The license model I would love to see work!

[jimshu]

Heya,

They started talking about the license model in another thread in another forum about something entirely different so I thought I would post my comment here and not derail the first thread further.

First I would like to say that I know this idea is silly and wouldnt work, but darnit, I like my silly dreams.

GMs play free, because well dont we have to do enough already? Give us a break! Gotta buy more books, have to spend more time, have to actually entertain, and we have to buy the big license so the slacker players can play for free? Im sorry, it just feels like I should scream, "Kick me again! Please, I secretly love it!"

Players have a trial license that expires 14 days from acquiring the license. A license is tied to an email address. After that its pay for it time.

Honestly, I dont have a real stake in how the players licenses are done. Just the GM licenses. In this magical unicorn dream world though, the result is that there are lots of different games out there as more games are being GMed as there is no barrier to entry. Less players sitting around with no license at all just waiting for someone else to pay for their fun.

Do I think it would really work? Nope, not a chance.

[AstaSyneri]

Heya,

They started talking about the license model in another thread in another forum about something entirely different so I thought I would post my comment here and not derail the first thread further.

First I would like to say that I know this idea is silly and wouldnt work, but darnit, I like my silly dreams.

GMs play free, because well dont we have to do enough already? Give us a break! Gotta buy more books, have to spend more time, have to actually entertain, and we have to buy the big license so the slacker players can play for free? Im sorry, it just feels like I should scream, "Kick me again! Please, I secretly love it!"

Players have a trial license that expires 14 days from acquiring the license. A license is tied to an email address. After that its pay for it time.

Honestly, I dont have a real stake in how the players licenses are done. Just the GM licenses. In this magical unicorn dream world though, the result is that there are lots of different games out there as more games are being GMed as there is no barrier to entry. Less players sitting around with no license at all just waiting for someone else to pay for their fun.

Do I think it would really work? Nope, not a chance.

LOL. Yeah, I hear you. I picked up the Ultimate license to give RPG newbies a chance to play, and it's very likely that none of them would pay something upfront. My hope is, that after a while I'll put out a virtual piggy bank and if any of them contribute I'll buy additional licenses (or rather modules). That way the GM's burden would be distributed a little bit. But realistically I can't expect that to work either.

Talking about realism: Getting people into a game that requires you to "work" before you play is hard enough these days. To me it appears that waning attention spans and inflated expectations make things really hard these days.

One thing that _might_ work is a "group subscription". I saw that in my Hex TCG guild where people could prolong having a certain feature set available and that filled up pretty well. For FG that could work kind of like a "parking meter". If somebody of your group pays $7.99 a month, you can all continue to use the Full Version of the game, as long as the meter is running.

[damned]

yeah gm's are suckers!

[Mellock]

My hope is, that after a while I'll put out a virtual piggy bank and if any of them contribute I'll buy additional licenses (or rather modules). That way the GM's burden would be distributed a little bit. But realistically I can't expect that to work either.

I asked a while ago if it would be unrealistic to have a "gift shop", where you could purchase stuff ans have it linked to someone else's account. It didn't look like a bad idea, but the problem, as always, is that it'll take time away from all the other things that need doing as well. Perhaps the gift shop idea would work for your piggy bank idea? The hard cash version would ofcourse just be using paypal, or even drivethrurpg pressies.

Oh, and on the few occasions I DM'ed myself, I found it its own reward. I'm a bit simple though. :D

[Griogre]

Yeah, I suggested the same pipe dream on one of the license threads in the past - that GM licenses are free and players pay for licenses. It would be sound from a numbers point of view, and encourage new people to GM. One of the reason's I never got the ultimate license was I *wanted* my players to commit some money towards playing in the hope it would make them more reliable than those who play for free. I've met some great people playing FG and found some wonderful players, there have been some not-so-good players but the most annoying are those that vanish with no word or warning. The good and bad news is its the Internet - the good is there are a lot of players out there; the bad is it will take a while to go through them to find the ones that like your GMing style and will show up.

