Release Fantasy Grounds Unity now...

[Locotomo]

...or else all the Roll20 converters are quicker gone than u think .
I know this will put a lot of pressure on you, but its a great chance you shouldnt throw away 😄👍

[LordEntrails]

So they should release something that's not stable?
Has bugs and will probably crash regularly?
Performs poorly?
Can't be used with existing content?

Come on, think about it, if they had something that they were comfortable releasing, they wouldn't be continuing to develop it. Sure, now would be an opportune time to release it, if it were ready, but releasing it before its ready could be enough to set back the company a decade.

[thorun09]

So they should release something that's not stable?
Has bugs and will probably crash regularly?
Performs poorly?
Can't be used with existing content?

Come on, think about it, if they had something that they were comfortable releasing, they wouldn't be continuing to develop it. Sure, now would be an opportune time to release it, if it were ready, but releasing it before its ready could be enough to set back the company a decade.

So I too am anxious for Unity, but I prefer them to get it close to right as they can before release. I know there may be kinks, but I'm willing to wait.

[Rewstyr]

So I too am anxious for Unity, but I prefer them to get it close to right as they can before release. I know there may be kinks, but I'm willing to wait.

One option, though I am not necessarily suggesting it, is to release a test version to people actually interested and able to test/play with a non-release version. I know I would do this even if there were bugs and such.

[lostsanityreturned]

...or else all the Roll20 converters are quicker gone than u think .
I know this will put a lot of pressure on you, but its a great chance you shouldnt throw away ����

I doubt anyone who gives the program a real shot will be gone that fast, there aren't really many other VTT of note on the market and what FG does well it does really well.

FGU will be great, and I really want it too. But it isn't ready and that is just reality sadly.

[Locotomo]

What about an ultra light demo version?
A sheet tool, some dice and some map features and most importantly video chat functionality .
You don‘t have to put in all the rules sets, combat tracker and backwards compatibility :)
On the other hand, if you want to stay with the old version for some time , is it not possible to at least make Fantasy Grounds able to open multiple windows?

[lostsanityreturned]

What about an ultra light demo version?
A sheet tool, some dice and some map features and most importantly video chat functionality .
You don‘t have to put in all the rules sets, combat tracker and backwards compatibility :)
On the other hand, if you want to stay with the old version for some time , is it not possible to at least make Fantasy Grounds able to open multiple windows?

As someone who has worked in software development... That would likely add months and months of time to the development schedule with little to no benefit. Better to just put out a beta when it is in a polished enough position to do so.

And open multiple windows? You can have multiple instances open at once already. I am not sure what you mean by open multiple windows unless you are asking for the elements to be floating windows elements. In which case no the program doesn't support that and I don't believe unity will either.

Sadly this limits multi monitor support to extended mode currently.

[Locotomo]

Yes, unlocking at the least the character sheets and putting them on a second monitor would be cool.
:)

[Mellock]

I wouldn't keep chasing the next high as a user. The current Fantasy Grounds is great as it is. If someone doesn't see the added benefit of FG over Roll20 right as it is now, let them stay with Roll20. Welcome warmly the users who decide to enjoy FG right now, and ensure them that the creators actually enjoy having them as part of the community.

[Calum]

I'd rather not have it released in an unfinished state. I've seen too many games pushed out way before they were ready (total war rome 2 anyone?) and it has taken devs of these games a long time to repair the damage both to their game their reputations. Personaly I think FG & Smiteworks are in a nice place in terms of community relations and I wouldn't want that peed all over by a rushed half arsed release.

[Nylanfs]

So what you are saying is we DON'T want a No Man's Sky? :)

[Ampersandrew]

My take, for what its worth.

If folk aren't happy with Fantasy Grounds Classic, they probably won't be happy with Fantasy Ground Unity either. I don't think masssive UI changes are on the cards.


It will have better networking, less handholding DMs through the connection process.
It will have better memory management, less worrying about sharing stuff.
The overwhelming majority (all?) of the stuff that works on Classic will Work on Unity.


I don't see how releasing a half-arsed version of that will convince people to stay.

[Three of Swords]

If folk aren't happy with Fantasy Grouunds Classic, they probably won't be happy with Fantasy Ground Unity either. I don't think masssive UI changes are on the cards.

I 100% agree that Smiteworks should not release Unity until it is ready.

But I can say that the way maps seem to work in the Unity demos is a huge UI boost. When I first came to FG from Roll20, the way maps work in FG was almost enough to send me back to Roll20.

I could be wrong. But it looks like Smiteworks is making maps work a lot like Roll20, which is huge because that is the best thing about Roll20 compared to FG.

[Ampersandrew]

But I can say that the way maps seem to work in the Unity demos is a huge UI boost. When I first came to FG from Roll20, the way maps work in FG was almost enough to send me back to Roll20.

I could be wrong. But it looks like Smiteworks is making maps work a lot like Roll20, which is huge because that is the best thing about Roll20 compared to FG.

I have seen the map demos and they were very, very impressive. I'm looking forward to having that. I hope you're right and the new version gives you map functions that replace Roll20 (which you obviously liked for its maps).

Anyway, They've held their nerve for four years or so, I don't think they're going to rush anything out at this point.

[ddavison]

I think it is fair to say that we've lost some potential customers & users due to port forwarding and lack of dynamic line of sight. FGU should hopefully bring many of those people back. If we lost you because you really don't like the general interface, then I don't think FGU is going to bring you back.

[epithet]

While your map tools could use some improvement, I think the "general interface" gets and keeps players.

Dynamic lighting and line-of-sight would be nice, but those aren't the features I really enjoy when I use other platforms. It's the simple stuff, like being able to type text onto the map, or mix freehand and shapes in different colors, or put an aura around a token. All of those little quality of life map tool things don't really come close to the automation, data organization and record integration, and combat tracker in Fantasy Grounds. That "general interface" is boss.

[seycyrus]

Well, I for one don't want FG to look like roll20!

[lostsanityreturned]

Well, I for one don't want FG to look like roll20!

Yeah FG is a bit clunky and poorly designed from a UX standpoint, but it is LEAGUES above roll20 in that regard.
Clunky, slow, nested.. these are all adjectives I use to describe the roll20 interface.

[yeknom]

Fantasy Grounds is excellent for me. It pretty much does what I need it to do to play any game I feel like playing. I really want a dynamic lighting feature but that isn't a must have for me for when/if the Unity version is released. I will buy Unity when it comes out because I expect it will deliver the same level of enjoyment I currently receive from Fantasy Grounds. I have had a few disappointments, sure, that's to be expected, but nothing that I can't manage on my end.

Would I like to see Unity sooner? Yes. Would I be concerned if it had bugs to start with? No, not really. Can I wait until Smiteworks is ready to release? Yes.

[Razortide]

I think it is fair to say that we've lost some potential customers & users due to port forwarding and lack of dynamic line of sight. FGU should hopefully bring many of those people back. If we lost you because you really don't like the general interface, then I don't think FGU is going to bring you back.

True. Port Forwarding is so 2008. I can live with everything else and I really love the interface, but in 2018 it is unacceptable to rely on IPv4 (which is not even supported by my ISP anymorei.

[shadzar]

If we lost you because you really don't like the general interface, then I don't think FGU is going to bring you back.

or lack of updating could drive more people away, or fail to gain new people due to the outmoded and outdated UI design.

4 years could have given a whole new updated rewrite and allow everyone to remake their content rather than worry with backward compatibility. with running parallel systems.

that is a lot of time wasted to change very little...


I think it is fair to say that we've lost some potential customers & users due to port forwarding and lack of dynamic line of sight.

those 2 things, shouldn't have taken 4 years as the only major upgrade to an aging software package.

the post tells people to not expect any better window management from FGU. it will just big as big a mess as it currently is, and cost more money to rebuy something you already own.

[Razortide]

By the way: Is there any way, we as users are able to support you guys to make this a thing?

[Valyar]

By the way: Is there any way, we as users are able to support you guys to make this a thing?
Use your wallet in the Store :) Standard way to support companies.

[Razortide]

It's not about supporting a company, but supporting a cause :-)

[Mellock]

Be an awesome DM :)

[JohnQPublic]

Use your wallet in the Store :) Standard way to support companies.

The problem with that is that it supports the status quo and doesn't in any way let them know that I would be spending even more money if they got Unity out.

I love Fantasy Grounds and I'm being as patient as I can for the Unity version but my guess is we are at least a year away still. If I remember correctly from previous comments, there was a list of 25 pages of 'stuff' that they wanted for Unity. There are 5 pages left (as of a month or three ago - I don't really remember). They've been working on it for 5 years, so approx 4 pages a year, which means there is approximately a year left before beta.

I'm in NO WAY saying that it's easy. I myself am currently maintaining a growing system while trying to create a completely new version from scratch. The new version needs to do everything the existing one does, but better and more. It's a gigantic pain in the ***. I know it's a lot of work.

When potential new users come to these forums and see that the thread asking for a release date for Unity is over 4 years old they get the (honestly correct) opinion that it's vaporware. Or worse(?), they get the idea that it's coming out 'soon' and don't buy anything. By the time it comes out they are going to be so heavily invested in Roll20 that they won't be able to afford to come back.

My concern is that by the time it's done (if it ever is), it'll be antiquated and in need of a new version.

[Three of Swords]

The problem with that is that it supports the status quo and doesn't in any way let them know that I would be spending even more money if they got Unity out.

I love Fantasy Grounds and I'm being as patient as I can for the Unity version but my guess is we are at least a year away still. If I remember correctly from previous comments, there was a list of 25 pages of 'stuff' that they wanted for Unity. There are 5 pages left (as of a month or three ago - I don't really remember). They've been working on it for 5 years, so approx 4 pages a year, which means there is approximately a year left before beta.

I'm in NO WAY saying that it's easy. I myself am currently maintaining a growing system while trying to create a completely new version from scratch. The new version needs to do everything the existing one does, but better and more. It's a gigantic pain in the ***. I know it's a lot of work.

