Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

 Ok, as much as I don't like the Idea of subscription. From a business point, it is the better way to go.  Hey, instead of buying a pizza that week spend it on a subscription. I believe that Josh is putting a lot of work into this. And I guess if you are as brilliant as Josh, then build your own game engine. I also believe people are just scared of a subscription cause it is kind of new. But to pay a little money a month and keep Josh working on the engine is more of a sure thing than a one payment.

 Anyway I for one will be getting a subscription. It is worth it, for something most of us enjoy doing.

Intel Quad 9300 2.5

Windows 7 64 bit

nforce 780i SLI MotherBoard

Sapphire, Ati Radeon HD 5770

8 GRam

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that a non-subscription modus for Indies is an art of quality garanty for customers, as it says: Look at that big studios which are owning over 50000 $ with our engine-made games. They have to pay a monthly fee, are not suffering for this, and we are stable.

That means nothing else than "pay our engine first after you get success with it" That's a warranty.

But the real question is imo which part of the market/customers is Ultra supposed to be attractive for ? Indies or profis ?

Maybe in a few years will seet Josh confortably with a big success thx to Ultra project and allow Indies to work or try to work with it for free or one-time payment. Who knows.

  • Like 1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of subscriptions for software in general. Moved away from Adobe completely when they changed to such an approach, etc.

However, ~$10/month is not really a huge ask. I can spend that much on a single visit to McDonald's (and I'm sure UltraEngine won't contribute to my midsection... at least not directly :p). 

My one concern is the long-term plans for UltraEngine once it's released.

One thing that's kept me away from jumping into Leadwerks is how it seems the latest version is barely out the door when work and focus shifts to "the next version". I never felt comfortable jumping into the TorqueEngine for the same reason. GarageGames was constantly working on "the next game engine", leaving their existing ones effectively abandoned.  It's like trying to put down roots in shifting sand.

I wouldn't even think twice about paying $10 a month to use UltraEngine, with the confidence that work on expanding and improving it would continue, instead of focus shifting to starting a new engine from scratch. 

Is that the plan with UltraEngine, Josh? To focus on building and expanding on one platform - at least to the point that it's no longer feasible and a complete ground-up rewrite is necessary? If so, just show me where to sign up :).

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, WSI said:

One thing that's kept me away from jumping into Leadwerks is how it seems the latest version is barely out the door when work and focus shifts to "the next version". I never felt comfortable jumping into the TorqueEngine for the same reason. GarageGames was constantly working on "the next game engine", leaving their existing ones effectively abandoned.  It's like trying to put down roots in shifting sand.

Is that the plan with UltraEngine, Josh? To focus on building and expanding on one platform - at least to the point that it's no longer feasible and a complete ground-up rewrite is necessary? If so, just show me where to sign up :).

That's a consequence of the one-time payment license, to some degree. I was able to take my time designing Ultra, and it is designed to be a foundation that can be built on for many years. I am very happy about the prospect of being able to just add features and steadily improve the same code base, instead of having to always come up with a new product. That can really only be done with a subscription model because it provides steady revenue that grows over time.

In the badly drawn graph below, I can guarantee you Garage Games' income looked like the image on the left. This is why they had to always come out with a new and slightly different engine. There's absolutely no way Ultra Engine can be fully developed, much less me being able to hire more programmers, unless the revenue looks more like the graph on the right, which is what I am trying to do with the subscription model.

Image1.thumb.jpg.7b21f23e26bb58a8e8517c85f62e79f1.jpg

I'm paying for a 3ds Max subscription right now, and I am personally would prefer to just buy it outright, but Autodesk is adding new features I want, so it is worthwhile to me.

My job is to make tools you love, with the features you want, and performance you can't live without.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Josh said:

That's a consequence of the one-time payment license, to some degree. I was able to take my time designing Ultra, and it is designed to be a foundation that can be built on for many years. I am very happy about the prospect of being able to just add features and steadily improve the same code base, instead of having to always come up with a new product. That can really only be done with a subscription model because it provides steady revenue that grows over time.

In the badly drawn graph below, I can guarantee you Garage Games' income looked like the image on the left. This is why they had to always come out with a new and slightly different engine. There's absolutely no way Ultra Engine can be fully developed, much less me being able to hire more programmers, unless the revenue looks more like the graph on the right, which is what I am trying to do with the subscription model.

Image1.thumb.jpg.7b21f23e26bb58a8e8517c85f62e79f1.jpg

I'm paying for a 3ds Max subscription right now, and I am personally would prefer to just buy it outright, but Autodesk is adding new features I want, so it is worthwhile to me.

So UltraEngine is planned for the long-term, then. That's perfect. Exactly what I was hoping to hear/see.  Great! Thanks for the confirmation!
Also, those graphs are beautiful. Don't sell yourself short. :p. 

That's interesting about 3DSMax. May I ask why you prefer to use it in lieu of the "obvious"* free alternative, like Blender?  Not knocking you for using MAX. It's a powerful software. Just curious, 'cause I know it's far from cheap, even to subscribe.

* - I chuckle typing "obvious" regarding Blender, 'cause I started learning it years ago, before it went open source, and everyone was like "why are you using Blender? It sucks! Use a real 3D program, like Max or Maya".  It's cool to see it have come so far to where it's now part of major creators' pipelines... Just funny, considering where it started.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, WSI said:

That's interesting about 3DSMax. May I ask why you prefer to use it in lieu of the "obvious"* free alternative, like Blender?  Not knocking you for using MAX. It's a powerful software. Just curious, 'cause I know it's far from cheap, even to subscribe.

I find it much easier to work with. There's an indie license that's less than $300 a year.

  • Upvote 1

My job is to make tools you love, with the features you want, and performance you can't live without.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Josh said:

I find it much easier to work with. There's an indie license that's less than $300 a year.

Being someone that started with Blender, I find it hard to use other tools. However I would like to. Blender has disappointed me recently with lots of crashes, slow downs, and freezing. I have 3DCoat, which I am trying to learn as a sculpting program. I previously used it for UV unwrapping and retopology, which it is great for.

Beeeeeeeeeeeeeep~~This is a test of the emergency signature system~~Beeeeeeeeeeeeeep

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IceBurger said:

Being someone that started with Blender, I find it hard to use other tools. However I would like to. Blender has disappointed me recently with lots of crashes, slow downs, and freezing. I have 3DCoat, which I am trying to learn as a sculpting program. I previously used it for UV unwrapping and retopology, which it is great for.

I haven't really been a fan of anything from 2.8 on. Especially after they got that influence... I mean "grant money" from EpicGames.  
I'm learning to use 2.9 since it's their LTS and so I know that it'll remain consistent at least for a while.

I still prefer and use 2.79b, though. Nothing added after that benefits me or what I want to use it for in any way. Its layout makes more sense to me, too. I found the .cubin files needed to support Cycles on my 2070 Super online, which was the only thing "holding me back". So I'm all set.

Anyhoo.. this thread is about pricing of UltraEngine, not 3D apps, so.. I'll stop derailing now 😛

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...