The future of FG - Against the swarm of VTTs [Archive]

Ephyzul

October 24th, 2013, 23:00

Doing quite a bit of research into FG and materials I ended up running across quite a few VTTs available, some older and some just hitting the scene. I personally feel that FG is the best, just an opinion. The features and visual appeal of FG seem to me to be a tad superior to the developed VTTs available, but there looks to be a few contenders on the horizon. Not sure what policy is so I won't name any of them but it seems to me that VTT PnP is somewhat of a niche market.

Do some of these upcoming VTT releases worry anyone about FG population? A couple I ran across look like they are working toward a more pleasant and easier to use interface than what has been seen so far other than FG.

I noticed that you are all greenlit by Steam, I would hope that will bring a few more people to your doors but in my long standing with Steam and its users I would say there would be an extremely small percentage of Steam users that would actually be looking for this. A couple of the developing VTTs are now using 3D environments, which would probably attract many users to them over the 2D top down or even an isometric view.

I also realized that FGs goals in working directly with publishers gives FG somewhat of an edge along with the ongoing effort to bring in more.

The only reason some of this concerns me is I am sure that I will eventually spend quite a bit of money on the materials made for FG and would hate to see things deteriorate due to other VTTs that release with a more attractive and effective VTT.

Does this kind of stuff concern Smiteworks and (maybe I am asking too much, so you can tell me if I am) does Smiteworks have a plan to retain and attract a larger population?

I read in the forums a suggestion by someone to allow the Rollplay people (I just skimmed through a couple videos) to utilize FG for some Youtube exposure. If they actually present the video and display FG this would most certainly be a good idea. I know their videos aren't viral but they do get quite a few hits for being an RPG session. Does Smiteworks intend to increase exposure of FG?

Or, are you all satisfied with the current player population and revenue?

AstaSyneri

October 25th, 2013, 08:55

For my part (not being connected to Smiteworks in any significant way) I am a bit concerned about the slew of "contenders", simply for being afraid that the development of the best ones will be stunted by money going to pretty debutantes who quickly turn into old hags once they see some extended use (my, that image kind of turns... strange now that I read it).

I looked at some others, but while they may satisfy the basic functions needed for D20 fantasy play, they simply don't fulfill my requirement for supporting the games i want to play. Fantasy Grounds does - and even if it's not there, the tools are there to make it possible. It may not have the prettiest screen shots (by comparison), but pretty assets grow dull quickly, it's hard on the GM to keep producing on that level or requires that you continue to buy those assets.

Fantasy Grounds is the best VTT out there in my point of view (that's why I invested in an ultimate license), but it needs to throw on the marketing machine and make itself more visible now that so many eyes are turned to VTT. Which is difficult enough to do with the rather small staff they have. We'll see what happens - the Greenlight success certainly is a great start - and maybe we'll even see a Kickstarter to bring FG to the next level.

RosenMcStern

October 25th, 2013, 12:28

I think the only real competitor - at least until Paizo launches its own VTT - is Roll20. Other products may be good, but they lack the completeness that FG has, and promising to implement 3D will not make up for the missing features. Roll20 instead has been expanding by creating hype and enlarging the community to the point that it is now the "default" VTT that people use.

IMO the selling points of Roll20 are as follows:

1. it pretends to be free (it is not, but you are not aware of this at start)
2. it does not suffer of the usual networking troubles of client/server VTTs like Fantasy Grounds
3. the software and the online community are tightly integrated

If Fantasy Grounds could implement points 1 and 2, it would gain a lot in terms of popularity.

Valarian

October 25th, 2013, 13:29

Tabletop Connect is an interesting newcomer. It has a character sheet builder and a 3D map builder with light sources and line of sight. This, to me, is the only contender for Fantasy Grounds' crown.

JohnD

October 25th, 2013, 15:48

IMO 3d is more trouble than it is worth. It sounds great but good luck finding a DM who can keep up with not only the demands of running a game on a regular basis, but added on top of that, the added development time for displaying the environment.

Speaking from experience of DMing campaigns in Neverwinter Nights 2 where it would take me 40+ hours of development time to create adventuring content that the players would blow through in one 2-hour gaming session.

grimm182

October 25th, 2013, 17:10

Speaking from experience of DMing campaigns in Neverwinter Nights 2 where it would take me 40+ hours of development time to create adventuring content that the players would blow through in one 2-hour gaming session.

The problem i see with 3D (and the nice art assets) is everyone is creating their own. Every computer RPG keeps RE-creating skeletons, orcs and dragons...and they are all so similar across many different games. Quality RPG assets could take a lot less time (to use) if there was one !massive! location for assets. Tombstones and coffins or even asteroids don't need to be custom made for every game.

The closest i have seen something like this work was indeed for NWN (1&2) but the standards greatly varied. Just look at how many dungeon making apps there all...how many thousands of grey cobble textures are out there...and now i am drifting off into blathering rant mode..haha.