When potential new users come to these forums and see that the thread asking for a release date for Unity is over 4 years old they get the (honestly correct) opinion that it's vaporware. Or worse(?), they get the idea that it's coming out 'soon' and don't buy anything. By the time it comes out they are going to be so heavily invested in Roll20 that they won't be able to afford to come back.

My concern is that by the time it's done (if it ever is), it'll be antiquated and in need of a new version.

Unfortunately, all of this.

When I first came to FG from Roll20, I saw the potential in Unity, and was very excited. Then I realized how long Unity had been in development with very little progress to show for it and had to temper my expectations.

I still feel FG is currently as good as Roll20 overall (each has some strengths and weaknesses compared to the other platform) and that I got my money's worth. FG is, after all, significantly cheaper than Roll20 over time (assuming you upgrade your Roll20 account to Pro, which I did).

But at this point, I'm convinced that Unity will not happen any time soon. So I'm prepared to deal with the platform, as is, for quite some time. In fact, I hope not much changes on the current platform, since that development time means it came from time that could have been spent on Unity.

[SirGraystone]

While dynamic line of sight would be nice, a lot of peoples on roll20 don't have it either because you have to pay for it. And you can show and hide part of the map with the fog of war in FG. Of course we all want FGU for many reasons, but we will get it when it's ready

[Octavious]

I am fine with FG at present and would rather wait until Unity is finished.. Problem with releasing something that is half baked even to people who say its fine with them, there are going to be just as many people bitch about things not working correctly and wanting their money back ... Case in point is the "Starfinder" rule set. far as I am concerned its not done until the starship combat tracker is completed . I GM one game and decided to shelf it until the rule set is finished.. Just not worth the aggravation . Until then Ill save my money and go back to D&D .

[Honken]

I have been around FG since mid 2.0. I remember when Unity was announced. It sounded AWESOME, but. I can play my games with FG as is, i would rather Unity is released when it performs to Smiteworks expectations. I have stopped waiting, it will come out when it will come out. All this automation won't do me any good, since i play games that doesn't have a fancy ruleset anyway.

/H

[Wolfheart]

I think it is fair to say that we've lost some potential customers & users due to port forwarding and lack of dynamic line of sight. FGU should hopefully bring many of those people back. If we lost you because you really don't like the general interface, then I don't think FGU is going to bring you back.

From my XP, I'd argue it's first and foremost port forwarding/network issues as you mentioned, but second IMO is not dynamic lighting. Keep in mind this is just my opinion based on people I know/use FG and you obviously have a better overview but still, I'd say it's the lack of ease to modify things such as character sheets without going into code, the map/images (I've had FG for three years now and I'm still struggling with the map feature) and the lack of options when it comes to dice rolling.

(No offense intended. Just thoughts I felt like sharing. There's a lot of good things about FG too of course).

[Octavious]

I think it is fair to say that we've lost some potential customers & users due to port forwarding and lack of dynamic line of sight. FGU should hopefully bring many of those people back. If we lost you because you really don't like the general interface, then I don't think FGU is going to bring you back.


I have to agree with port forwarding part.. FG always worked on my system with no fiddling of port forwarding.. but I can tell you.. if I had to mess with all that FG would have been deleted immediately and I would have moved on to most likely roll20.. but since it worked ok I have bought well over 800.00 of material.. I imagine more than you can think may have moved on due to having to mess with something to get it up and running.

[Xemit]

The only reason port forwarding is needed is to host the game locally instead of using some pool of servers in a permanent farm on the Internet. That, of course, means you would only be able to play if there was a live Internet connection and that the server pool is big enough to never cause lagging game play.

So it would be easier to have users connect and use it, but at the expense of obtaining and maintaining a large pool of servers (hardware and staff).

I personally prefer hosting locally and keeping my costs down substantially.

Port forwarding is not all that difficult to achieve manually. Only the outlier very odd cases make this tricky. I agree that not everyone is familiar with the fun of port forwarding as few ever install server software on their computers.

UPnP technology can (mostly) make this as transparent as using a pool of servers. UPnP will have trouble on those odd network configurations where people have chained multiple routers or have an ISP that blocks the port. So it will work for those with typical connections and be trouble with those outlier cases still.

[damned]

The only reason port forwarding is needed is to host the game locally instead of using some pool of servers in a permanent farm on the Internet. That, of course, means you would only be able to play if there was a live Internet connection and that the server pool is big enough to never cause lagging game play.

So it would be easier to have users connect and use it, but at the expense of obtaining and maintaining a large pool of servers (hardware and staff).

I personally prefer hosting locally and keeping my costs down substantially.

Port forwarding is not all that difficult to achieve manually. Only the outlier very odd cases make this tricky. I agree that not everyone is familiar with the fun of port forwarding as few ever install server software on their computers.

UPnP technology can (mostly) make this as transparent as using a pool of servers. UPnP will have trouble on those odd network configurations where people have chained multiple routers or have an ISP that blocks the port. So it will work for those with typical connections and be trouble with those outlier cases still.

In the US, UK, AUS this is mostly true - but for many other countries IP addresses are shared and natted outside of the customers control and port forwarding cannot be done.
I personally believe networking issues is the #1 challenge that needs solving.

[Batman13]

I have has issues with the networking over the years, but it is nothing I could not fix with a little fiddling and research. I do agree that the UI is a bit clunky and looks dated. I have to run a double monitor to see all the windows and maps that I need to have open to DM effectivley. That I liked roll20 interface, but not many of the other features. I would love for the new employies to design a new UI that we could load. Iam not talking about the skins, but a new UI that looks more sleek and modern. Now that being said, what I like and what is needed or nessassary are different things. If creating a UI is too time intensive, scrap the idea. I would rather work toward Unity than retrofitting wasting time and effort retrofitting the current FG. All in all, it is clunky but reliable.

[Ken L]

If creating a UI is too time intensive, scrap the idea..

FG needs a new UI. The only current saving grace it has is the ability to mold the UI by the user which d20pro and roll20 lack.

A bunch of the rulesets have 'themes' but none really re-work the UI like such: https://imgur.com/zpg2iAc. It however isn't an excuse to not retrofit the default UI rather than relying on the 'community' to develop it like a set a of crutches.

[Bidmaron]

It doesn't need a new UI, and no matter how many times you say it, there are many of us who disagree. Are there aspects that need improvement? Sure. But I (and others) like the fact that the UI is not like a normal, sterile Windows (or Mac) UI. We use it for fantasy roleplaying, and the different UI helps that suspension of disbelief. The skinning abilities could use some improvement so those who want to play a SCI-FI or modern game can do so easier,

I do thank you, Ken for all your hard work for the community.

[Batman13]

Bidmarn, I think Ken and I are saying that we would like to have multiple UI options not just skins. I am in no way lobbying for FG to completely drom the current interface. I would like to have more modern, sleaker options. The software is powerful, but looks veryoutdates. That can push many casual gamers away. I know when I first saw FG, I thought it looked like it looked like a video game from the late 90's/early 2000's. That is not nessassarly bad. I love Baulders Gate, but is is also not attractive to many newer players whos cant get past their inital impressions.

[Bidmaron]

It is that 'antique' look that helps reinforce the fantasy aspect, IMO. And I remain in disagreement. The trend in OSs these days is to remove the OS UI or only have it show up if you cursor up to the top for the menu, e.g. Many are using applications in full-screen mode. I acknowledge that there are UI features we need that don't affect the visual component (why can't you click in the space off the thumb of a scrollbar to move the window contents up/down one window-height, e.g. in some windows), but do decry that it is completely unapproachable or imply that our own personal tastes in interface must be inflicted upon everyone is over the top, IMO. FG was designed for fantasy use, as its very name indicates. The fact that it can easily be used for other genres is a tribute to its strengths, but please do not inflict some sterile, modern-looking UI on the application.

I have never understood why radial menus, for example, are so bothersome. They are much more attractive than the text-based contextual menus that are the alternative. They DO need to be modified to provide for more than 8 selection options.

[dulux-oz]

I have never understood why radial menus, for example, are so bothersome. They are much more attractive than the text-based contextual menus that are the alternative. They DO need to be modified to provide for more than 8 selection options.

Oh, I don't know - eight is about the right number of options for one "set" - design theory says a "good" number is 5 to 9 options on a menu / in a set - any less and you're wasting space (assuming you have more, of course) and any more that 8-9 and the human mind shies away from "too many choices".

And its very easy to have submenus as one or more of the eight choices.

But yes, I don't think the UI needs to be "updated" either - it serves it purpose, it does add to the "feel" of the RPG, and even when playing a "modern" game a simple skin change is all you need to help with the "suspension of disbelief" - check out the CoC Ruleset skin, or even the DORCore, for some examples.

Remember: "new" does not necessarily mean "better", nor "different" mean "inferior". Nor do I believe that the interface is turning away players - they many be using that as an excuse (if you were to ask them) but I think you'll find it more likely that their "wham, bam, thank you mam" attitude towards *computer* rpgs is way more likely the reason - ie unrealistic expectations. I've *never* had anyone turn away from the platform over the UI, but I have had people complain bitterly that they can't get in a "pick-up game" when ever they want - but that's not what Tabletop RPGs are about.

Finally don't forget that but "current" windows and mac UI designs can be said to do the same thing (ie turn people off).

Just my $0.02 worth (from over 35 years of gaming experience) :)

[Bidmaron]

And its very easy to have submenus as one or more of the eight choices.



The problem is that if you are writing extensions, it is a pain in the arse to try to figure out how to do submenus because you may not know the context of the menu you are adding to. Sure, if you are starting from scratch at the top to produce a menu, it is easy to do submenus, but I have not found a graceful way to examine an existing radial menu and figure out how to make a submenu that makes contextual sense (e.g. if there are 8 options, and you want to add a 9th, which of the 8 do you peel off to the new submenu to make room for your submenu option [which can basically only have an ellipsis graphic with hover text of "Additional options..." or some such]). Not to mention patching the original response code to handle the option that had to be moved to a submenu...

