .
Also i see many of you say that IAP will be the same as IAD and its crap and not worth it , well.. i disagree , i think IAP can make a significant change to many games, if you use it the right way Im not talking about games that requires spending money to complete the game , but the ability to give the user a choice of making purchases to advance faster in the game is very reasonable imo .
Actually my experience while interviewing with GS was extremely positive, there were just some things that I noticed which I would consider problematic at the time. I got a great view at the inner workings of the company and I'm happy to say honestly that it is populated with very intelligent and nice people. Although we have never met, I have no doubt you fit into that category as well.
It was after the interviewing process where things fell into the realm of unprofessional, or "bad". That's all I'll say publicly about it.
I'm happy to hear that there is more emphasis on in-house human testing (an odd phrasing, sorry about that) while utilizing the same team for what I'm assuming is monetization and public relations purposes. The problem is there are still long existing, avoidable bugs making it through to the public builds. No one person or team will be able to get all the kinks out if they have an end product they have to produce because gameplay ends up defining how you go about building a project. I'm by no means saying that you guys are doing a bad job, I'm simply saying that it may be possible for more to get accomplished in the bug squashing if there were a different outlook on how to attack them.
BTW, I am excited about having IAP as a tool to use. I'm happy it's finally going to be in the arsenal.
what great reading this thread is turning out to be. @entersimon wow, that would explain a few things @EinsteinApps i wholeheartedly agree with you on everything you said. and if you hadn't of put it so eloquently,i think it would of turned nasty
i think its great that part of the community are testing,but i disagree with anyone being able to publish,release,or do anything other than test.otherwise people will use that position to there advantage.its human nature to get ahead of the game. haha, no pun intended
The way i see it, the release is planned for Wednesday, whats the problem? We'll all have access then. It seems people think they are missing out on a gold mine here! No one whined about the sous beta testing any other feature that was new in their test builds, just now because it is in-app purchases and potentially (can't stress that word enough) could make extra revenue. Its not like its new to iOS, i wouldn't worry about the select handful or so getting a couple of weeks head start on us, the app store as a whole have had this level of access for a while, we're not really competing with others on here, more the whole app store, I'm glad its coming, its another feature and I'm glad its coming with a more rigorous testing procedure behind its release. The only other time i've seen complaints like this is with iAds, again, because people felt like they were going to miss out on money and we all know how that turned out.
Yeah I was really nervous about any negative reactions that would hurt what makes this group of people special, but I just felt someone had to speak up when there something I felt was so unfair. I also believe many more identify but haven't read yet or didn't want to get involved. When you spend a lot of money on something and see someone else has an advantage it has a distinct sting to it, especially since all the apps as of late have been having poor sales on the app store.
Either way I am very glad that GS didn't stop the thread and that in my mind shows me the SSS is a talented and dedicated community manager, which was awesome because he could have easily stomped this out by removing the thread at any time. I tried to keep us (mostly myself) focused on the debate without becoming personal and I believe I was successful with the help of all the people who posted their honest opinions. At least GS knows we can air our grievances in an organized and professional manner!
And if I am not mistaken we got good tentative date! *Cheers*
I think one person who should get an early release is Tshirtbooth not just for unquestionable devotion to Gamesalad, its so he can make us some tutorials early then release them with the update. haha thanks TSB
+1 to TSB ... a lot of us complain about stability and bugs, when you become a sous or line cook, you get pre-released software that's not yet stable (even more so than what we have now) so it make no sense to ask for an unstable copy if you don't know what you are getting yourself into. if anyone wants that "edge" of testing new software they simply just apply to be a line cook... i applied knowing that whatever they send me might even mess up my file... it's like installing pre-released iOS, your device's usability is at stake...
yes have to agree with POM i did see my titles got a hit on christmas time because it's not much of a holiday friendly title.. but sales are picking up again right after.. in fact i have so much confidence I just hired an intern as someone(thank you even though i forgot your name) has suggested... i want IAP because i want to generate even more revenue... not because my titles are not selling well...