In short, 3D assets might not have to be time consuming if you could find everything in one place in a standard format! :)

JohnD

October 25th, 2013, 20:00

The problem i see with 3D (and the nice art assets) is everyone is creating their own. Every computer RPG keeps RE-creating skeletons, orcs and dragons...and they are all so similar across many different games. Quality RPG assets could take a lot less time (to use) if there was one !massive! location for assets. Tombstones and coffins or even asteroids don't need to be custom made for every game.

The closest i have seen something like this work was indeed for NWN (1&2) but the standards greatly varied. Just look at how many dungeon making apps there all...how many thousands of grey cobble textures are out there...and now i am drifting off into blathering rant mode..haha.

In short, 3D assets might not have to be time consuming if you could find everything in one place in a standard format! :)

Oh agreed on the assets part - when I was creating content my custom hak files were in excess of 4 gb in size! It isn't the asset creation that hits the DM though, as once you find a skeleton you can use it, but rather putting everything together into a cohesive whole. What can be quickly described in voice chat with player's imagination doing the rest quickly requires visual representation and the hours of, frankly, work that go along with making that happen.

Moon Wizard

October 25th, 2013, 20:51

As a member of the SmiteWorks team, I'll throw out my 2 cents. It's off the cuff, and this is not a formal position statement. Plus, Doug probably has his own views as well.

In general, we're always looking to grow the FG user base, as it is good for us as well as the community (more content developers, more GMs, more players).

The issue that I find with most competing VTT solutions is that they tend to over-estimate revenues and under-estimate costs. Given that this is a niche market targeted at a price-sensitive consumer, there are challenges to expanding a VTT business in a sustainable method. I've been working on and using VTTs for about 7 years now. There are quite a few VTTs that come out strong, then fade away as the developers realize that the revenue is not what they expect especially after initial launch. It's similar for the free open source ones, people get excited and help out, then drift off as interest wanes or they actually need to make a living. Also, a lot of VTTs focus heavily on marketing to get the initial cash, but not so much in improving their product.

I agree that the marketing of FG has been light. I think that this is more a function of the fact that the company is run part time by 2 people. We are actively looking at different marketing opportunities. It just takes time to set up and manage all the marketing pieces, and not all of them pan out. We've had several promising marketing leads and content publisher leads that we spend time on that just don't work out in the end. Plus, marketing usually ends up taking a back seat, when compared to keeping development going, the web site running, getting more content, etc. We are currently considering options around Steam and Kickstarter for further marketing, but it takes quite a bit of effort to run marketing at that pace (i.e. good Kickstarter projects require full-time person) as well as legal resources to make sure we don't hurt the business in the process.

Specific to 3D, I've talked to quite a few companies looking to do 3D VTT solutions. The biggest problem I see is that they all plan to charge for the 3D assets as one of their primary revenue streams. Given that the cost of making a 3D asset is significantly higher than a 2D asset, this means that they are expecting people to pay $1-3 per 3D asset object, even in bundles. So, given the assumption that our target audience is price-sensitive (especially given free (or marketed as free) competition), I don't see this as a great selling point of the 3D VTTs. If you look at the Kickstarter for Tabletop Connect referenced above, you'll see the cost of 3D assets baked right into their backer levels.

In addition to the 3D asset costs, 3D also increases the setup time for GMs, as outlined by other posters in this thread. In general, I tend to think carefully before adding in features that increase the GM setup time, as I feel that GMs already need to spend too much time to set up games as it is. At some point, I'd like to make that a theme of an update to focus on reducing setup time for all GMs (homebrew or published content).

Regards,
JPG

Ephyzul

October 25th, 2013, 21:48

There are quite a few ways to do marketing on the cheap. I bet you could even enlist the current members of the community to give a hand. Just a thought on a means to bring in more customers, I have seen different levels of success in different online companies offering a recruit a friend type system. You could offer current license holders free material for encouraging friends, family, or whoever to get involved in FG. You could also host events and pull people from the multitude of RPG sites and offer material as prizes, those materials could be the ones utilized by FGs software therefore nudging people to buy a license. Just a couple of ideas but there are many ways to get people in the RPG community to have a better look at FG. I know for a fact the cost alone scares many people away, even if they can afford it. I bought a full and 2 lite licenses back in 08' because two of the people that were going to play with us scoffed at the idea of paying that much for what it "appeared" to be. They did not have that opinion after using the software. The demo really did nothing to encourage them at the time, when we actually started messing with the software together and played a few games is when their opinions really changed.