[shadzar]

It is that 'antique' look that helps reinforce the fantasy aspect, IMO.

So does a horse and cart, but you won't see me going amish and getting rid of my car anytime soon for some unneeded flavor in my life. things for daily use, need to work better than antiquated technology and design.

the UI can still be a jumble of windows, but better management with a better core coding environment that is Unity. ability to lock windows to a location or size, and better window controls than say the map trying to fight to zoom or scroll or figure out which MS-DOS method of keyboard combinations to use ti navigate it.

a point and click system and UI should only need the pointing and clicking, not a 3-finger salute added to it.

even keybinding your own commands would be a big improvement. 20 years ago was Windows98, there has a lot been changed in the way software looks and works since then, and to gain new users of the mdoern era, you have to update to a more NOW and intuitive design in some way. otherwise the only customers of your product will be the existing ones, with no hope for growth.


work smarter, not harder.
Keep It Simple Stupid
Garbage in, Garbage Out

[Bidmaron]

Growth has been steady and good, shadzar. SW has the statistics to prove it, so your argument is on its face, specious. Again, there needs to be some improvements, and the need for a middle click IS very frustrating. The appearance is not something that needs improvement, IMO. We can disagree and obviously do, but don't force your view on me.

[Kelrugem]

I agree with you, Bidmaron :) My players and me really like the actual UI, for us it was more intuitive than Roll20's and my first thought (when i saw FG) was how good it looks :D Yes, there may be some people who likes something like this :) Modern UIs never really fitted my taste at the moment, especially when I want to play D&D or whatever :) I would not say that modern UIs are necessarily better, first of all they are only "different", with a different skin and order. And what is intuitive or not depends often on the user and to what he/she is used to.

But I also disagree with the typical sentence "A UI which is not self-explaining is not a UI", it always depends also on the user and in my experience simple UIs get complicated when using more complex usabilities (clicking through thousands of thousands of drop-down menus) while a more complicated UI provides more speed in such situations when a user has learned to use it. I am someone who likes to learn new UIs, especially when this "initial energy" (I've used for learning it) is somehow persistent such that this "energy" helps me later to be faster in using this programme, while I have to start always near the bottom of "energy" in simple build programmes. (sorry I am a physicist, so I hope this picture somehow explains what I mean :D )

Thanks for the discussion :) Concluding it, I guess it also depends strongly on the taste of the people, some like this, some like that, and it is nothing wrong with either of that :) When someone disagrees with some UI then this doesn't necessarily mean that this UI is better or worse than another UI (for this one would need deeper discussions and arguments about the UI and not about the tastes of people)

PS: This reminds me a bit about the discussions if one should use Word or LaTeX to write one owns works :D

[Oberoten]

I agree with you, Bidmaron :) My players and me really like the actual UI, for us it was more intuitive than Roll20's and my first thought (when i saw FG) was how good it looks :D Yes, there may be some people who likes something like this :) Modern UIs never really fitted my taste at the moment, especially when I want to play D&D or whatever :) I would not say that modern UIs are necessarily better, first of all they are only "different", with a different skin and order. And what is intuitive or not depends often on the user and to what he/she is used to.

But I also disagree with the typical sentence "A UI which is not self-explaining is not a UI", it always depends also on the user and in my experience simple UIs get complicated when using more complex usabilities (clicking through thousands of thousands of drop-down menus) while a more complicated UI provides more speed in such situations when a user has learned to use it. I am someone who likes to learn new UIs, especially when this "initial energy" (I've used for learning it) is somehow persistent such that this "energy" helps me later to be faster in using this programme, while I have to start always near the bottom of "energy" in simple build programmes. (sorry I am a physicist, so I hope this picture somehow explains what I mean :D )

Thanks for the discussion :) Concluding it, I guess it also depends strongly on the taste of the people, some like this, some like that, and it is nothing wrong with either of that :) When someone disagrees with some UI then this doesn't necessarily mean that this UI is better or worse than another UI (for this one would need deeper discussions and arguments about the UI and not about the tastes of people)

PS: This reminds me a bit about the discussions if one should use Word or LaTeX to write one owns works :D

.... He said LaTeX! GET HIM!!!

[Kelrugem]

.... He said LaTeX! GET HIM!!!

Then I should rather not say that I prefer LaTeX? :D oh, ooops... :P

[dragonheels]

It doesn't need a new UI, and no matter how many times you say it, there are many of us who disagree. Are there aspects that need improvement? Sure. But I (and others) like the fact that the UI is not like a normal, sterile Windows (or Mac) UI. We use it for fantasy roleplaying, and the different UI helps that suspension of disbelief. The skinning abilities could use some improvement so those who want to play a SCI-FI or modern game can do so easier,


I could not have said it better!

[StoryWeaver]

I am excited about the possibilities Unity brings. One being eventually that development effort is no longer split, so all rather than 1.5 currently can focus on improving on one platform.

While the current interface is something me and my players are getting more used to as we play more and it has a lot to offer once you start figuring it out. Overall though it is somewhat antiquated and a lot of things work counter-intuitively to modern standards.
Is that better or worse, that can be argued back and forth, I suppose you can get used to most things.
However I know it's made it very hard for some of my players to get to grasps with it, to the point of temporarily leaving a long standing group that previously played for months together on another web based platform prior. Out of frustration with the UI.

So I would agree to the comments before about retention vs gaining new customers. Even if SW and the use of FG are growing, which I am very pleased to know, one could always ask if it wouldn't grow faster with a more welcoming (in general for device users more comfortable with modern UIs), if it had a more modernized and streamlined interface?


We've figured out the network issues and solved those so that's a no issue for myself. Though again, it's taken some researching and effort to overcome that.


For myself, the one thing I would rate of highest importance would be a fully working 64-bit environment and a better memory architecture for players clients going forward. Running out of memory has been a frequent issue in my D&D 5e games with the current 32-bit version of FG. It's limiting for campaign running and creation and awkward to try to constantly keep an eye on it and work around it. Something which isn't usually an issue in this day and age. For less popular RPG systems with fever resources available this has not been such a problem.

As most of you DMs/GMs out there may have noticed, memory usage tends to be about 2-2.5x higher for players than the GM. So for D&D 5e, it doesn't take more than 2-4 books loaded sometimes to push past that 3 GB mark for players, at which point everything starts to act badly and crashes are frequent. It limits the players to not be able to keep the books provided loaded and is only going to get worse as more books get released by WotC.
I am aware of measures to limit memory usage, which I found out about partly due to the help of the great support at FG's discord channels (for which you have my thanks :) ), and forum digging. Even despite that it's a bit of wrestling with the system and it's been a lot of trial and error over the weeks to get things under control by limiting the players and the media richness provided to the group.

Having tried the 64-bit client things have gone well overall, clients are both running better and faster and players no longer feel constricted by having to worry about memory limitations.
If the program freezing bug of not being able to remove "shadow of war" sections on the maps could be fixed, we would probably all move over to use that exclusively instead.

This would be something which would make all of our lives easier until Unity comes out. Speaking for myself and the groups I run.

[LordEntrails]

For myself, the one thing I would rate of highest importance would be a fully working 64-bit environment and a better memory architecture for players clients going forward. Running out of memory has been a frequent issue in my D&D 5e games with the current 32-bit version of FG. It's limiting for campaign running and creation and awkward to try to constantly keep an eye on it and work around it. Something which isn't usually an issue in this day and age. For less popular RPG systems with fever resources available this has not been such a problem....

Note, 3.3.7 which is currently in the public beta test channel has significant changes to the player client image management. So the issues about players running out of process memory before the host should be resolved.

[StoryWeaver]

Note, 3.3.7 which is currently in the public beta test channel has significant changes to the player client image management. So the issues about players running out of process memory before the host should be resolved.

That is fantastic news, can't wait to try it out! Thank you for sharing LordEntrails. :)

[shadzar]

That is fantastic news, can't wait to try it out!

You shoudn't have to wait. Click settings on the main FG screen, and when the window pops up at the bottom look for section updates, then switch from Live to Test, and you will get the test version. but remember to backup your games before you load them, and when the host is using test version, all the clients will also.

[StoryWeaver]

You shoudn't have to wait. Click settings on the main FG screen, and when the window pops up at the bottom look for section updates, then switch from Live to Test, and you will get the test version. but remember to backup your games before you load them, and when the host is using test version, all the clients will also.

It's almost every day I learn something new with FG *laughs*. Thank you shadzar, I'll go give it a try, after backing up, at my next game.

[dulux-oz]

I'll go give it a try, after backing up, at my next game.

I'd be careful, if I were you - its not called the TEST channel for nothing.

But if you are going to do it, then all your Players should probably be on the same version as well - we know that when the GM and Players are on different version "bad things" can happen.

Just so you know, I (as one of the Community Devs) *never* run any of my games on the Test Channel - sure, I work in it to develop and update Rulesets and Extensions, but I *always* change back down to the Prod version to run my games - just my $0.02 worth, take it or leave it as you like.

[StoryWeaver]

I'd be careful, if I were you - its not called the TEST channel for nothing.

But if you are going to do it, then all your Players should probably be on the same version as well - we know that when the GM and Players are on different version "bad things" can happen.

Just so you know, I (as one of the Community Devs) *never* run any of my games on the Test Channel - sure, I work in it to develop and update Rulesets and Extensions, but I *always* change back down to the Prod version to run my games - just my $0.02 worth, take it or leave it as you like.

You make some valued points, and it does seem like you're speaking from experience, you may be right. It's only 3-4 weeks until the 3.3.7 gets pushed to the live version anyways. I'll do some testing locally in the meantime, I'm sure we can hold on for that long *laughs* until the memory improvements.