I agree with Mellock that since most GM's do it for fun, it doesn't really matter if the GM license is free or not - from a GM participation point of view. One of the advantages of FG getting on Steam would be you could do one time tickets to play, gifting or free weekends.

[jimshu]

I havent really seen an issue with FG user base. I just see in other forums for different VTTs that there is a large group of people looking for others to do the work and not put anything into it themselves. The most telling example of this is on the looking for group forum on roll20. Groups of players advertise for a GM and then dictate the game they want to play...and the time.

[JohnD]

I havent really seen an issue with FG user base. I just see in other forums for different VTTs that there is a large group of people looking for others to do the work and not put anything into it themselves. The most telling example OF this is on the looking for group forum on roll20. Groups of players advertise for a GM and then dictate the game they want to play...and the time.
Yes, this is annoying but, unfortunately that's how people are - they probably also think nothing of not showing up for a game either.

[primarch]

Yes, this is annoying but, unfortunately that's how people are - they probably also think nothing of not showing up for a game either.

Hi!

This is a big pet peeve of mine. I have found that being clear and up front about certain rules save you a lot of grief.

My rule is simple, two sessions you miss without a valid excuse, your gone.

With this rule I have put together two solid groups and keep unreliable players out (haven't had one for over two years).

Primarch

[Macgreine]

Great ideas. Its too bad they dont seem to want to change the way the licenses work.

[damned]

i think its more along the lines of - its not in the top priority list... when smiteworks have discussed license changes far and away the response has been dont change from people - although the one alternate license option that got the most interest was the free lite client with advertising - but smiteworks dont see value in that model so at this stage i dont think that there are any plans to do anything...

[dulux-oz]

Why should they change the way the licenses work? They're working fine as is for everyone except for a few who keep bringing it up.

"You can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time" so you aim for pleasing as many as is practically possible. I do this when I'm running ICT Projects; my guys do it when they're coding, my Clients do it in their businesses, and that's what the SmiteWorks Team are doing (at least, to me that's what they appear to be doing).

If its that big a deal (& I'm looking at you Mac) then you can always go out and write a VTT yourself - you know, the old "put up or shut up" routine.

OK, fine, you've got a problem with the way SmiteWorks choose to do their licensing - they've heard you, we've all heard you. And yes, its a free country where people can express their opinions and where discussions like this can occur in the spirit of friendship and comraderie (sp?), but for Gawds sake, give it a rest! You've made your point - several times in several threads - the guys have heard and acknowledged you, and there's even an entry on the Wishlist for it - which, by the way, is the most appropriate way for the FG Base to request changes.

So, please, stop whinging about it and, more importantly, please stop turning off noobies to the software by whinging about it (which is something that can happen).

[Macgreine]

Why should they change the way the licenses work? They're working fine as is for everyone except for a few who keep bringing it up.

"You can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time" so you aim for pleasing as many as is practically possible. I do this when I'm running ICT Projects; my guys do it when they're coding, my Clients do it in their businesses, and that's what the SmiteWorks Team are doing (at least, to me that's what they appear to be doing).

If its that big a deal (& I'm looking at you Mac) then you can always go out and write a VTT yourself - you know, the old "put up or shut up" routine.

OK, fine, you've got a problem with the way SmiteWorks choose to do their licensing - they've heard you, we've all heard you. And yes, its a free country where people can express their opinions and where discussions like this can occur in the spirit of friendship and comraderie (sp?), but for Gawds sake, give it a rest! You've made your point - several times in several threads - the guys have heard and acknowledged you, and there's even an entry on the Wishlist for it - which, by the way, is the most appropriate way for the FG Base to request changes.

So, please, stop whinging about it and, more importantly, please stop turning off noobies to the software by whinging about it (which is something that can happen).

Thanks for your input. Very passionate. Btw Mac (I'm looking at me<-------) Didn't start this thread. I only commented on it. I guess others see need for change. I'll consider your advice and thanks again.

[damned]

farkin whingin loudmouth farkin aussies
trial license is a good idea - but its too hard too easily code into the software so it aint happening just now...