I am personally pretty fresh when it comes to VTTs as well as PnP. Last time I messed around with PnP was back in the late 80s. Two of my friends growing up became enthralled by PC gaming and that's where I have been since then. We attempted FG back in 2008 but the majority of the people that came into with us wanted to go play an MMORPG. I have longed for and missed the strategic thoughtful gameplay, story driven immersion, and otherwise more involved gameplay of PnP RPGing. I am actually back now because the two friends I grew up are no longer able to game. I am the type of person that invests wholehearted when I get involved in something and that is one of the reason I made the thread.

I would like to, given time and experience, become a successful GM as I really enjoy the thought of creating some challenging scenarios for people to attempt to live through. I just don't want to hear crickets in these halls when I actually get to that point.

Olodrin

October 25th, 2013, 22:30

My group has been using FG2 exclusively for about 5 years now (playing 4E).

In the beginning, the must have tool was the package of parsers built by a forum member. These allowed us to translate all game information into the game, lifting some DM burden. Of course, there's a new 4e parser solution and it's awesome

Once this initial barrier was lifted, we ran smack into the second limitation - maps. DMs would spend hours every week carefully crafting a few maps, which then became the center piece of the session. Since maps are used for combat, we saw A LOT of combat. Enough so that we thought there might be a problem with 4E in general. We eventually cracked the map problem (PM for details).

At this point FG2 has actually become both our VTT and RTT solution.

I agree with the comments above; FG2 succeeds b/c it is a whole solution present in a single place. I'd say cementing their first place position would best be done with more official assets (maybe a dungeon dressing pack to go with the enhanced images functionality?) or some detailed training on how to use the 3.0 functionality to build rulesets and libraries.

Thanks,
Olodrin

PS. Great thread!

Nickademus

October 26th, 2013, 00:18

JFK

October 26th, 2013, 00:47

For me, item #2 (Networking) is the single thing most holding back FGII. Others will, undoubtedly, disagree. People give up when things don't easily work. Hosting FGII, despite many people saying how easy it really is, is not really easy for some people. So, people who would DM/Host and play give up, and continue to keep the software on their machine (maybe), and continue to visit the forums and watch, but they don't actually PLAY. That, in fact, is my experience.
So, 3d isn't even on the bottom of my list; ease of hosting is everything.

Ephyzul

October 26th, 2013, 04:11

My 2 cents:

0.01 = I would never use 3D for a table-top game, virtual or otherwise. I play video games with friends for that.
0.02 = The only features I would use in a VTT are ones that speed up gameplay by handling minutia such as math or tactical positioning. I have no desire to use any other program than Fantasy Grounds because it meets and exceeds my needs and expectations in this department.

It really wasn't my intention to have the focus of the thread geared towards 3D. I think 3D really does nothing just for the simple fact that it does not create a scene to enhance the story, immersion, or replace what needs to be had by the imagination, there is no animation or some CGI movie to go along with each step of the way. That aspect is still up to the players imagination. My main focus of starting this thread was to benefit my own piece of mind and directed more towards the people involved with the development and longevity regardless of position within the company or community. Any project, software or otherwise, requires constant development and room for more inclusion in my opinion. Any sort of gaming (CCG, RPG, Online) that end up with my interests always pulls me in a great deal and I am always compelled to spend a good portion of my time with it. I just want to know the stance of the developers and the community to better assess, as I said before my interest in longevity, how this game will progress in the future. I spend quite a bit of my time outside of reality and would just feel better knowing that my time and money being spent won't be for naught after a couple years. I believe this is some part because many of the MMORPGs I have played over the years have failed at the cost of the gamers. I suppose in the world of VTTs this can be different but there is still major difference between a thriving and successful community and a community that is fading.

I am here and I will remain but I see roll20 & google hangout flourishing with games and people. I find it a lot more difficult to find games here, I have found one during the virtual con since I have come back seeking. This can be because I am sort of brand new to the community and don't know how things roll or maybe it's a slow time. The fact remains that you can't just buy Fantasy Grounds and hop into a game within a short time period. That is ok maybe in some respect if that is how the community goes but to a person just picking up Fantasy Grounds and trying get into VTTs it takes diligence as I have found and diligence is something people don't want to associate with gaming in any regards. Well, other than the diligence of killing an epic foe or fighting your way through a perilous journey.

Trenloe

October 26th, 2013, 04:52

@Ephyzul - Fantasy Grounds has been around for what, 10 years? Look at the joining date for some of the users and a lot of them have been around for a long time (a lot longer than me). Case in point, you signed up on these forums 5 years ago. I don't think Fantasy Grounds is going anywhere, so your investment in time and money will not be lost. Fantasy Grounds is not like an MMORPG, it does not need a company's servers to be able to play.

In terms of finding a game, the Fantasy Grounds community is generally not that much into one-shot scenarios (with the exception of Pathfinder Society and the odd other one-shot game). The community generally plays long running campaigns - so a lot of the games will be running along happily in the background without anyone other than the group knowing. GMs will post in the forums when they are looking for a player or are starting up a new campaign.