[Valyar]

Not running your “production” games from dev or test channel should be common sense imo :D

[StoryWeaver]

Not running your “production” games from dev or test channel should be common sense imo :D

Well in some case the cons may outweight the costs, which this might have done.
And it's not like it's a commercial product, it's only a game shared between friends, so different rules apply.
In which us as a group, that keep on working together to improve things, could try out the beta with an easy switch, then switch back if we decided it presented issues. Hardly a disaster if it crashed a few times on us and the original game backups would always be there to revert to.
Besides a beta that is only 3-4 weeks from being pushed out should be more or less stable.

[Valyar]

Hardly a disaster if it crashed a few times on us and the original game backups would always be there to revert to.
The problem is when the dev/test is having a major change in CoreRPG ruleset that breaks all nested ones :) It will completely prevent you from playing. But we are on the same page here - if you know what you are doing and what kind of issues you can encounter - why not.

[damned]

3.3.7 is pretty light on changes that will break child rulesets.
Your players will see some console errors on load about some of the image handler changes but otherwise it should work fine - at least as far as I have seen.

Backing up your campaign regularly is a good idea.

[shadzar]

console errors on load about some of the image handler changes

does this affect reference manuals, or just campaigns and themes?

[damned]

I had some error messages on a 3.3.6 client connecting to me
and I was unable to view newly shared images when I connected to a 3.3.6 GM

i did downgrade for the game in the end

[Trenloe]

The main issue most people will encounter with running in test is issues with the new code and extensions designed for previous versions not working as expected and/or raising errors. You'll probably experience a lot more of the latter the more extensions you run. If you're not running community extensions then you probably won't experience too many issue if everyone is running in test.

Note - whereas if the GM updates to test, but the players don't, the GM will share only the new test ruleset changes with the players when they connect. They won't share any changes in the underlying application, the players will also need to switch to test and do an update.

Generally, if the release notes don't include a ruleset name against a specific item, the change is in the base FG application. Info on test release v3.3.7 here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?46523-Beta-Release-v3-3-7&p=414081&viewfull=1#post414081 It can be seen that the main memory improvement change in test is not tagged for a ruleset, so is in the base client: "Player image loading delayed until image window opened." So players will need to change to test as well to experience this new functionality.

[Valyar]

You are all going off topic. Release Unity NOW! :)

[Bidmaron]

Valyvar, you have been around long enough to know that no amount of badgering will get SW to release something before it meets their standard of excellence. We are all dying to get it, but this won't help.

[celestian]

Valyvar, you have been around long enough to know that no amount of badgering will get SW to release something before it meets their standard of excellence. We are all dying to get it, but this won't help.

I'm pretty sure that was with an implied /s

[QuizicalWiz]

You are all going off topic. Release Unity NOW! :)
.

.

.
Most find it hard to deal with the established guard here, the new version was promised in 6th months... 2 years ago, this is a fact. The people working on it a top self folk but it seems they have their hands tied trying to retro-work an older 'acquired' piece of core software they did not write themselves.

What happens when Wizards or Paizo says ok were going to make our own virtual table top, they throw Money at it and produce a VTT that integrates perfectly with ... say DnD Beyond. I know this is the best software I just want it to keep growing as fast as other companies. I'm assuming there will be a 3rd competitor before too long, that will mean less an less are choosing this VTT. I think all good folk are aware of this but how can FG be even better marketed , more sales more traction with the RPG community.

Will the Unity version cost more all over again? i heard that hinted at. I hope not.

Please release the new version soon.

Thank you all for your great efforts

[Mentalic]

This delay is, frankly, a bit much and the current software is certainly starting to show its age.

Its core feature set and ruleset implementations is still enough to keep me using FG. However, more and more VTTs are in development. I want FGU more as a way to protect the investment I have placed in the software already. But eventually I and other folks will move on to more feature rich and user friendly software if SW does not strike while the iron is hot.

[QuizicalWiz]

This delay is, frankly, a bit much and the current software is certainly starting to show its age.

Its core feature set and ruleset implementations is still enough to keep me using FG. However, more and more VTTs are in development. I want FGU more as a way to protect the investment I have placed in the software already. But eventually I and other folks will move on to more feature rich and user friendly software if SW does not strike while the iron is hot.


Is it possible to find out what the current issues are, hurdles to overcome, I have worked in large teams in production environments and when people are vague it’s a terrible sign of incapability.

There may be just too many problems to solve.

As valued clients I hope we can find out the reasons for delay, and maybe ways we can help.

Again the love that’s poured into this is amazing I hate to see it fade out by being caught in a mire.

[Mentalic]

Frankly, the reasons for their delay do not concern me. I just care about being able to use the software (specifically the mapping and dynamic shadow tools they have showcased).

Reasons for delays dont help much.

[QuizicalWiz]

...or else all the Roll20 converters are quicker gone than u think .
I know this will put a lot of pressure on you, but its a great chance you shouldnt throw away ����


Frankly, the reasons for their delay do not concern me. I just care about being able to use the software (specifically the mapping and dynamic shadow tools they have showcased).

Reasons for delays dont help much.

Reasons, explanations and communications help the customer base make purchase decisions, putting a head into the sand and saying gimmie now don’t help much. Open dialog once a month will a even better customer base and reassure those who have spent a serious about on digital content. There needs to be more great warriors like Rob2e streaming so much, and giving so much of his a Life to FG. Visibility is a key for more users and again an avenue for a dialog on current progress in unity version. Let Dave and rob and other stalwarths host new games with the new software. We love you Guys and FG, please show us some magic :) and keep telling us where you are in the process.

[Mentalic]

Dialogue will likely come when people can actually use the software in beta. Then they can engage the userbase better since that discussion will be contextualized.

I will say that I am disheartened that it is not released as I purchased my Ultimate license based on SW assurance of an impending beta release. I admit that I have made full use of my license but I still feel a bit unhappy that I made that purchase on what proved to be a false understanding of their release schedule.

Now Im gonna need to likely rebuy my Ultimate License from the sound of it since I purchased too soon. At some point two or three years from now from the sound of it.

[LordEntrails]

Most find it hard to deal with the established guard here, the new version was promised in 6th months... 2 years ago, this is a fact.
Interesting, I remember comments about 'hoping it' would be released, and 'aiming for', but never a 'promise to' release. But, not sure semantics really matter at all.


What happens when Wizards or Paizo says ok were going to make our own virtual table top, they throw Money at it and produce a VTT that integrates perfectly with ... say DnD Beyond.
Wizards tried to develop their own VTT some years back. After many years and repeatedly failing to deliver, they gave up. Their current business model is to license their content to other platforms, like FG, Roll20 and DDB. Paizo hasn't shown any interest in developing their own VTT either. They have recently licensed PF and PF2 to FG, so if they had any interest in developing their own VTT, I doubt they would have done that.


I know this is the best software I just want it to keep growing as fast as other companies. I'm assuming there will be a 3rd competitor before too long, that will mean less an less are choosing this VTT. I think all good folk are aware of this but how can FG be even better marketed , more sales more traction with the RPG community.
If you look at the numbers published on the number of FG games being played, you will see that FG is growing exceptionally fast (20 or 30% year over year?). We can assume revenue is fairly proportional to that. Then look at the number of employees SmiteWorks has. That's gone from what, 3 people 3 years ago to 6 now? Plus all the contractors that are doing conversion and ruleset work. So yea, if SmiteWorks was growing any faster I would be concerned for the company stability (unlimited growth is usually a bad thing for a company)

Maybe you mean technology growth? We've had what, 2 releases so far this year that keep enhancing capabilities and a third is in public test channel right now so we should have that in a few weeks.

Yes there are other VTT that in the last 3 years have shown a great deal of promise, and many of them have also died out in the same time. Proof of concept and production software are miles apart. Building a new application from scratch and upgrading an existing application to a new platform while maintaining compatibility is a huge difference. Getting 80% to somewhere with a product is easy, getting the last 20% takes 80% of the effort *G*


Will the Unity version cost more all over again? i heard that hinted at. I hope not.
I'm sure it will be. When you own Office 2003 did you get Office 2013 for free? No. When you bought Never Winter Nights, did you get NWN2 for free? Nope. All of that work being done for FGU has to paid someway right? Though their are other business models, paying for new version of software is pretty traditional and accepted.


Please release the new version soon.
I'm sure SmiteWorks would love to release FGU as soon as possible. But, they are not willing to release it before it is stable and meets the expectations of a quality VTT.

Hopefully none of that is deemed negative, defensive, or dismissive. Its intended to be thoughtful and informative. And, its only my opinion(s).

[QuizicalWiz]

Interesting, I remember comments about 'hoping it' would be released, and 'aiming for', but never a 'promise to' release. But, not sure semantics really matter at all.
Wizards tried to develop their own VTT some years back. After many years and repeatedly failing to deliver, they gave up. Their current business model is to license their content to other platforms, like FG, Roll20 and DDB. Paizo .........(truncated) And, its only my opinion(s).

Thanks LordENTRAILS you are a Zealot. I find allot of you guys answer well, questions that are situational I would love the same transparency from the from the higher ups or the ones doing direct work on status of UNITY. I think paying for another ultimate licence was implied as waived by Doug some time ago in a impromptu YouTube conversation with Dave Middleton. I do not expect it honored but my brain holds onto such things.

FG has been super stable and super useful but there has been a curve getting the players to use the software in general, the spell abilities and class features seamlessly. I think the hope is that everything is integrated in a click or a flyout menu.

I still think we need a Expert user Demoing a campaign with the Unity ALPHA/BETA, create interest, choose great ways to show off features.

I think "resting on laurels" of Failed attempts by Wizards, or lack of Interest of other RPG companies, maybe cost efficient but it also could be a hazard. It is an infinitesimally small community developing a VTT for use with all major Table Top RPGs so I guess we will wait.

[LordEntrails]

Thanks LordENTRAILS you are a Zealot. I find allot of you guys answer well, questions that are situational I would love the same transparency from the from the higher ups or the ones doing direct work on status of UNITY. I think paying for another ultimate licence was implied as waived by Doug some time ago in a impromptu YouTube conversation with Dave Middleton. I do not expect it honored but my brain holds onto such things.