[Dr0W]

I've just posted about FG2 on Steam Greenlight on some FB Groups I participate. They got interested, voted for it and asked me lots of questions about FG2. When I said it was a paid software, half of them lost interest. When I said the prices the other half lost interest to. Just one or two guys are still interested in "maybe someday" buying FG2.

Just because in your reality it's a good and fair license model doesn't mean it is for the rest of the world. I'm not saying it isn't worth it's price but having a different licence model would help me get players, since I bought this like two years ago and I've yet to run a single game because I can't find enought players interested in paying for a software they don't know if they will like or not. And I haven't bought the Ultimate license yet because honestly it costs more than a half minimum wage for me.

[Macgreine]

farkin whingin loudmouth farkin aussies
trial license is a good idea - but its too hard too easily code into the software so it aint happening just now...

Oh wow.. Damned. Thank you so much. You are the first person in every thread I have posted about this who has ever answered my original question "Why won't they try it?". Thank you. I wish one the developers would have told me that a long time ago. It would have saved a lot of typing for everyone. I didn't realize it was a difficult thing to include or try out. I will keep my fingers crossed in the meantime that we will see this one day and other than that, I have nothing more to say on the subject unless I am asked. Good day friends.

Mac

PS: Of course I still will never pay the insane price of $115 to introduce new players but that's their loss.

[Moon Wizard]

We're not bothered by discussing what people want to see in the product (including licensing options). Its good to hear the ideas, but definitely have to prioritize and think about bigger picture items as well. There are many factors to our decisions, including limited resources for a niche product.

In fact, there are very few (if any) software companies or web sites that have people working full time on TTRPG projects. I talked with several of them at Gencon, and we all do what we can.

The one interesting idea that came up in this thread is the idea of one or more people in each group being able to pay the cost to play. I'm not sure if it would work well, especially on cases where the "paying" person misses a session, etc. However, I like the idea of players being able to pay the costs for GM to run their game.

Another thought is if we moved to a hosted model (which we know many of the vocal forum members dislike); we could more easily offer different trials, free weekends, and other options to bring in more users.

Adding gifts to the store is definitely on our short list, but web dev tasks tend to fall to lower priority usually. I'd also like to have better store integration in the client for easier module, map, token, portrait product access.

Regards,
JPG

[Macgreine]

I have nothing more to say on the subject unless I am asked.

But everyone be nice about putting up posts that tempt me to get on the soapbox again. Its become a habit of mine and may require some rehab or something.

[Trenloe]

...since I bought this like two years ago and I've yet to run a single game because I can't find enought players interested in paying for a software they don't know if they will like or not. And I haven't bought the Ultimate license yet because honestly it costs more than a half minimum wage for me.
Well then, run a game in the upcoming FG Con - the full-to-ultimate free upgrade will be active for the duration of the convention. We're just finalising the website which will be up towards the end of the month: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?19073-FG-Con-3-November-1st-3rd-2013

[damned]

Another thought is if we moved to a hosted model (which we know many of the vocal forum members dislike); we could more easily offer different trials, free weekends, and other options to bring in more users.

i didnt include that one because of how vocal may long term users of FG were about it...
i personally think that a subscription model will probably cost users more but is also the best way to ensure the ongoing viability of the business...

[Nickademus]

But everyone be nice about putting up posts that tempt me to get on the soapbox again. Its become a habit of mine and may require some rehab or something.

If it makes you feel any better, this is my first time hearing you on the soapbox. :P

[Gargomaxthalus]

I prefer that there be a somewhat harsh entry requirement. Before the F2P craze I had found 2 MMORPGS that I loved and had absolutely no problem paying the monthly fee for. Then F2P and WoW hit around the same time and all of the sudden the internet was loaded with mind numbing bullshit and I have failed to find an MMO that I can get behind since. More users simply means more users. While seeing more people become interested in FGII and the games that are played through it would be nice, I would want those to be users of a certain quality, in other words, those with a vested interest who show proper respect to the devs, the games, the GMs and each other.

All right I'm a bit anti-social and prone to outbursts but you get the idea, "You get what you pay for." if you don't pay anything you tend to get a rotting carcass that only functions due to Necromancy and deals with Devils.