It will usually take you a few weeks to find a game that is good for you - in terms of times, style, group, personalities, etc.. Have patience and keep trying - it may take you a while to find the right fit for you. Don't sit back and wait for the games to come to you, keep monitoring the forums and communicate with groups that might work for you. If you are just looking for one shot games, unless you are interested in Pathfinder Society, this may not be the community for you.

Your difficulty in finding a game short term may also be that a lot of the FG community GMs are preparing games for FG Con.

Don't give up - there are plenty of us here who play more than one game a week on Fantasy Grounds. That didn't happen overnight for us, it took us a while for people to get into reliable gaming groups, find the players and GMs they get on with and get some good gaming going.

dulux-oz

October 26th, 2013, 05:28

My $0.20 worth:

As a looonngggg time GM I (and I'm sure others) have ALWAYS had trouble initally finding Players that could be relied upon to show up for most if not all sessions. As I run campaigns, I've gotten to the point of asking potential Players up-front can they commit to showing up every week/fortnight for 3-4 years - if not, then sorry, its not worth my or their time.

Now, here's the funny thing - I struggle for a month or two when preparing for a new campaign, but once things are under-way I find I'm turning potential Players away because the game is full - and I like running games with up to 8-10 Players. I don't advertise games, its all word of mouth. And as we have the rule "Family, Work, then Gaming" we never have much trouble with people not showing - and when they can't show because of family or work they ALWAYS let me know. This, again, is one of the "Rules" I lay down.

Some of the people who want to play are those that are newbies to PnP RPGs and who's only experience is with PC Gaming - they take some work to get their brains into a "group" mode as oppossed to the "me me me" of most PC and Online Gaming - but once over this hurdle they tend to be really great Players.

My point:
The biggest "problem" with FG2 is the same "problem" with PnP RPGs in general: its hard for people to "look over your shoulder" and see a game in action - especially if its one of those games that doesn't use a lot of "props" but is all in the mind of the GM/Players - you have to actually "play" an RPG to figure-out what's it about. In Knowledge Management terms its "Tacid Knowledge" as oppossed to "Explicit Knowledge" - like knowing how to ride a bike: you can't really be told, you have to actually do it yourself.

So, what I am saying is that FG2 at first comes across as a PC Game, as oppossed to what it is, a VTT - if we, as a RPG/VTT community don't encourage others to sit down and try out our hobby (and FG2) then our hobby will die - as it almost did in the 90s before the d20 revival. Its up to US to grow the hobby by getting others to try in out - some will like it and stay with the hobby and others won't. This goes for FG2 as well: we've got to encourage others to play/use it to try to "capture" them. Other VTTS may be "prettier", but has been pointed out above, "pretty" is NOT functionallity, and the work invoved with something like 3D far outweighs the benefits.

OK, so what can SmiteWorks do (for their part) to encourage this?

They can give a free license to some of the groups currently doing PnP YouTube Videos on the provision that FG2 is used in those videos (this has been suggested elsewhere).

They can form some sort of partnership/joint venture with the castAR people to see if both sides can't benefit from the strengths of the other.

They can go to a real-life Con and demonstrate FG2 "where the Gamers are".

They can update the Website to feature the newest/latest Tutorial Videos so that FG2 is easier to Set Up, Run, etc - and no, I don't necessarily mean mine, I mean whoever's are the most up-to-date/clearest/etc.

As I suspect that neither John & Doug have a (strong) business background they can talk to someone that does, with the view of potentially hiring/contracting/partnering/whatever with that person to grow the company. One of the signs of strength with a small enterprise is knowing that you don't know everthing and getting hold of people who do know what you don't. One of the great failures and weaknesses with small business is being scared to talk to experts and potentially holding onto all of the "pie", thus keeping the "pie" small, as oppossed to bringing in new people to grow and share the "pie" - you end up with a smaller percentage of the "pie" but a bigger slice as the "pie" is bigger - I'd ralther have 25% of $1M then 100% of $1K. To get the boys started I hold myself out as an ICT Business person (MBA, M.Inf.Tech) - always willing to talk, fellas.

OK, so what can we do?

We can promote our hobby.

We can encourage others to use FG2.

We can go to a real-life Con and demonstrate FG2 by playing with it "where the Gamers are".

We can go dowen to the local gaming shop and demonstrate FG2 by playing with it "where the Gamers are".

And I'm sure others can come up with other ideas.

OK, end of rant/lecture/whatever. I just thought I'd throw this in.

Cheers

Trenloe

October 26th, 2013, 05:38

Lots of good stuff...
...
They can go to a real-life Con and demonstrate FG2 "where the Gamers are".
...
More good stuff.

The SmiteWorks bunch (and some of their family) had a booth at GenCon - they were busy non stop.

dulux-oz

October 26th, 2013, 06:24

Excellent!!!