Transparency to customers for product development is tough. I would enjoy it too. But I also understand whatever metrics etc that could be shared would be prone to misinterpretation and developing a product, especially a unique product, is prone to change. If I remember Doug mentioning something like they had 15 pages of items and were down to 3. But doing something like that people are going to try and extrapolate that to a time frame. But, such extrapolation really is useless. Because all things are not equal, and often times in product development when you "finish" or resolve one item, you might solve two items, or require ten other items that were already "finished" now have to be re-worked. Plus, new things sometimes have to get added to the list. So, it's tough :)

Second, look at other companies, how may of them are transparent in their product development? At the moment, I can't think of any. Their are reasons for that :)

Plus, think of it this way, to put together meaningful and clear "reports", or even to just answer questions if internal metrics/status were shared takes time. I could imagine Doug or John spending 10 hours a week answering questions. That's 10 hours a week not put into working on FGU.


FG has been super stable and super useful but there has been a curve getting the players to use the software in general, the spell abilities and class features seamlessly. I think the hope is that everything is integrated in a click or a flyout menu.
Their are a few threads on the forum about the UI. And you will find no consensus, and lots of opinions. I doubt major UI changes will be coming, even after FGU. But, who knows, maybe (but I'm 99.9% sure no major UI changes will happen with FGU).


I still think we need a Expert user Demoing a campaign with the Unity ALPHA/BETA, create interest, choose great ways to show off features.
Well, none of us will be experts when FGU first comes out. But, I'm sure people like Rob and Mr. Z and FG College and many others will be putting out videos, classes, etc as soon as its available.


I think "resting on laurels" of Failed attempts by Wizards, or lack of Interest of other RPG companies, maybe cost efficient but it also could be a hazard. It is an infinitesimally small community developing a VTT for use with all major Table Top RPGs so I guess we will wait.
I don't see anyone resting do you? :)

[Moon Wizard]

This is my attempt at adding some transparency, for what it is worth. No dates included. ;)

I want to just say as one of the main developers for all of FG; that there are very good reasons why we keep dates internal. (including reasons such as LE mentions above). I have always stated every time that I have responded to questions about FGU that people should buy Fantasy Grounds for what it does today, not for some possible implementation in the future. We would all like it to be done faster; but we have competing priorities that don't always allow full development on just FGU. To my knowledge, we have never given formal dates for release.

I have seen multiple VTT projects from Wizards, one from Paizo, and at least a dozen more independent VTT projects over the years. They have all failed for underestimating the work needed, as well as the need to approach things incrementally in such a relatively niche market.

One of the things that I've always felt is important to Fantasy Grounds is that we never seem like the product is standing still, just "waiting" for the new shiny thing in some distant future point. It's a path that many software companies have taken to ruin, either due to too long between new developments, competitive pressures, or underestimation of effort. That's why we put out release updates every 3-4 months to keep adding features, as well as growing our RPG catalog to meet demand as best we can. All of those improvements have taken manpower, and required us to spend development time building additional systems other than the main client to keep moving forward. Plus, anything we build now has to work in FGU, because the amount of work to redo 1000+ DLC packages is staggering, not to mention losing lots of community projects.

The Unity project began as a sort of 10% project a few years ago to see how hard it would be to migrate FG to a new platform. It turned out to be extremely complicated especially without stalling all current development. Additionally, we acquired the Wizards of the Coast license around that time as well; which took precedence (for good reason). It stayed a 10% project for me until a couple years ago when we brought Carl on board to help out. Then, with his help, we pretty much have been rewriting the entire client, since the "simple port" to Unity was not going to work. While Carl has remained on the project focusing on image features/handling and as the Unity specialist, I have only been able to spend about 30% of my time helping up until this summer. In addition, all the goodness that gets added to the current version also has to be added to the Unity version by me as well, which increases the work for both projects. (But also makes sure they are compatible with each other.) Currently, I'm at about 50-60% on FGU. Thus, why we have mentioned 1.5 developers on FGU in other posts.

Based on the negativity of posts from people "waiting on FGU" formed from the little bit of information and teasers that Doug has shared so far, I feel like we have good justification to keep dates internal. If it was just me, we wouldn't even have talked about it yet, and we would just surprise everyone when it was almost done and ready for beta testing.

As for any other relevant facts about FGU, such as pricing; all of those things have yet to be determined. While Doug has floated some ideas in a couple different places, the fact remains that the product does not exist to be sold yet, and thus distribution and pricing are not finalized.

One last point. I have been adamant that our position on new features for FGU is that we will simply be moving to a new platform, and that everything will continue to work. That is the highest priority (due to DLC catalog and community needs). It has been a constant job to keep people both internally and externally from throwing every imagined improvement into the FGU "bucket". FGU is not some magical panacea that will revolutionize RPGs; it's an incremental improvement on what we have today. While we hope and plan to surprise people with some of the incremental improvements, it will not be radically different than what you have now.

And again, I will re-iterate that our message has always been to buy what we have today, not what might be built in the future.

Regards,
JPG

[dulux-oz]

Thank you, Moon, for the clear communication on your thoughts, attitudes, and the implementation of what's happening - I appreciate it, as I am sure others do as well.

Being a professional ICT Consultant and one of the Community Devs, I also appreciate everything you've said about incremental improvements, etc. I, for one, believe that SW is on the right track, both as a Gamer, as a Community Dev, and as a fellow ICT Pro. I've seen too many ICT Projects go "belly up" exactly because of the issues you raise.

So, keep up the good work, keep at it, and rest assured that there are those of us out there (your peers) that know that you guys are doing the best, most sensible thing you can.

Cheers

[shadzar]

Is it possible to find out what the current issues are, hurdles to overcome

at current is appears the delay is due to adhering to antiquated design. Rather then rebuilding form the ground up to make a better working, and better looking, and more user friendly interface, they are more interested in making the new system be able to function with EVERYTHING that has been made up until now, including all the bugs and glitches that cause problems the new programming environment should strive to alleviate.

they "claim" FGU is ready, but they have to make sure it works for every existing community extension, and modules, every module inthe store, every module on the DMs Guild, which seems to number in the low thousands?

so rather than making a new system and letting the developers of content update their content for a new version.. they want to make FGU delayed so the content creators don't have to update their own stuff to the new system.

Seemingly FGU was ready months ago, it is just the "backwards compatibility" with the antiquated design and testing every piece of content written for FG on the forums, DMs Guild, and FG/Steam Stores, is what the hold-up is.

so this months time they have been updating the content created by other people or making sure the antiquated methods used to allow that existing content to continue to run, people could have been using FGU, and content developers could have updated their content to a new format already.

this backwards compatibility is also the reason for the lack of any new features, UI updates, or anything else because it would not be compatible with everything made in the last 10 years.

[ddavison]

Sorry, shadzar, your information is incorrect on most accounts.

FGU is not "ready". FGU has several new features. We have not performed rigorous testing of these yet.

Backward compatibility is a key desire for the software and for a large part of our community. It's essential for current customers buying stuff to know that it will work in the new version. Other companies could have chosen a different choice but we stand by this as the absolute best choice for customers. There are other companies and people building new systems from the ground up for VTTs all the time. The vast majority of these fail and a very few make it.

If you think that the way FG works is too antiquated in design for your tastes, then please look around at other options and go there.

[JohnD]

.

.

.
Most find it hard to deal with the established guard here, the new version was promised in 6th months... 2 years ago, this is a fact. The people working on it a top self folk but it seems they have their hands tied trying to retro-work an older 'acquired' piece of core software they did not write themselves.

What happens when Wizards or Paizo says ok were going to make our own virtual table top, they throw Money at it and produce a VTT that integrates perfectly with ... say DnD Beyond. I know this is the best software I just want it to keep growing as fast as other companies. I'm assuming there will be a 3rd competitor before too long, that will mean less an less are choosing this VTT. I think all good folk are aware of this but how can FG be even better marketed , more sales more traction with the RPG community.

Will the Unity version cost more all over again? i heard that hinted at. I hope not.

Please release the new version soon.

Thank you all for your great efforts

Uh... when was this "in 6 months" promise made? I certainly don't remember anything of the sort.

[lokiare]

at current is appears the delay is due to adhering to antiquated design. Rather then rebuilding form the ground up to make a better working, and better looking, and more user friendly interface, they are more interested in making the new system be able to function with EVERYTHING that has been made up until now, including all the bugs and glitches that cause problems the new programming environment should strive to alleviate.

they "claim" FGU is ready, but they have to make sure it works for every existing community extension, and modules, every module inthe store, every module on the DMs Guild, which seems to number in the low thousands?

so rather than making a new system and letting the developers of content update their content for a new version.. they want to make FGU delayed so the content creators don't have to update their own stuff to the new system.

Seemingly FGU was ready months ago, it is just the "backwards compatibility" with the antiquated design and testing every piece of content written for FG on the forums, DMs Guild, and FG/Steam Stores, is what the hold-up is.

so this months time they have been updating the content created by other people or making sure the antiquated methods used to allow that existing content to continue to run, people could have been using FGU, and content developers could have updated their content to a new format already.

this backwards compatibility is also the reason for the lack of any new features, UI updates, or anything else because it would not be compatible with everything made in the last 10 years.

Please refrain from making claims about groups or companies you are not a part of.

[Moon Wizard]

I have made multiple requests to shadzar via PM to refrain from attacking other user's posts and about making incorrect claims about SmiteWorks policy/actions to which he has no knowledge. After many, many complaints from community members on his aggressive and inaccurate posts, I am blocking shadzar's account for now.

Normally, I would do this behind the scenes; and inform shadzar directly via e-mail to discuss further. However, he has not provided a valid e-mail that he can be reached at. So, this is his notification that his account is blocked until he speaks with us at [email protected], and provides us with reassurance that he will stop his disruptive behavior. I have stated to him before that his actions force us to respond and distract us from working on more constructive tasks.