[unerwünscht]

Gargomaxthalus,
I would typically agree with you, however the current pricing model is so steep, that even though I have an ultimate license and my players need pay for NOTHING, I still have trouble getting players to even try Fantasy Grounds because they are instantly put off by the price, and they don't want to take the risk of getting use to the program and then wanting to buy it.

The end result is that even with an ultimate license, I rarely get to use Fantasy Grounds, and I am forced to either use free/cheap alternatives, or forgo 'table top' roleplaying altogether and stick with MMORPGS. For the last few months I have just opted for MMORPGS, it is less trouble in the end.

Bottom line is, do I regret buying any of my Fantasy Grounds licenses? No. But at this point in time there is exactly 0% chance that I would spend anymore money on Fantasy Grounds... Bright side, now that I own an ultimate license and multiple GM and Lite licenses, I should never need to spend anything else on Fantasy Grounds.... unless they switch to a subscription model, and in that case they make it absolutely clear that those of us who have spent hundreds of dollars mean absolutely nothing to them.

[Nickademus]

I would want those to be users of a certain quality, in other words, those with a vested interest who show proper respect to the devs, the games, the GMs and each other

I completely agree with this and am choking on the irony. XD

[Valarian]

For one, I would not want the application to go down the route of a subscription model. If they can do this via the Steam Greenlight thing, then I'm all for it as long as the existing license model is available for those who don't want the total dependency on a third party server.

As a software developer myself, the pricing of the software seems more than reasonable. The prices haven't gone up in several years. $25 for a player license being the equivalent of a single supplement, or a new hardback novel. The GM license at $40 being the equivalent of the spend on a single rules corebook. The Ultimate license was provided for those of us who asked for it and the $150 is not meant for the standard GM but for those who have used the product, believe in it and want to run games to introduce new players to the tabletop.

This is a niche product guys. The license can't be any less and have the developers make money to continue development.

[Valarian]

Apologise if the following comes over as a rant. It seems to me that, all too often a product isn't valued because it happens to be delivered as a virtual product. This is the case with software, music, books, art. It seems to be a growing trend. People spend the time to create these products and deserve to be paid for them. Perhaps I'm just old fashioned that way.

Yes, I am turning in to a grumpy old man. It's not age, just a state of mind.

[phantomwhale]

I was hesitant to buy initially because although it was $20-40, there was no guarantee I would (a) like the software when I really got into using it, and (b) be able to find a game.

If you assume that is the turn-off point for new players, then improved demo software (which was done this year, but still only for the core D&D offering) and better chances for players to "try before they buy", perhaps by joining in on Ultimate license games, are some ways to bridge that gap. I suspect more is required here to keep bringing people over the gap though. All this is predicated on FGII, once you are using it, offering the best online RPG experience - which currently for my systems of choice, it is.

In reality, if the game and software quality was guaranteed, then I don't think the cost is an issue (hours of gaming for around $40 ? Bargain). But if it's not guaranteed, and lets face it, it never can be 100%, then it's a speculation, which would turn many away.

As for the model - well, the GM has always bourne the brunt of cost, and nothing has changed here. Nice idea to get the players to chip in more, but afraid SOCIALLY it doesn't seem to go that way too often. That's not an FG issue, so much as a hobby-trend issue. As the GM, I don't mind so much, but some way to "tip" the GM for groups that don't know each other might be a nice to have. E.g. after a one-shot, you can tip the GM a dollar or two in FGII store credit ?

But certainly, Smiteworks are listening, and suggestions are considered - I've seen many of them read many times. I'm not sure some of them would work, however, in what is already a niche industry.

[Dr0W]

Well then, run a game in the upcoming FG Con - the full-to-ultimate free upgrade will be active for the duration of the convention. We're just finalising the website which will be up towards the end of the month: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?19073-FG-Con-3-November-1st-3rd-2013

That's exactly my idea. I've got most of it ready and started telling people about it. I will certainly run a game on FG Con and maybe I'll buy an Ultimate License next time it goes on sale.

[JohnD]

The Demo version IMO needs to be more robust.

And there needs to be an accompanying file that explains how to do things.