That's the trouble with being "Down-Under" - you miss out on most of the great USA & European Cons :(

Actually, I threw that one in more-or-less as an idea "place-holder" - I was pretty sure the boys were doing that anyway.

Might be worth them (& others) actually playing with FG2 at a Con - assuming that that's not happening already - just another $0.02 for the mix.

Cheers

Doswelk

November 3rd, 2013, 14:22

Magnatude

November 3rd, 2013, 18:35

One thing I would like to say... as a v3 tester, Is I LOVE having the facing indicators. As one who worked with NBOS Software, this was one of my favorite things about Screenmonkey. Seeing this in FG made me very happy.

One other thing that drives the users to cling to a VTT is the ability to create your own ruleset... FG2 HAS this... however....
The documentation on this is sparse and hidden in corners of the interwebs... mostly OLD info.

We need a COMPLETE reference and tutorial section with some video or PDF'ed samples.
One of the most asked questions... does it support "*****" rules?

We've lost a major site in the past with reams of good information, we need to get that back once again.
I've personally been spending much time taking IH Ruleset and converting it to 3.5, and its been rather a slow process with my limited time and scripting abilities.
Sure the FG users can step up to the plate and fill in as engineers for new rulesets or updaters of current obsolete sets... but we need a complete reference site.

Zeus

November 3rd, 2013, 21:12

I'll add my thoughts.

As a long term role playing veteran and an established user and developer for FantasyGrounds I have to say the three things that keep me coming back to FG are:

i) a very flexible platforms that focuses on delivering the essence of P&P RPG gaming - for me this is the character sheet and the ability to cross reference information across a variety of differing games systems (not just D20). FGII is very extensible and with the latest work moon_wizard has put into v3 stands to get even better.
ii) a wonderful, supportive and collaborative community of which the tool would be nothing without. Whether your simply looking for a game, wanting to learn more about FG or a particular game system or even a developer looking to add your own bells & whistles - you don't have to search too far before someone here offers some assistance. Blooming marvellous if you ask me.
iii) developers and owners who not only use the product themselves but actively encourage feedback from the community for its ongoing development and providing as much support as a developer could ask for. Thank you Doug and John.

On the subject of 3D, all that glitters, is not gold. I have and sometime and still mess around with 3D tabletops, I built a prototype a couple of years ago using the Unreal Engine SDK for some private face to face games (some of you may have seen some of the videos I shared at the time). I won't lie, it turned out to be a beast in operation and my groups were swooning at the animation and all. However these setups take a lot of time to setup (prefab models or not). It took me nearly 6 months to build the first level of Pyramid of Shadows in Unreal and that was using some off the shelf models as well as custom ones. Whilst it was a fun an interesting project, I couldn't put that much time into every game, it would simply kill me.

I can't speak for all of you but for me P&P RPG gaming started out with my friends many many moons ago with some paper, pens and pencils, dice and a ton of IMAGINATION, at a time when Binatone ran supreme in game consoles (shows you my age). Maps and 3D maps with miniatures is great and all for big battles but I much prefer the speed of imaginative play and for this you need very few visual queues.

I have been lucky to be working on 5E when the alpha for v3 landed and all I will say is, for those who have yet to look under the covers, your in for a treat. :)

Magnatude

November 4th, 2013, 00:20

ah yes... there has even been a few FG sessions where we scrap using any sort of map and play by voice and drop rolls over Icons in the Combat Tracker, Reminds me of the old days doing it like that. :) Thanks for the reminder Zeus.

The best 3D machine is your imagination.

Weltengeist

November 4th, 2013, 12:18

Before giving my 5 cents (mainly about what I think could be improved to stay ahead of the pack), here's my background:

I've been using FG2 for 3 1/2 years now and GMed an estimated 150 gaming sessions using it. Sessions are in German and are arranged within the largest German VoIP roleplaying community, www.drachenzwinge.de (https://www.drachenzwinge.de), playing with a large number of frequently changing players. After a loooong discussion with myself (actually lasting more than a year), I've finally gotten myself an ultimate license which you can take as an indication that I personally prefer FG2 over its current competitors.

However, I'm also well aware of its shortcomings. When trying to encourage others to use FG2, I frequently meet two types of objections:

Objections by new users. The problem here is that many people don't want to buy a players license just because a GM wants to use FG2. They'd rather not join the game. In this context, it would have been helpful if the ultimate license would be more affordable. If that would have been the case, I would have had the possiblity to show FG2 to many users in recent years, hopefully getting them to like the program. Instead, however, many an announced round had to be cancelled due to lack of interest, often with the argument: "Sounds interesting, but regrettably, you're using FG2...".
Objections by experienced users. There is also the other group that knows exactly what they are talking about, and they usually have technical objections - often the same ones that I have myself (the non-standard handling, slow network issues etc.). You know all of those from other threads, so I skip them here.