Regards,
JPG

[Valyar]

Moon Wizard and Doug, salutes for the honest and fair responses. :)


Now with the conversation back on track, of course I was far from being serious with "release NOW". ;)

[viresanimi]

If you think that the way FG works is too antiquated in design for your tastes, then please look around at other options and go there.


Well said.

[JohnD]

I have made multiple requests to shadzar via PM to refrain from attacking other user's posts and about making incorrect claims about SmiteWorks policy/actions to which he has no knowledge. After many, many complaints from community members on his aggressive and inaccurate posts, I am blocking shadzar's account for now.

Normally, I would do this behind the scenes; and inform shadzar directly via e-mail to discuss further. However, he has not provided a valid e-mail that he can be reached at. So, this is his notification that his account is blocked until he speaks with us at [email protected], and provides us with reassurance that he will stop his disruptive behavior. I have stated to him before that his actions force us to respond and distract us from working on more constructive tasks.

Regards,
JPG

Bravo.

[Oberoten]

Please refrain from making claims about groups or companies you are not a part of.

I think he finaly HAS stopped. :)

- Obe

[iotech]

I have made multiple requests to shadzar via PM to refrain from attacking other user's posts and about making incorrect claims about SmiteWorks policy/actions to which he has no knowledge. After many, many complaints from community members on his aggressive and inaccurate posts, I am blocking shadzar's account for now.

Normally, I would do this behind the scenes; and inform shadzar directly via e-mail to discuss further. However, he has not provided a valid e-mail that he can be reached at. So, this is his notification that his account is blocked until he speaks with us at [email protected], and provides us with reassurance that he will stop his disruptive behavior. I have stated to him before that his actions force us to respond and distract us from working on more constructive tasks.

Regards,
JPG

Good!
I don't think you'll get any blowback from the rest of us, Moon. Thank You for being transparent about this also!

[lostsanityreturned]

While we hope and plan to surprise people with some of the incremental improvements, it will not be radically different than what you have now.

I dunno about that, those teasers regarding image handling suggest a pretty massive improvement for us gms ;)

[Cluanar]

...or else all the Roll20 converters are quicker gone than u think .
I know this will put a lot of pressure on you, but its a great chance you shouldnt throw away 😄👍
If I have this rigth Unity will be a different program and cost as if you are buying a new one with maybe some discounts. The longer pushed out the release the more one has to pay. Since they bought the technology in 2015 with no results yet I am guessing at this time they do not have the programmer capable of merging the two codes. Or they are like you and I messing around with python or java to make a "Hello World" script :-)

Just forget Unity and enjoy FG as is. It is still better than any other. You may never see Unity as you think.

[damned]

If I have this rigth Unity will be a different program and cost as if you are buying a new one with maybe some discounts. The longer pushed out the release the more one has to pay. Since they bought the technology in 2015 with no results yet I am guessing at this time they do not have the programmer capable of merging the two codes. Or they are like you and I messing around with python or java to make a "Hello World" script :-)

Just forget Unity and enjoy FG as is. It is still better than any other. You may never see Unity as you think.

Please refrain from making derogatory comments about the programming team.

[Cluanar]

Please refrain from making derogatory comments about the programming team.It wasn't meant as derogatory. It simply states that there are two different programs that are trying to be meshed by twp programmers that have expertise in their own and not the other. When companies merge it happens all the time. Integration sometimes is not possible with current staff.

And with almost 4 yrs in the works I would think it is fair to guess they need help.

[damned]

It wasn't meant as derogatory. It simply states that there are two different programs that are trying to be meshed by twp programmers that have expertise in their own and not the other. When companies merge it happens all the time. Integration sometimes is not possible with current staff.

And with almost 4 yrs in the works I would think it is fair to guess they need help.

Or more accurately that the job is quite complex and requires both expertise and time.
There are two full time Unity Devs working on the project.

[damned]

apologies for being a bit gnarly.
there is so much more information about why Unity isnt here already other than it isnt here already.
its not like the info is hidden - there is info and answers in this thread too.

i get gnarly about it because people make statements as facts that are misleading or incorrect and they influence others to repeat or build upon those statements.

i cant talk on behalf of smiteworks and only know what has been stated here and on other channels.

some of the important stuff is:

unity has taken longer than initially expected
unity has turned into a much bigger job than initially expected
smiteworks was only 2 staff when the project was started
smiteworks now has two additional devs who are full time focused on this project
smiteworks now has two additional dull time staff who are focused on other parts of the business which in turn helps the devs do what they do
the current product has not sat still for 4 years while unity has been worked on
the current product has had multiple significant upgrades several times a year plus hundreds of small updates
the volume of content has grown massively over that time
the number of commercial rulesets has increased over that time

so why dont they just hire more people?
why didnt they hire more people earlier?
this is not a big triple A gaming software house - this is a small team who are growing in the right direction and directing their resources into the areas they know they need them to
and are growing at a rate that they can sustain
and that growth has been supported by the additional content that has been added

ultimately - whether we like it or not - smiteworks has the better understanding of where and why they spend their resources on the things that they do and they have to be able to balance expensive development costs against maintaining and growing the revenue to pay for those.

maybe unity will get here *too late*
but im willing to bet that it will get here at the right time and will simply be another step upwards for the team
oh and im sure there will be a bunch of sleepless nights when it launches and really gets stress tested and a whole slew of new bugs get found
and it will im sure still be worth the ride - at least from my perspective

have fun - keep gaming

[gogots]

I've been on Fantasy grounds for five or six years. I find that the software is full of flaws: it is difficult to modulate for the different game systems (and even the More core greatly reduces this problem), the management of maps and images support is now very limited and The difficulty to translate the rulesets (I'm French).
But next to that, the game is now the best thing that can be done. The intrerface, which some people find Old school, is very immersive. The possibility of having interactive links on the images, in the text on the NPC sheets, is great for building these campaigns. As for the ruleset supported by FG, they are not commensurate with with what competing software does.
Finally when I see the number of games that come out badly finished, pressed by distributors and players, that end up with a very bad reputation despite their potential (Hello Pathfinder!), I would have only one advice: "When is done!"


Good luck with the end of Unity development, in the meantime please continue to support the current version!


PS: sorry for my english.

[Cluanar]

Or more accurately that the job is quite complex and requires both expertise and time.
There are two full time Unity Devs working on the project.
If 4 yrs isnt enough I'd look to more staff :-)

[Cluanar]

I hope that another tabletop option doesnt catch up in other ways that forces bad options for Smiteworks. At this time , IMO, no one touches what FG can do and I have no plans on going elsewhere. The support from FG and FGC is so overwhelming the game almost plays itself. I researched all the D&D options for 6 months before deciding on FG and it wasn't even close.

I invested heavily in FG and will continue to do so and hope they don't lose a race and we lose a great product.

[lokiare]

Some perspective:

Take a look at your average video game. It takes 2-4 years plus about 30 or more people to push out the game (no seriously look it up). Smiteworks has been working with 1-2 developers focused on Fantasy Grounds Unity.

Keep in mind the features of Fantasy Grounds:

Windows program that displays graphics.
Windows program that runs a LUA interpreter
LUA interpreter that interfaces with the Windows program to coordinate graphics and data through a dedicated API.
XML interpreter in LUA that loads up instructions to display windows, controls, etc...etc... which LUA then passes to the Windows part of the program.
A fully networked system that is exposed to the Windows API so that network calls can be done with and through the LUA interpreter.


The features of Fantasy Grounds are much more complex than most AAA games (short of MMOs).

[esmdev]

To be honest, I'm sort of ambivalent about FGU, I'd rather have 64-bit FG. FG generally does enough for me at the moment and with more memory available could likely be coded to do more.

I'll probably update to Unity whenever it rolls around regardless, but that would be more a following the herd reaction than actually needing the new features so far revealed.

[Iotatron]

Hi all, new to the forums here but been following FG for a while. Just though i'd throw in my 2 cents:

I am purposefully not purchasing FG until FGU because i don't want to have to purchase it again, even at significant discount or whatever they are planning (since thats no guarantee). I am staying on roll20 until then. I want to switch because i've seen how awesome FG is but honestly the lack of communication from the devs regarding FGU updates (what is currently being worked on, what's working, what they are still planning, roadmaps, etc) on a regular basis is pretty offputting. I just hear snippets here and there as i lurk through the forums about it and there isn't any concrete info. I want FGU and i'm going to wait (with all my friends who are also waiting for FGU for the same reason), but it's pretty disappointing not to see more details besides "it's in the works" and "it's taking longer than we thought."

Moreover, responding to this:


Some perspective:

Take a look at your average video game. It takes 2-4 years plus about 30 or more people to push out the game (no seriously look it up). Smiteworks has been working with 1-2 developers focused on Fantasy Grounds Unity.

Keep in mind the features of Fantasy Grounds:

Windows program that displays graphics.
Windows program that runs a LUA interpreter
LUA interpreter that interfaces with the Windows program to coordinate graphics and data through a dedicated API.
XML interpreter in LUA that loads up instructions to display windows, controls, etc...etc... which LUA then passes to the Windows part of the program.
A fully networked system that is exposed to the Windows API so that network calls can be done with and through the LUA interpreter.


The features of Fantasy Grounds are much more complex than most AAA games (short of MMOs).

These feeatures honeslty are NOT more complex than most AAA games. As a software developer myself i can tell you that having a couple interpreters that pass data around and displaying graphics are really not that complex (especially when the interpreters are probably not written by the devs themselves since there are so many free LUA and XML interpretters that can be packaged into the system. As for networking, that may be the most complex thing about this program, but most AAA games have networking involved (hell even a ton of indie games have it), especially since engines (such as unity) can handle a lot of the networking headaches these days it makes it a lot easier.
I don't know why you are saying that these features are extraordinarily complex, it's simply not true.