Right now too much relies on the new user to have the presence of mind and persistence to ask questions on the forum and have the community provide ad hoc support.

The next hurdle is finding someone who is willing to do a "demo" session for a new person to give an approximation of what the real experience is like. All the while knowing that 9/10 the new person isn't going to be an ongoing member of your current game(s), if in fact they show up at all for the arranged session.

I understand that in some corners of the world $24 is a lot of money. I don't know what anyone can do about that. But really, in the rest of the world, $24 is what, two tickets to a 95 minute movie or dinner for one (not even!) at an average non-fastfood restaurant of your choice. Seriously, if someone isn't willing to ante up that much, experience has shown me as a FG DM that they aren't going to stick with your game.

In the past I've bought games for friends when I wanted them to play... did that for Neverwinter Nights a few times before it was nice and cheap at $10 like it is now. I'd love the option to be able to buy a Lite license and gift it to a specific user account.

Timed demo versions are an option I suppose, but I'm not sure what is practical with that approach.

Advertising is no good because who are you advertising to? People who have already shown that they don't want to spend money on a product they use... why would they buy whatever product/service you are being paid to advertise?

I don't see a single solution pricing model in any of this... the individual situations are far to numerous.

[JohnD]

I've just posted about FG2 on Steam Greenlight on some FB Groups I participate. They got interested, voted for it and asked me lots of questions about FG2. When I said it was a paid software, half of them lost interest. When I said the prices the other half lost interest to. Just one or two guys are still interested in "maybe someday" buying FG2.

Just because in your reality it's a good and fair license model doesn't mean it is for the rest of the world. I'm not saying it isn't worth it's price but having a different licence model would help me get players, since I bought this like two years ago and I've yet to run a single game because I can't find enought players interested in paying for a software they don't know if they will like or not. And I haven't bought the Ultimate license yet because honestly it costs more than a half minimum wage for me.

How hard have you been trying and where have you been trying?

[Dr0W]

How hard have you been trying and where have you been trying?

Usually with close friends that I know IRL. They end up saying that "but there's a free app that lets you do that, why should we even pay?" and we've played online a few times using other VTT.

But as FGCon is coming I plan to DM and I'll invite an entire online community, giving them a taste of it and if they like it I hope they'll buy it.

[Macgreine]

"Bites own tongue" remembering he's pledged to go cold turkey. But oh man, so tempting.

[AstaSyneri]

The Demo version IMO needs to be more robust.

And there needs to be an accompanying file that explains how to do things.

Right now too much relies on the new user to have the presence of mind and persistence to ask questions on the forum and have the community provide ad hoc support.

I don't see a single solution pricing model in any of this... the individual situations are far to numerous.

Yes, absolutely. Lowering the entry barriers is what this great program needs (and price is only one of them). Some help on getting started out would certainly help in the demo version (also for the full version - but those guys have already jumped into the deep end of the pool ;-)).

The one thing I like about the "pool solution" is that this potentially gets more money into Smiteworks' coffers than for example a "Guaranteed Money back if you don't like it" or any such marketing ploy.

Of course more videos of well-run adventures of any game where people are having fun will do wonders, too. So many possiblities, so few resources...

[Trenloe]

Of course more videos of well-run adventures of any game where people are having fun will do wonders, too. So many possiblities, so few resources...
Lots of videos here: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fantasy+grounds&oq=fantasy+grounds

Or the tutorial videos here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/downloads/

[dulux-oz]

I'll just add my $0.02 worth (& another absolutely shameless self-plug) and say that there is another set of Tutorial Videos which people seem to like at the YouTube link in my sig. ;)

[Nickademus]

Well, this thread's gone on long enough that I should add my $0.02 as well. I tend to look at things realistically so I might agree that better licensing would improve things. But the SW crew are in the middle of patching up a new launch, so not much of anything else is going to happen until after FG 3.0...