Another major issue for me is the strong dependency of FG2 on rulesets. Whenever I find a cool new roleplaying game (you know, the ones that are brand new and that everyone is talking about), I hit this obstacle: There is no ruleset yet. And without ruleset, FG2 loses against its free competitors. So one thing that I would consider a major advantage (at least for the kind of game I'm often playing) is a good universal ruleset. I'm aware that there are universal rulesets, but I found all of them wanting in practice. I'm also aware that development of a better universal ruleset is under way - this might really be helpful for playing cutting-edge RPGs and thus recruiting new users in the future.

Along a similar vein, developing your own ruleset it a pain in the neck. Even for a training computer scientist, building a ruleset is often counterintuitive and awkward. The documentation is incomplete, not up-to-date and sometimes even non-existent, and the beginner spends weeks trying to find out how things work. Given that FG2 depends on the community to develop rulesets for as many RPGs as possible, at least improving the documentation for developers (and, come to think of it, also the users) would be really helpful.

And finally, along the same lines, for non-English communities, it would be helpful if translating rulesets would be easier. Currently, the language-dependent features of official rulesets are spread all over the place (or are even hidden from view entirely in the case of bought rulesets). For you English native speakers who can't image that there's another world out there: How much would you like to play a game if all the FG2 terms and text would be, say, in Spanish? See? A clear separation of all language-related entries (say, in one database file) would be helpful for us, so we can quickly translate what needs translating.

And now I say "sorry" for hijacking this thread to post my wish list, but it is indeed a wish list that would make it a lot easier for me (and maybe others) to attract new FG2 users in the future and strengthen our favourite VTT program against its competitors...

RosenMcStern

November 4th, 2013, 13:41

In this context, it would have been helpful if the ultimate license would be more affordable.

I absolutely agree on this. However, it is not our money we are talking about, but Smiteworks', so while reasonable this suggestion might turn out to be simply non-viable. I hope Doug can find a workaround for this issue, but this is strictly his task.

Objections by experienced users. There is also the other group that knows exactly what they are talking about, and they usually have technical objections - often the same ones that I have myself (the non-standard handling, slow network issues etc.).

This is true, too, but in this case it is up to us to show how the apparent technical limitations of the platform are in fact strengths. Everyone now wants web-based vtts, but in fact client/server software works better, albeit it is harder to manufacture. Setting up a complete tech support page for firewall/network issues teaching how to use Hamachi or other VPN software to work around tech issues would be a great added value, and I do not see it anywhere near. A lot of people also argue that it does not have built-in audio or video chat, so a complete tutorial about how to use it in conjunction with Teamspeak, Ventrilo, Skype or Google Hangouts would greatly benefit the marketability of the application.

And without ruleset, FG2 loses against its free competitors. So one thing that I would consider a major advantage (at least for the kind of game I'm often playing) is a good universal ruleset. I'm aware that there are universal rulesets, but I found all of them wanting in practice.

Here I disagree instead. It is true that when I do not have a ruleset for the game I am running I go back to maptool, but this is because of its superior mapping capabilities. Even with a generic ruleset, FG is still better at handling charsheets and other non-graphic game info than its competitors. Of course, a new Foundation ruleset would make things even easier.

Weltengeist

November 4th, 2013, 14:21

This is true, too, but in this case it is up to us to show how the apparent technical limitations of the platform are in fact strengths. Everyone now wants web-based vtts, but in fact client/server software works better, albeit it is harder to manufacture. Setting up a complete tech support page for firewall/network issues teaching how to use Hamachi or other VPN software to work around tech issues would be a great added value, and I do not see it anywhere near. A lot of people also argue that it does not have built-in audio or video chat, so a complete tutorial about how to use it in conjunction with Teamspeak, Ventrilo, Skype or Google Hangouts would greatly benefit the marketability of the application.

Actually, those were not the technical issues I meant ;).

But as for the issue of multimedia support, let's face it: If a competitor manages to build an otherwise competitive solution that offers an all-in-one experience with built-in VoIP or possibly even video chat or music streaming included, then FG2 will lose the battle. As simple as that.

RosenMcStern

November 4th, 2013, 14:46

But as for the issue of multimedia support, let's face it: If a competitor manages to build an otherwise competitive solution that offers an all-in-one experience with built-in VoIP or possibly even video chat or music streaming included, then FG2 will lose the battle. As simple as that.

Why? All-bundled is not the correct solution for technical tools that have a reference implementation. If I am used to Skype for audio and G+ for video - as almost anyone is, at the moment - why should I want to get used to a different tool that does the exact same thing, just differently, for "the sake of integration".

If I was to market my product as having "built-in text editing, no more need to access files in Word to give them that nice formatted look", would you think many people would find it more attractive because of this feature? And in any case, your chat solution will _always_ be technically inferior to G+ or Skype, for the simple fact that the latter are manufactured by the companies with the largest stashes of gold available, so they are usually ahead of any other manufacturer.