Comments
I can totally see that lite versions would decrease sales, but most people do it the way Penguin Glide was done in that you only get access to a few levels which gives the customer a chance to make sure your app is polished enough to earn the .99. I had a few people that work for me try out this on Penguin Glide and they totally bought the full copy after playing the intro free levels, and let me insure you they are pretty diverse in their interests haha!
I may be in the minority but when I have the ability to increase my knowledge and efficiency through purchasing tutorial based templates from other customers it is difficult to try and learn on my own, especially when I know this could effect my ability to generate revenue and compete mor effectively in the market. This not only to say that everyone thinks like I do, but I it has been mentioned to me offline by more than one GS user that people make more off of templates than actual apps/games with in our community. When this is added to advanced access for said template sellers I think it really cripples the creative process, and supports the sentiments that these people have expressed to me. Making money on templates and tutorials is one thing, but having advanced access to do so is were I have to say something about fairness.
IAP is a feature that can only be fully 100% tested in a live app. Sure we ca sandbox the hell out of it but they would have been releasing an untested feature if there were not a few trial runs.
So In this particular case GameSalad would have been doing a disservice by releasing with out multiple real world tests.
Also sorry f some already said that I didn't have time to read the whole thread.
+1 100 %
That's why they made and released their internal title? No respectable business model would depend on volunteer testing to vet software roll outs, so I see what you're saying but respectfully disagree. The update you received and thus built your release was more than likely tested way before it even became an alpha build multiple times by professional QA testers. Volunteer testers are used as a control group of the consumer base, not app consumers but GS customers. Allowing customers to get paid before others as a result of a volunteer testing hierarchy is just plain unfair in my opinion.
Send and Receive Data using your own Server Tutorial! | Vote for A Long Way Home on Steam Greenlight! | Ten Years Left
That's why they made and released their internal title? No respectable business model would depend on volunteer testing to vet software roll outs, so I see what you're saying but respectfully disagree. The update you received and thus built your release was more than likely tested way before it even became an alpha build multiple times by professional QA testers. Volunteer testers are used as a control group of the consumer base, not app consumers but GS customers. Allowing customers to get paid before others as a result of a volunteer testing hierarchy is just plain unfair in my opinion.</code People develop so many different ways using gamesalad it's crazy. There is no standards of code, or how to develop certain functions. Every single time a release comes out, people scream bloody murder that their products broke. Can you imagine the uproar if iAP wasa released with only a single test application? There would be mutiny. There are still going to be a ton of posts saying that it doesn't work for people, but at least we have multiple examples from multiple people with different ways of programming showing it works. Trust me, they might have inapp purchase a few days or a week ahead of you, but the rest of the world has had it for a lot longer. You ain't missing out.Send and Receive Data using your own Server Tutorial! | Vote for A Long Way Home on Steam Greenlight! | Ten Years Left
I apologize if you felt I was suggesting the you personally were not aware of development processes, but let us also be clear in the fact that we are talking about software development cycles specifically. This is executed by Software Engineers and done so based on the understood best practices taught to them during their pursuit of a degree in the field. I am not personally a Software Engineer but have had them reporting to me in previous positions so I am pretty familiar with industry driven and accepted "Best Practices". I do not think my opinion is the only one here or is the best, I just feel that I do not have a fair advantage and wanted to express my opinion to the community and GS.
@ Jon
You touch on a very interesting topic, if you were in business as a case manufacturer and found out someone had advanced knowledge of a new release spec that would put them weeks ahead of your production would you not feel the need to speak up? And I do appreciate TSB and his tutorials, they originally led me to GS. However, now that I am a peer I can see how powerful it is for him to have advanced access to upcoming releases thus giving him a huge competitive edge. His videos also give him free advertising for his business, so let us speak about it for what it truly is which is a very effective business model. Just this week I saw him offer a template before giving free help, after another member offered help he did come back and talk a little about the problem which was helpful, but he offered a paid service first. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, but I want us to be honest about what we are talking about which is the ability to make money.
and state that I agree with @jonmulcahy! … iAP is a bad idea … just another attempt to bilk the public …
if a game is promoted as free, but requires spending money to play/complete the game, then you haven't download a game; you have downloaded junk
… and you might as well go sit on a stick, cause you are a (I'll be nice) lollipop.
iAds I like, if they give me a game that is free … and, I do make a conscientious effort to click on the ads!