So, with the situation as it stands now, there is another solution to the root problem that causes people to dislike the current licenses. Simply put, more people with ultimate licenses need to host Demo games that interested parties can join and test out FG. I will be doing such when I get the Chronic Games up and running, probably hosting 2 to 4 demos a month. But it will be a bit before that happens. Hopefully when I start running regular demos it will spur some of the veteran members to throw one or two up themselves. (Depending on legals, I might even share my demo modules and helper images.)

Something to do until the option of changing licenses is even possible for Smite Works.

[JohnD]

Of course more videos of well-run adventures of any game where people are having fun will do wonders, too. So many possiblities, so few resources...

You are right. There are some videos that do the game a disservice.

Telling a new person to watch a video but forward past the first 45 minutes because all that is are people who can't get their TS to work, or walking people through installing or push-to-talk activated... I know ***for a fact*** that I lost my best friend's participation in FG gaming because I was still new to it and directed him to the "wrong" video to get an idea of what the experience is like.

[JohnD]

Well, this thread's gone on long enough that I should add my $0.02 as well. I tend to look at things realistically so I might agree that better licensing would improve things. But the SW crew are in the middle of patching up a new launch, so not much of anything else is going to happen until after FG 3.0...

So, with the situation as it stands now, there is another solution to the root problem that causes people to dislike the current licenses. Simply put, more people with ultimate licenses need to host Demo games that interested parties can join and test out FG. I will be doing such when I get the Chronic Games up and running, probably hosting 2 to 4 demos a month. But it will be a bit before that happens. Hopefully when I start running regular demos it will spur some of the veteran members to throw one or two up themselves. (Depending on legals, I might even share my demo modules and helper images.)

Something to do until the option of changing licenses is even possible for Smite Works.

Another great point.

Those of us with Ultimate licenses need to do more Demo games.

Unfortunately I suspect that most people, myself included, don't have the free time to devote to this, or it would already be happening. The FG-Con dates are perfect for this... would be nice to see say a free FG copy of a module if you run it in the Con or something along those lines.

But really, a Demo game could be as quick as a 2-hour short "adventure". You'd need to have say four pre-generated PCs available and two or three encounters and a few maps. If you use Voice, then everything else doesn't need to be entered.

In actuality, I personally probably already have a slightly longer than Demo adventure created as a prelude to my ToEE campaign... it could easily be done.

[Nickademus]

Indeed.

I will be making short demo adventures for each Chapter of the Chronic campaign arc so they have a light flavoring of the area featured by the Chapter. I will also be using the four base level 1 pre-gens for the Chronic campaign so that a new player that likes their character in a Demo can jump right into a level 1 adventure with it.

[Griogre]

Honestly, I think you can do a demo in an hour. I think the key is simplicity: you want to show the character sheet, attack rolls, damage resolution, a map with tokens, and some skill/attribute rolls. For a demo use pregens of the simplest character archetype vs. the simplest melee monsters (ie in D&D this would be a party of 1st level vanilla fighters vs. goblins). The last time I ran a demo for someone I just did the first encounter in Caves of Chaos and part of the second. Using audio chat simplifies everything.

[Trenloe]

And just as a reminder... A demo can be ran for 1 player by any version of Fantasy Grounds. Although, without at least a full licence the demo campaign (A Tale of Dinor) will have to be used and campaign data won't be saved.

[Valarian]

Just to note, a person with a full or ultimate license can create a demo campaign for a community ruleset. Again, data won't be saved and the players limited to 1 connection.

[Mellock]

Honestly, I think you can do a demo in an hour. I think the key is simplicity: you want to show the character sheet, attack rolls, damage resolution, a map with tokens, and some skill/attribute rolls. For a demo use pregens of the simplest character archetype vs. the simplest melee monsters (ie in D&D this would be a party of 1st level vanilla fighters vs. goblins). The last time I ran a demo for someone I just did the first encounter in Caves of Chaos and part of the second. Using audio chat simplifies everything.

A demo with me takes about 45 minutes. Most text is pre-written. It walks through most of the player functionality in the DnD 4e ruleset, using 2 premade characters. The little fight at the end is about 10 minutes, and then there's some time for more questions at the end that usually takes another 15 or so. There are others in the chatroom that do demos as well. Most of those take a good amount of time as well and most use GURPS.