It's just a matter of patiently explaining to other people that Fantasy Grounds does not include this feature because it is not needed: your browser or operating system is supposed to support it. It's the exact same reason why it does not include an editor for text or XML: you just use your favourite one.

Weltengeist

November 4th, 2013, 15:18

Why? All-bundled is not the correct solution for technical tools that have a reference implementation. If I am used to Skype for audio and G+ for video - as almost anyone is, at the moment - why should I want to get used to a different tool that does the exact same thing, just differently, for "the sake of integration".

You mean in the same way that WoW relies on people to use ICQ or Skype chat instead of offering its own? :)
(And afaik they've also built their own VoIP into the program in 2007.)

I guess this is just a battle of opinions, so we won't reach a conclusion. But if wasn't so damn hard to find a clear winning condition, I would be tempted to offer you a bet that the media integration that Roll20 & Co are aiming at WILL give them a competitive advantage...

That being said, I personally can live perfectly well with my current Teamspeak + FG2 setup.

dulux-oz

November 4th, 2013, 15:57

You mean in the same way that WoW relies on people to use ICQ or Skype chat instead of offering its own?

Yeah, but this ISN'T WoW - and I for one appreciate that.

Mt gaming group don't usually use any sort of VoIP when we're playing, and the few time we have Teamspeak is the solution we use.

I agree that having a better set of documentation/tutorial videos/etc would make things easier (hence me continuing to put up my Tutorial Videos on YouTube), but the SmiteWorks guys can only do so much - they haven't got the staff that the WoW studio does - and we've all seen the issues we have when we can't get players to shell out the cost of a Player License - if the players would spend the type of money that people happily spend on the WoW client (and monthly suspscription - I assume that WoW has a monthy subscription) then the SmiteWorks guys could put in "all the bells and whisles" that people want.

Just another $0.02 worth of MNSHO - and another shameless Tutorial Video plug :p

Cheers

Talen

November 4th, 2013, 16:07

I agree with a number of observations and suggestions that have been made in this thread regarding the future of FG. For me, the most significant issue is increasing the size of the community. I agree we have a significant silent majority of gamers who use FG to run their regular games and never post here. However, this doesn’t do anything for the newcomer to assure their investment will continue to be supported by the developers and the community when they are looking for new games. They want to see a visible and active community.

I think the convention and weekly pickup games do a lot on the visibility front. I think this is one of the reasons the Pathfinder community grew so much in the last 2 years because many are looking for pick-up games and the PFS model is completely aligned with that goal.

Related to the early suggestion on the pricing of the ultimate license: I’d love to see Smiteworks more actively support scheduled regular pickup games of different systems by either running the games themselves on an ultimate license, or providing an ultimate license (temporary or permanent) to the GM’s running the games for strangers. I wouldn’t expect the support for games the GM runs for my friends, but if they are running for strangers who might pick up the program or a new ruleset, Smiteworks should explore ways to make that happen more often.

Trenloe

November 4th, 2013, 16:14

So one thing that I would consider a major advantage (at least for the kind of game I'm often playing) is a good universal ruleset.
This is exactly what you'll get in FG 3.0 with the CoreRPG ruleset. All other rulesets will be based off this which provides a lot of the base functionality - including allowing you to run games for most RPGs (very little automation, of course) with a basic character sheet and all of the base FG features. This ruleset is where all of the base, generic functionality is coded - it is where upgrades and future functionality will be coded so will keep up with FG as it changes in future versions.

And finally, along the same lines, for non-English communities, it would be helpful if translating rulesets would be easier.
This is also coming in FG 3.0. There are "string" XML files that are used as resources for the rulesets. Here is a part of the strings_common.xml file from the CoreRPG ruleset:


<string name="message_slashcommands">SLASH COMMANDS [required] <optional></string>
<string name="message_slashREVLon">Revealing all die rolls</string>
<string name="message_slashREVLoff">Hiding all die rolls</string>
<string name="error_slashexportcharmissing">Unable to find character requested for export.</string>
<string name="error_slashreplytargetmissing">Reply target not available.</string>
<string name="error_slashwhispertargetmissing">Whisper recipient not found.</string>
<string name="error_slashwhispermsgmissing">No whisper message found.</string>
<string name="error_slashwhispersourcemissing">Please select an identity before whispering.</string>
<string name="message_slashimportsuccess">Imported character(s) from</string>
<string name="message_slashexportsuccess">Exported character</string>
<string name="message_slashexportallsuccess">Exported all characters</string>
<string name="error_oobunknown">[ERROR] Unknown special message type received.</string>

Along a similar vein, developing your own ruleset it a pain in the neck. Even for a training computer scientist, building a ruleset is often counterintuitive and awkward.