[Kelrugem]

I am purposefully not purchasing FG until FGU because i don't want to have to purchase it again, even at significant discount or whatever they are planning (since thats no guarantee). I am staying on roll20 until then. I want to switch because i've seen how awesome FG is but honestly the radio silence from the devs regarding FGU updates on a regular basis is pretty offputting. I just hear snippets here and there as i lurk through the forums about it and there isn't any concrete info. I want FGU and i'm going to wait (with all my friends who are also waiting for FGU for the same reason), but it's pretty disappointing not to see more details besides "it's in the works."


Hi :)

You may not have seen it, but in post #74 MoonWizard explained why they do not want to throw in too much information about FGU (and he talked also about other things there) :) It is very understandable :)

Best,

Kelrugem

[Iotatron]

Hi :)

You may not have seen it, but in post #74 MoonWizard explained why they do not want to throw in too much information about FGU (and he talked also about other things there) :) It is very understandable :)

Best,

Kelrugem

Just read it, thanks for direciing me.

I understand the devs reasoning but i'll be totally honest when i say that I think the news and work around FGU is being handled poorly. Not to mention that if they focused more heavily on switching to FGU then they wouldn't have to split their focus as much. Unity has become extremely powerful as a game engine and allows for a ton of extensibility. If they just focused on making the existing modules work on FGU and made the switch "cold-turkey" then they wouldnt have to double up all their efforts on feature support. This is why Microsoft gave away copies of windows 10 to every 7 and 8 users, so they could focus on one system and drop support for older ones. It makes sense, and doubley-so with such a small team.

[esmdev]

Hi all, new to the forums here but been following FG for a while. Just though i'd throw in my 2 cents:

I am purposefully not purchasing FG until FGU because i don't want to have to purchase it again, even at significant discount or whatever they are planning (since thats no guarantee). I am staying on roll20 until then. I want to switch because i've seen how awesome FG is but honestly the radio silence from the devs regarding FGU updates on a regular basis is pretty offputting. I just hear snippets here and there as i lurk through the forums about it and there isn't any concrete info. I want FGU and i'm going to wait (with all my friends who are also waiting for FGU for the same reason), but it's pretty disappointing not to see more details besides "it's in the works."

My personal thinking is why wait for FGU when it could be years before it comes out. FG is current available, consistently updated and extremely versatile. We already know that FGU will use the same UI with some extra features, so it might not even be important to upgrade for awhile after it actually comes out. I'd wait for awhile anyways just to let them sort out bugs and such.


These feeatures honeslty are NOT more complex than most AAA games. As a software developer myself i can tell you that having a couple interpreters that pass data around and displaying graphics are really not that complex (especially when the interpreters are probably not written by the devs themselves since there are so many free LUA and XML interpretters that can be packaged into the system. As for networking, that may be the most complex thing about this program, but most AAA games have networking involved (hell even a ton of indie games have it), especially since engines (such as unity) can handle a lot of the networking headaches these days it makes it a lot easier.
I don't know why you are saying that these features are extraordinarily complex, it's simply not true.

I'm not sure what your level of experience as a software developer is, but my experience is that after a decade of consistent development and upgrading software gets pretty complex. One thing to remember about Fantasy Grounds is that it has passed hands from one company to another, and from developer to developer going all the way back to 2004 (development probably starting before that). Different developers with different writing styles (and level of commenting) can significantly impact the time it takes to make changes. Translating those changes while keeping the same functionality can be quite a lot of work. I'm not sure if you've ever done a major migration from language to language and platform to platform (as in COBOL to C++ and Mainframe to Windows) but it isn't a picnic.

It is mostly speculation but I assume that FG is written in C or C++ at is core. For Unity you would likely want to (not need to, but want to) migrate the code to C#. While Unity will handle a lot of the graphical work it still needs to be setup and organized to handle the specific functionality that FG already has. You (or I) don't know that FG uses an off the shelf LUA or XML interpreter, both could be custom.

Short of actually seeing the source code it would be difficult to compare it to an actual AAA game, but also the question you'd need to ask is what sort of AAA game are you talking about? They already excluded MMO, and also didn't indicate a timeframe. In it's era, Zork was an AAA game. If you take out the real-time graphical and replace it with turn-based token it is probably at least as sophisticated and versatile than some of the older MMOs, especially the ones initially written in 2004. One comparison I'd make is Neverwinter Nights (specifically 2002 Bioware) the DM capabilities in this game are quite a bit more robust than what a DM could do in NWN. You can build new powers, write new races, classes, backgrounds, items, spells, etc. Of those abilities within the actual toolset you could only add new items in NWN. The effects ability in the NWN toolset is quite limited compared to what is possible in FG. The point is if you compare a AAA game from about the same timeframe (that was in development for a lengthy time) FG actually stacks up quite well.

Anyways it's easy to say without knowing the actual situation that something shouldn't be so hard, but sometimes it is much harder in reality than it appears from the outside looking in.

[Bidmaron]

Many of us (including the developers) respectfully disagree. I am glad to have updates to the legacy while we are waiting for the new one, and if you cannot see how updating an inventory of 10k items to work with a product that is not backward compatible then there is probably not much use in trying to explain their views any further. That is if they were to do what you and others want and abandon the current platform and the attempts to keep new one compatible.
However, we do look forward to welcoming you when you decide to make the leap. Your decision to wait baffles me because if you simply take the monthly fees you are spending on Roll20 now in the bank you could pay for any difference in price that will exist if you buy FGC now and upgrade to FGU when it comes out. And your players wouldn’t have to pay a single dime if you use ultimate license and they use free license. You are missing out on some incredible game enriching experience, as you know.

[pindercarl]

Welcome to the forums, Iotatron.

I typically refrain from commenting on the progress of FGU and I've asked lokiare1 to exercise the same restraint. It's best if publicly shared information comes from Doug and John (Moonwizard). They are the owners and face of Smiteworks and it reduces confusion to limit the number of voices. Unless you read something from them, it is best to view it as speculation.

Regarding, AAA games, comparing AAA games to Fantasy Grounds is like comparing apples to desk lamps. Other than both being software, there is little else in common. Prior to developing (the now defunct) Tabletop Connect, and subsequently joining the Smiteworks team, I spent 15 years in video game development. The last nine of which were exclusively working on AAA titles, primarily developing tools and pipeline. One the last titles I worked on, Call of Duty:Black Ops 2, had a 200+ member dev team and a budget close to a quarter of a billion dollars. In contrast, FGU has a single full-time developer (that's me) and John does both FGU development and continues development of the current version of Fantasy Grounds. Other than helping the users understand where and why FGU development is where it is, this is mostly irrelevant to the current or future FG user. You're only interest is when will FGU be available and what can it do when it gets here. I can assure you that no one wants FGU to launch more than Smiteworks.

Circling back to game development, there is a habit there to hit alpha dates by redefining alpha. That's not something Smiteworks is prepared to do. Post alpha will primarily be about performance optimization and testing, not bolting on whole features. Do I have a date for you? Nope. Are we close? Yeah, pretty close. Do I have guess? No. We have limited resources and don't have the luxury of a big dev shop that can just throw warm bodies at the problem. I appreciate that you are choosing to stick with Roll20 for now. If there is one thing that I've discovered during my time here is that Smiteworks wants you to be a satisfied customer and you're confident that the current offering isn't everything that you're looking for. FG has a lot of satisfied and passionate users and I'm confident that you'll become one of them when you're ready to come aboard.

[esmdev]

Just read it, thanks for direciing me.

I understand the devs reasoning but i'll be totally honest when i say that I think the news and work around FGU is being handled poorly. Not to mention that if they focused more heavily on switching to FGU then they wouldn't have to split their focus as much. Unity has become extremely powerful as a game engine and allows for a ton of extensibility. If they just focused on making the existing modules work on FGU and made the switch "cold-turkey" then they wouldnt have to double up all their efforts on feature support. This is why Microsoft gave away copies of windows 10 to every 7 and 8 users, so they could focus on one system and drop support for older ones. It makes sense, and doubley-so with such a small team.

There is a really big difference between Microsoft (134k employees and net income of 16B) and Smiteworks (10 employees and likely much lower net income).

I for one am glad to have constant updates to FG, since I am currently using FG. I'm sure that without the consistent revenue Smiteworks would be done, so it's not like they can just say hey that's it no more development until Unity is completed and fully tested.

Even once they complete FGU there will likely be a long internal testing as they work their way through who knows how many rulesets, extensions, modules, etc., to figure out what's working and what needs to be reworked.

[Iotatron]

My personal thinking is why wait for FGU when it could be years before it comes out. FG is current available, consistently updated and extremely versatile. We already know that FGU will use the same UI with some extra features, so it might not even be important to upgrade for awhile after it actually comes out. I'd wait for awhile anyways just to let them sort out bugs and such.



I'm not sure what your level of experience as a software developer is, but my experience is that after a decade of consistent development and upgrading software gets pretty complex. One thing to remember about Fantasy Grounds is that it has passed hands from one company to another, and from developer to developer going all the way back to 2004 (development probably starting before that). Different developers with different writing styles (and level of commenting) can significantly impact the time it takes to make changes. Translating those changes while keeping the same functionality can be quite a lot of work. I'm not sure if you've ever done a major migration from language to language and platform to platform (as in COBOL to C++ and Mainframe to Windows) but it isn't a picnic.

It is mostly speculation but I assume that FG is written in C or C++ at is core. For Unity you would likely want to (not need to, but want to) migrate the code to C#. While Unity will handle a lot of the graphical work it still needs to be setup and organized to handle the specific functionality that FG already has. You (or I) don't know that FG uses an off the shelf LUA or XML interpreter, both could be custom.