[JohnD]

Honestly, I think you can do a demo in an hour. I think the key is simplicity: you want to show the character sheet, attack rolls, damage resolution, a map with tokens, and some skill/attribute rolls. For a demo use pregens of the simplest character archetype vs. the simplest melee monsters (ie in D&D this would be a party of 1st level vanilla fighters vs. goblins). The last time I ran a demo for someone I just did the first encounter in Caves of Chaos and part of the second. Using audio chat simplifies everything.
I am going to put something simple and straightforward together for 3.5e and make myself available as needed starting in October.

[Macgreine]

I am going to put something simple and straightforward together for 3.5e and make myself available as needed starting in October.

I am encouraged by posts like this. I think my frustration comes from so many people looking for a quick and easy way to plug in and not being able to find it. If it didn't cost me $115 I would gladly run intro games or better yet invite someone to be part of a table I am already running. I would even go as far as to say if the dev's would allow me one night a week to use the "ultimate license" I would use it to introduce players new to FG2 and RPG games alike. Just a thought, But I am in recovery, so disregard this post.

*uses soapbox for firewood to keep himself warm through troubling times*

Mac

[jimshu]

I started this thread as tongue in cheek, complaining really about the player base out there for VTTs and the way GMs are udders that game companies suck upon but if people are going to be serious here then I guess I can too.

Im a new dad and the amount of free time I have is minute. So MMOs are out. I cant completely divorce myself from games so I made the decision to get into an RPG and finally be a player. I looked around for games in the area and didnt find any that looked promising. My friends were all scattered around the bay and they all had time issues too, so even if I could convince one to GM (since I am always the GM) it would be hard to get them all to travel. So I started looking at VTTs. I talked to friends at the big convention in the area and we had a plan. A bunch of us would get together to play games and trade of GMing. Since there were going to be a lot of us, if we had to miss a night it wouldnt be a big deal as there would be others. Grand plans....which ended up in getting me one regular sized group. Which is great.

You know what sucks though? I only get to GM. I dont get to be the player. Please let someone else GM with my ultimate license while I am connected as a player. Please.

I mean Im on my knees.

[AstaSyneri]

I feel your pain. I am a not so new dad (but my youngest is just turning two this week), but it's pretty much exactly my situation - and the reason I turned to FG as well. And right now I am facing the same "problem": When I want to play, I have to offer to GM, because otherwise it'll be impossible to time things to fit my extremely tight schedule (my wife's a medical doctor in the hospital and frequently has 24 hour shifts on week-ends).

"Borrowing" out your license if you are online - or at least to people who have the player's license is a great idea, though, I like that! IMHO that would work in everybody's favor - the GM would still have to have a license (if only the cheapest one), but the trick is to get as many players to use FG frequently as we can. Once people are used to it, they are bound to upgrade, simply because... they come to appreciate the functionality.

It's the old Microsoft trick: You don't have to have the best program, you just have to make sure everybody uses it.

[Blacky]

The current license model is fine to me.

[AstaSyneri]

The current license model is fine to me.

It will be for most of us here - why else would we hang around in these forums?

The really big question is "How many more players would use FG - and pay for it, thus accelerating developement which would benefit all of us - if FG had a different or supplemental license model?".

[Blacky]

Without forgetting that it's a lot of work from SmiteWorks to think on it, read, brainstorm, adjust, read marketing data, plus legal fees, and so on. I'm not saying they shouldn't do it, it's their business they should do what they think is right/needed. But my answer was: put the cost (in time and money) of new license models against the academic/theoretical gains. It might no be worth it (ie less works on pure development).

[AstaSyneri]

Oh the joys of doing business. ;-)

Yep, you are exactly right. You only have a chance to know after the fact, and even then you don't know how the alternative would have went.

Just to make sure: I am not asking Smiteworks to do anything (that would be preposterous on my part), I am just writing down ideas I had (and the thread started with a not that serious post anyway).

I have bought my Ultimate license because it is valuable to me - but I want many others to buy into FG, because that will guarantee additional features, continued development, etc. I am that selfish. ;-)