rob miracle, any chance of other plans?
month of splash plugin : usd 10 , or even usd 15
year of splash plugin : usd 99
Thank you to everyone who has been committed to using Corona and have been passionate enough to share your thoughts on this topic. I just created a video to share with you my thoughts on the splash screen. I did this so you could see my face and hear my voice, and not just read my words.
Near the end of the video I mention a splash screen contest. Please consider participating in this contest as soon as possible so we can have your submission for the community to review.
Thank you again for being a part of the Corona community.
@ivan888 read this topic https://forums.coronalabs.com/topic/64444-do-we-use-admob-sdk-70/, i posted links and comments from the Admob team. No reply yet from Corona on when we’re getting an update for the plugin. all we know is admob v2 should still be serving ads.
First paid plugin! Woohoo! Congrats, Corona Labs, this is great news!!
Just watched your video, Charles. I feel your apology. I know we don’t have to pay $$99 to remove the splash screen. BUT I CANNOT SUBMIT AN APP UPDATE WITH THAT DEFAULT SPLASH SCREEN. THE WHOLE LAUNCH SEQUENCE LOOKS SO WEIRD.
I just tested a build on my device (Corona SDK v2016.2951, iPhone 6, iOS 10.0.1). This is what i see, when i cold start my app:
-
I see my own app splash screen
-
Then I see the Corona splash screen
-
Then I see the main menu of my app.
I just cannot describe to you how weird the app launch looks right now.
Seems very fair to me. Unity always had this. Should have done it years ago!
I’m sure any visual issues people are seeing will be ironed out quick too.
Now no more surprises for a month please :-).
Should I pay the $99 and have a cleaner app or leave it there and support corona. I don’t mind the splash screen but would prefer to have a corona splash screen that matches my apps load screen colours.
I submitted my 4 screenshots.
Hi @Rob Miracle,
We’re having trouble getting rid of the “Powered by Corona” splash screen. In your Pricing page, it says that there is “No Required Splash Screen” for Enterprise users. I’ve messaged support (submission 5960043) and am hoping to get a response as soon as possible.
We’ve been wanting to get a release out for a long time now. Our app got rejected last week due to the whole “app thinning” issue. Therefore, we upgraded to the latest version of Corona that fixed this issue and now we’re getting this whole splash screen issue.
@jhow Are you doing an Enterprise build or a simulator build?
Have you tried putting in the:
settings = { splashScreen = { enable = false }, }
into your build.settings?
We are in the process of trying to make sure Enterprise subscribers are not hitting this problem.
Rob
@Rob Miracle,
Received a “Build Failed” error that states:
"A device build error occurred on the server.
Error: Splash screen control is only available if you are subscribed to the following plugin:
Plugin: plugin.CoronaSplashControl
Publisher: com.coronalabs…"
Just to verify this is a simulator build and not an enterprise build?
@Rob Miracle,
Just to verify this is a simulator build and not an enterprise build?
That is correct. It is a simulator build.
We are still working on a fix @jhow. I’ll update when I know more.
Alright thanks. Hope to hear from you soon
Hello everyone,
Well I feel so strongly about this I made my first post!
So not being part of the community yet my opinions won’t carry much weight but as a one person develpoment team about to release their first game it is still very important to me. I’ll offer my opinion on this anyway.
- I absolutely 100% agree Corona needs this branding to help it grow. As Charles stated on youtube it is a missed opportunity that needs addressing for a secure future.
- The way it was handled wasn’t great (nuff said).
So I’ve emailed my examples suggestions, and if you want a voice so should you. They are as follows:
- Offer the option of a standalone splash screen or a co-branded splash screen
- Allow users to choose their own background and then the position of a forced Corona Logo
- Offer some logo variation options
- Allow Corona brand colors or single color (even just white) for the logo
- Enforce a minumim size for the logo
- Offer the option of a link if the logo is pressed to the Corona SDK website
This would surely please everyone wouldn’t it?
Personally the option to not have a splash screen was a HUGE influence on me choosing Corona in the first place. A co-branded splash screen wouldn’t have swayed me away much either. But a forced 1st place splash would have deterred me somewhat.
Cheers everyone.
What I dislike about this is
you still calling “feature” when is clearly not.