Lite version, I like … cause then I'll know if I want to spend money.
if the iAP is in a completely playable game and offers purchase of continuing episodes … that I don't mind because I can make or not make the purchase.
so what if the big guys are giving their things away; then making users pay to actually play … the public isn't gonna fall for that ruse for very long.
I personally want to download all those crippled games and post very,very negative reviews.
@};- MH
Your perspective is always a favorite of mine, regardless of the topic! I will try not to choke on the lollipop!
Let it be known that I'm speaking from first hand experience and am also not under a NDA of any kind with GS, nor would I be disclosing anything that would be covered by a NDA. That's not professional and that's not my style. I am hesitant to type this out, but reading everything here is making my innards spin.
As of about the third quarter of last year, the way testing was done in house at GS via QA was an automatic process. As it was explained to me, the new builds go through thousands of tests to ensure quality. That is of course to be expected because you can get through a ton of different scenarios extremely quickly through scripts, and new scripts can be added at any time. This is standard in program testing. The internal game team will no doubt find some issues and pre release beta testers find some issues as well. One major problem I saw, which I hope has been resolved by now, is that ALMOST NO ONE at GameSalad actually used the software on their own or had anything more than a basic understanding of the user development process. This shocked me when I encountered this. Now, they did tell me that they were hoping to bring someone in to train other members of the GS team on how the software works, but this was still a huge red flag for me. I also heard that one of the reasons that bugs get through is that most pre release beta testers spend the majority of their testing time on the apps they've already built, trying to get them ready for the next update and once things work out, they usually stop. If they find a bug in that process, then it's a good thing, but there are a million other possibilities left out. I can't speak to how much truth there is in that statement as I am not a pre release beta tester, this is just what I was told. Even if this were true, I can't wag a single finger at any pre release beta tester for their actions since they aren't getting paid and because it's really GameSalad's responsibility to ensure the highest quality testing occurs. From what I saw with my own eyes, there were gaping holes in the kind of quality assurance a product like GS requires. GameSalad is filled with highly intelligent people who do a great job at what they know, without a doubt, and I believe fully that they have the best of intentions with their releases, but nothing would beat a full time in house tester that was working on projects not intended for release. Just a person who is highly familiarized with GameSalad user development making simple and complex projects, trying out anything and everything they could from every angle to see what comes up in real world scenarios. I couldn't imagine something like the "otherwise" bug getting through human testing like that. This would also help remove a lot of the "grey area" bugs that require advanced knowledge of GS Creator to overcome. For example, timing issues which require a very short timer to ensure a process goes through as intended by the user. This is frustrating to new users, and is unclear how to resolve unless you've experienced it and overcome it on your own, or were lucky enough to have found someone who ran into the same issue as you and resolved it on their own. The result would be a tighter experience for the users in a shorter period of time.
Beta testing is about playing normal and playing weird. Since GS has so many variables to it, and there are so many styles of development possible, the "playing weird" is way more important than it would be for a product like photoshop. Human brains can play weirded than any scripts, and when there isn't money on the line for finished products, there is no reason to hold back.
As I said, this was as of about the third quarter of last year as I experienced with my own eyes, and it's completely possible that this is no longer how things are run over at GS HQ.
Now as to my opinion on allowing pre release beta testers to release new features onto the market: I don't think it's a good idea at all. I understand the idea of rewarding your testers, but this is not a good way of going about it. Let me explain my reasoning.
SSS said "They do this testing on a purely voluntary basis, and for this they were allowed to submit games with this thoroughly tested feature (tested by both our internal teams and these voluntary testers) only a short time before it's official release"
From this statement it sure sounds like GS is confident that IAP is working as it should. I can't imagine you'd allow your trusted testers to release something that would potentially tarnish their reputation had the feature not worked properly. At this point of confidence, you should have released it to the rest of the paying community. The feeling I get from reading this is not that the pre release beta testers get a head start, rather that we (paying users) are being held back from being able to implement IAP.