There is a ruleset creation "wizard" (IDE) being created by a community member, who is talking to SmiteWorks about how best to do this with their support: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?19549-New-project-Ruleset-wizard This will make it much easier to develop the GUI side of FG and to also hang code off these components.

Documentation is definitely a weakness and we'll hopefully see some updates to that once FG 3.0 is out and stable. Until now a lot of ruleset update documentation would be relevant only to a specific ruleset so documenting how to change most rulesets would have been a huge job. With FG 3.0 there can be documentation on how to build/modify a ruleset based on a single ruleset - the CoreRPG ruleset.

As has been mentioned elsewhere, SmiteWorks is a company of 2 people who have day jobs, so they have to target the work they do very selectively. They do listen to the community and a lot of what is being put into FG 3.0 is based off community feedback. I think FG 3.0 will be a major step forward in expandability and customisation - allowing more people to game in FG with the games they want to play and making it easier for developers to keep their ruleset up-to-date with base FG functionality.

dr_venture

November 4th, 2013, 18:58

The only thing I'd like to toss into the discussion here, regarding integration of features, ease of use, technical issues, etc. I can only speak from personal experience, and that is that the majority of the gamers I personally know a) are not using VTT in any games, and b) run a whole range from technical klutzes to hardware driver programmers... but the majority fall towards the not-so-techie side of the spectrum. I can almost guarantee that most of them want an integrated solution if they are to make the change to VTT - their lives are complicated enough and busy enough that they don't want to have to understand the technical issues involved, they want to buy something at a reasonable price and have it solve all their problems... that would be the whole idea to them, I think. If you needed to figure out how to use multiple services to add video chat, background music, etc... they'd be turned off very quickly.

Another aspect that I think is overlooked by many folks (especially those behind the ill-conceived "reforging" of Obsidian Portal) is that people are willing to put up with a certain amount of change if the benefits are clear to them, but they're tired of the virtual world constantly shifting under their feet. Part of their desire to purchase an integrated solution would be to learn 1 tool, and learn it once... hopefully. They'd like a sense of consistency, and to not have to worry about software changes significantly interrupting their games. They aren't going to want o invest the time and money into a platform that they aren't sure they're going to like the next time it "reforges" into the flavor of the day.

But again, these are the gamers I know who don't already use VTTs, so they're less inclined than many on these boards to proactively hunt down solutions... so they are not customers yet. A reasonably priced solution that was very easy to use and intuitive, and made their purchase seem like 1-stop shopping for your online gaming needs, and they might become customers. Now what the potential universe is out there for those types of customers, I have no idea - but from my group of friends, I'd think it was the majority of current, former, and potentially once-again gamers. It's worth keeping in mind the type of customers that Smiteworks might be marketing to, as they're not all the same as many of the folks on the boards are.

Magnatude

November 4th, 2013, 19:00

There is a ruleset creation "wizard" (IDE) being created by a community member, who is talking to SmiteWorks about how best to do this with their support: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?19549-New-project-Ruleset-wizard This will make it much easier to develop the GUI side of FG and to also hang code off these components.

Oh Man... this here is the best news I've ever seen... brings a tear to my eye... I'm all choked up now...

Yeah Dr Venture... I'm with you there on OP...
My crafted CSS site now looks like pumpkin-vomit.
And I want my money back.

RosenMcStern

November 5th, 2013, 09:01

I guess this is just a battle of opinions, so we won't reach a conclusion. But if wasn't so damn hard to find a clear winning condition, I would be tempted to offer you a bet that the media integration that Roll20 & Co are aiming at WILL give them a competitive advantage...

It all boils down to the stupidity of the customer base. The Roll20 team has just admitted that their initial choice of video chat technology was a mistake, and they are now moviing to another video technology. In my opinion (and I am more qualified than them to make such a statement), the time spent on this - which is by no means trivial - is time that is just WASTED when your app can already leverage Google Hangouts for video: whatever tech you can integrate, Google will always be ahead of you in video performance. And in the meantime they are not integrating "negligible" functionalities like designing character sheet templates (you have to re-enter the name for the attributes in each and every char sheet you input) or adding up multiple die rolls when comparing them to a number: all stuff that true roleplayers certainly need less than new ways to make funny faces while playing. If I was a paying customer of Roll20, I would really be pissed off. Luckily thy did not get my money. Ah, and I did not mention the "three dimensional dice" they have just added: I tried them last week and all players were ROTFL when comparing them to the FG ones. What puzzles me is the number of people who say "bravo" when they see them adding this useless crap and neglecting basic functionalities like organizing your tokens and the like.

Please consider also that the majority of players who play online do NOT use a VTT, just they just use Skype and G+, so I think integration of what you already use to play is much more attractive than redoing it with questionable technology. The real advantage of Roll20 is that it integrates with Google Hangouts. But as long as they do not exploit this strength, FG has room to expand its market base.