Design is really basic as other users said, having and awesome app with beautiful art this splash is not elegant at all. I dont know if that was on purpose to force us to pay a little extra to remove that beta version of a splash screen design or what.
Finally saying “Many people have struggled with adding this to their app” really?
code:
--main.lua local composer = require('composer') local splashScreen = display.newImageRect("splashScreen.png", display.contentWidth, display.contentHeight) splashScreen.x,splashScreen.y = display.contentCenterX,display.contentCenterY local function closeSplash() display.remove(splashScreen) splashScreen = nil composer.gotoScene("menu", {time=500, effect="fade"}) end timer.performWithDelay(2000, closeSplash)
there you go, splash screen for 2 seconds… where is the struggle. (code from corona sample projects)
I dont mind this new pricing but at least be honest about it.
- some time awareness before this change would have been nice.
- making apple ios 10 new update your wall so that we get force to pay.
- calling this a “feature” and hide it with nice words… just be clear and go straightforward.
Im not against this changes, this are reasonable.
but where I think you made a mistake is how you introduce them…
I think they’ll offer those options with the plugin. It’s the logical way for them to go. Otherwise, they won’t have any selling points for the plugin other than “support the platform”. I think they should offer at least 2(hopefully 3) variations to splash screen for free users. Any user should have the chance to select between a dark, light and somewhere in between(like bone color) theme for the splash screen. Any of those would fit the game perfectly and if you still want to integrate your own splash screen or remove it, you can pay $99 / years to do so.
Also, talking game-wise, many huge companies with great IPs include splash screens of Unity, Unreal etc. before their games. I don’t think players care even a tiniest bit about splash screens. It’s both valid for PC and mobile devices. I’ve seen many games on App Store Featured list with “Made with Unity Free Edition” splash screen at the beginning. Even Apple doesn’t care about this.
The problem with that is how they introduced the new pricing plan. This shouldn’t have been announced as a “feature” because making a splash screen is as easy as it gets. You can do it 30 minutes into Corona at most. Also, they should have told about it earlier so people don’t get frustrated when they have to submit their latest apps or updates with iOS 10.
Anyway. I think Corona being free is a great thing because it saves us from some expense as a startup but I always thought this was gonna go wrong at some point because Corona never had the user base Unity had when they were going free. Corona should have never adopted this monetization model all along. It was wrong when they first announced and it still is. Corona shouldn’t be competing with Unity at this matter. Corona should be smart and charge for their services to keep money flowing, grow their user base and development - marketing team with that money. Hope they can make it right from now on.
I, for one, am glad Corona is going this route. I was worried about Corona from a business/longevity standpoint when they went the free route a couple years back. It simply didn’t feel like a good business model, and it seemed to have been brought on by whatever company it was that acquired them at the time. Going free wasn’t a decision they could simply walk back on.
This feels like a good decision, and an even better business model than they had years ago. I want Corona to succeed and be around for a long time. Now, I don’t think they could get away with charging like Unity does for Android/iOS/etc builds, but hopefully they find some additional ways to monetize. Perhaps via some real value-add plugins, or taking a cut of paid community plugins.
It is good to know that Corona is committed to staying around for a Long time. With this paid tier, can we expect more efforts to be put in to adding more features that helps grow Corona to be a platform not only good for building games but business apps as well. The general feel lately is the great focus in releasing many monetization plugin for ads network and not adding much value to the platform itself.
[quote name=“landoncope” post=“339764” timestamp=“1474413033”]I, for one, am glad Corona is going this route. I was worried about Corona from a business/longevity standpoint when they went the free route a couple years back. It simply didn’t feel like a good business model, and it seemed to have been brought on by whatever company it was that acquired them at the time. Going free wasn’t a decision they could simply walk back on. This feels like a good decision, and an even better business model than they had years ago ($300/yr for pro). I want Corona to succeed and be around for a long time. Now, I don’t think they could get away with charging like Unity does for Android/iOS/etc builds, but hopefully they find some additional ways to monetize. Perhaps via some real value-add plugins.[/quote] I believe most of us who can afford to support this new initiative are willing to do so but the way they introduce this cannot be worse. And it even seems like it is not even at a ready state to roll out. It appears that they try to quickly push this out to see how much they can get from it though this may not exactly be the case.