Let me repeat that. I don't feel that the pre release beta testers are getting a head start here. I feel the rest of us are being held back from using a "thoroughly tested feature."
Im refering to GS volunteers. Not internal game releases, released by GS itself.
Volunteers Advantage: Making Videos and Templates that will be needed minutes after a new update release.
Volunteers Not allowed: To create and early publish products that have features not accessible to all customers of GS.
GS proved that it doesnt need volunteer publishing to do live testing. They have their own internally created games to test live in the Apple/Android Markets. Leave that to GS Internal. Volunteers... get a headstart on creating teaching content for sale.
This is my opinion based on fairness. Nothing more.
Hmm i don't know.. i agree with both sides arguments , personally its not bothering me that some users where able to publish with the new build , but i can understand the fact that it will disturb some members.
Jeffnichols brought up some good points .
Also i see many of you say that IAP will be the same as IAD and its crap and not worth it , well.. i disagree , i think IAP can make a significant change to many games, if you use it the right way
Im not talking about games that requires spending money to complete the game , but the ability to give the user a choice of making purchases to advance faster in the game is very reasonable imo .
Roy.
I used the speech feature too!
and i say @P-O-M for sous chef!!
Thanks for the post, I have gained valuable insight from it!
@ Jeff
I agree with you 100%!!!
@ Pom
iAD is crap and I think our posts from earlier this week show that without a doubt, the formula Apple uses is laughable.
iAds Is crap, I agree 100%, tested and proven. I was refereeing to IAP (in-app purchase) in my comment
Roy
It was after the interviewing process where things fell into the realm of unprofessional, or "bad". That's all I'll say publicly about it.
I'm happy to hear that there is more emphasis on in-house human testing (an odd phrasing, sorry about that) while utilizing the same team for what I'm assuming is monetization and public relations purposes. The problem is there are still long existing, avoidable bugs making it through to the public builds. No one person or team will be able to get all the kinks out if they have an end product they have to produce because gameplay ends up defining how you go about building a project. I'm by no means saying that you guys are doing a bad job, I'm simply saying that it may be possible for more to get accomplished in the bug squashing if there were a different outlook on how to attack them.
BTW, I am excited about having IAP as a tool to use. I'm happy it's finally going to be in the arsenal.
@entersimon
wow, that would explain a few things
@EinsteinApps
i wholeheartedly agree with you on everything you said.
and if you hadn't of put it so eloquently,i think it would of turned nasty
i think its great that part of the community are testing,but i disagree with anyone being able to publish,release,or do anything other than test.otherwise people will use that position to there advantage.its human nature to get ahead of the game.
haha, no pun intended
Just my opinion guys and i value everyones here
Yeah I was really nervous about any negative reactions that would hurt what makes this group of people special, but I just felt someone had to speak up when there something I felt was so unfair. I also believe many more identify but haven't read yet or didn't want to get involved. When you spend a lot of money on something and see someone else has an advantage it has a distinct sting to it, especially since all the apps as of late have been having poor sales on the app store.
Either way I am very glad that GS didn't stop the thread and that in my mind shows me the SSS is a talented and dedicated community manager, which was awesome because he could have easily stomped this out by removing the thread at any time. I tried to keep us (mostly myself) focused on the debate without becoming personal and I believe I was successful with the help of all the people who posted their honest opinions. At least GS knows we can air our grievances in an organized and professional manner!
And if I am not mistaken we got good tentative date! *Cheers*
not just for unquestionable devotion to Gamesalad,
its so he can make us some tutorials early then release them with the update.
haha
thanks TSB
√ the yellow sticky!
@};- MH
"especially since all the apps as of late have been having poor sales on the app store. "
Wonder what makes you say that? games are flourishing in these holiday times .
Roy.
Just so we know to expect...