Short of actually seeing the source code it would be difficult to compare it to an actual AAA game, but also the question you'd need to ask is what sort of AAA game are you talking about? They already excluded MMO, and also didn't indicate a timeframe. In it's era, Zork was an AAA game. If you take out the real-time graphical and replace it with turn-based token it is probably at least as sophisticated and versatile than some of the older MMOs, especially the ones initially written in 2004. One comparison I'd make is Neverwinter Nights (specifically 2002 Bioware) the DM capabilities in this game are quite a bit more robust than what a DM could do in NWN. You can build new powers, write new races, classes, backgrounds, items, spells, etc. Of those abilities within the actual toolset you could only add new items in NWN. The effects ability in the NWN toolset is quite limited compared to what is possible in FG. The point is if you compare a AAA game from about the same timeframe (that was in development for a lengthy time) FG actually stacks up quite well.

Anyways it's easy to say without knowing the actual situation that something shouldn't be so hard, but sometimes it is much harder in reality than it appears from the outside looking in.

I agree it's really easy to armchair criticize the devs, and i'm not trying to do that unfairly. I agree that code migrations are a huge pain and it can get extraordinarily ugly fast. But i do want to point out that the listed features i stated as "not that complex" in reality aren't if you are smart about how you choose to implement them and use the right tools available to you. Is implementing a graphical system with networking using raw C++ (assuming FG is written in that) a much bigger task than using unity? hell yes it is, even if you take advantage of a library like Qt. Is writing your own custom LUA and XML interpreter a pain? It sure can be.
But you don't have to do that all from scratch, if they chose to do so i hope they have very real reason for it.


Welcome to the forums, Iotatron.

I typically refrain from commenting on the progress of FGU and I've asked lokiare1 to exercise the same restraint. It's best if publicly shared information comes from Doug and John (Moonwizard). They are the owners and face of Smiteworks and it reduces confusion to limit the number of voices. Unless you read something from them, it is best to view it as speculation.

Regarding, AAA games, comparing AAA games to Fantasy Grounds is like comparing apples to desk lamps. Other than both being software, there is little else in common. Prior to developing (the now defunct) Tabletop Connect, and subsequently joining the Smiteworks team, I spent 15 years in video game development. The last nine of which were exclusively working on AAA titles, primarily developing tools and pipeline. One the last titles I worked on, Call of Duty:Black Ops 2, had a 200+ member dev team and a budget close to a quarter of a billion dollars. In contrast, FGU has a single full-time developer (that's me) and John does both FGU development and continues development of the current version of Fantasy Grounds. Other than helping the users understand where and why FGU development is where it is, this is mostly irrelevant to the current or future FG user. You're only interest is when will FGU be available and what can it do when it gets here. I can assure you that no one wants FGU to launch more than Smiteworks.

Circling back to game development, there is a habit there to hit alpha dates by redefining alpha. That's not something Smiteworks is prepared to do. Post alpha will primarily be about performance optimization and testing, not bolting on whole features. Do I have a date for you? Nope. Are we close? Yeah, pretty close. Do I have guess? No. We have limited resources and don't have the luxury of a big dev shop that can just throw warm bodies at the problem. I appreciate that you are choosing to stick with Roll20 for now. If there is one thing that I've discovered during my time here is that Smiteworks wants you to be a satisfied customer and you're confident that the current offering isn't everything that you're looking for. FG has a lot of satisfied and passionate users and I'm confident that you'll become one of them when you're ready to come aboard.

I only made the AAA comparison because Lokiare decided to make the comparison too. I don't see Smiteworks as a AAA studio and i know they are worlds apart.



To make my position abundantly clear, since i don't want to make you all feel like i just came here to rag on FG. I think FG is better in nearly all aspects than Roll20 currently is (save for some stuff like map doodling, video/voice, etc), i am not paying for Roll20 right now but am also choosing to wait to buy FGU. Why? I don't want to have a wishy-washy promise of being able to purchase it at some unknown discount off of some unknown price. I intend to buy whatever the equivalent of Ultimate is in FGU and i'd rather not risk paying nearly that amount twice instead of once.

[Iotatron]

There is a really big difference between Microsoft (134k employees and net income of 16B) and Smiteworks (10 employees and likely much lower net income).

I for one am glad to have constant updates to FG, since I am currently using FG. I'm sure that without the consistent revenue Smiteworks would be done, so it's not like they can just say hey that's it no more development until Unity is completed and fully tested.

Even once they complete FGU there will likely be a long internal testing as they work their way through who knows how many rulesets, extensions, modules, etc., to figure out what's working and what needs to be reworked.

I understand the difference between the two. But, as i pointed out, if it makes sense for a huge company like microsoft to drop 7 and 8 and push only 10 so they can solely focus on supporting 10, don't you think it would also be a good move for SmiteWorks to do that since FG seems decently capable currently? After making the previous modules like books and adventures compatible with FGU why bother trying to implement everything twice over so you can produce new FG features at the same time as FGU? It makes more sense to me to do a feature freeze on FG so that FGU can advance more quickly. In addition it will incentivise people to switch if they see a new killer feature they want in FGU. When Adobe was working on Photoshop CS6 you didn't see them rolling out new features for CS5 that were also included in CS6, did you?

[LordEntrails]

...I don't want to have a wishy-washy promise of being able to purchase it at some unknown discount off of some unknown price. I intend to buy whatever the equivalent of Ultimate is in FGU and i'd rather not risk paying nearly that amount twice instead of once.
Totally valid reasoning.
My experience is SmiteWorks has always been totally customer focused, even at their own expense, so I'm not worried that any cost for FGU will be anything but fair. Of course, you don't have that experience with them so caution is certainly understandable. And of course, I've already gotten a great deal out of my FG purchase that it has already been a very worthwhile expenditure, you haven't, yet. But, as Carl said, when you do come over, both the community and the company (from what Carl said) are pretty confident you'll be happy with your decision.

Good gaming :)

[Valatar]

Iotatron's reasoning scales with size, however. Any development time spent on FG3 at this point is basically wasted time that's never coming back; a lot of hours are going to be going down a hole for tweaking software that will be obsolete the moment FGU hits the shelf. FG3 is in a pretty decent spot right now, stability-wise; I doubt it's going to burst into flames if it goes unsupported for a few months. The program itself, I mean, you can't pull support off of keeping up with module release for an extended period. Plus I don't know the resumes of the module devs but I'm expecting it's unlikely that they're Unity developers on the side, so taking them off of making new modules would probably not help the program get finished any faster.

[Iotatron]

Iotatron's reasoning scales with size, however. Any development time spent on FG3 at this point is basically wasted time that's never coming back; a lot of hours are going to be going down a hole for tweaking software that will be obsolete the moment FGU hits the shelf. FG3 is in a pretty decent spot right now, stability-wise; I doubt it's going to burst into flames if it goes unsupported for a few months. The program itself, I mean, you can't pull support off of keeping up with module release for an extended period. Plus I don't know the resumes of the module devs but I'm expecting it's unlikely that they're Unity developers on the side, so taking them off of making new modules would probably not help the program get finished any faster.

Exactly. From what i can tell the community LOVES FG as it already is. So if the devs just said "hey y'all we know you want FGU and we want it too, so as of next update we are freezing the FG3 features to focus solely on FGU" would anyone really get mad? I feel like everyone would encourage it despite potentially being a little sad that they aren't getting more FG3 features.

[LordEntrails]

Iotatron's reasoning scales with size, however. Any development time spent on FG3 at this point is basically wasted time that's never coming back; a lot of hours are going to be going down a hole for tweaking software that will be obsolete the moment FGU hits the shelf. FG3 is in a pretty decent spot right now, stability-wise; I doubt it's going to burst into flames if it goes unsupported for a few months. The program itself, I mean, you can't pull support off of keeping up with module release for an extended period. Plus I don't know the resumes of the module devs but I'm expecting it's unlikely that they're Unity developers on the side, so taking them off of making new modules would probably not help the program get finished any faster.
Note, Moon Wizard has said a few times that changes he makes to FGC/FG3 are things that are being implemented in FGU as well. Yes it does increase labor.

We also have to guess that if FGU was only a couple of months away, stopping FGC revisions would be feasible, but if it is still a long way off, that might not be feasible.

But again, now we are well into just speculating, which really doesn't help FGU get released any sooner.

[Iotatron]

Note, Moon Wizard has said a few times that changes he makes to FGC/FG3 are things that are being implemented in FGU as well. Yes it does increase labor.

We also have to guess that if FGU was only a couple of months away, stopping FGC revisions would be feasible, but if it is still a long way off, that might not be feasible.

But again, now we are well into just speculating, which really doesn't help FGU get released any sooner.

Why a couple months, how is waiting longer than a few months for new features not feasible? Like I pointed out with photoshop: after CS4 came out the users didn't get mad at adobe for not constantly providing new features while also trying to build new features for CS5. They just enjoyed what they had while CS5 was being worked on and then CS5 came out (two years later) with all these new features that people wanted so they purchased the new version. Why do we expect FG to constantly come out with new features especially when FGU is publicly known as being in the works with new features. It's very very nice that the devs provide new features and i think it's important to do so from a business model standpoint to retain customers (especially subscription customers who may expect updates more than one-time buyers). But since FGU is already being worked on with new features does it make sense to double the workload? Clearly FG as it stands is feature-rich; is anyone going to get mad if they have to wait a year or longer without any FG updates (besides bug fixes which degrade the product and potentially new modules from wizards)?

[Trenloe]

As has always been said by the people in the know on these forums - buy Fantasy Grounds now for what Fantasy Grounds is now. Don't buy it based on what it may be in the future - whenever that is.

Right now Fantasy Grounds is not a legacy application. It's a full blown, main product with over 1,000 DLC titles, active support and development and many tens of thousands of sessions ran every year. FGU will be backwards compatible with any DLC products you purchase, so you can keep on going using the products you may purchase now.

If there's any concern over future upgrade costs and double dipping then, sure, wait for FGU to come out - whenever that may be. It's just a shame, because you'll be missing out on some great games and products for the next however many months/years before FGU comes out, gets stable and you'd be ready to migrate. That being said, I respect anyone's decision to wait. As I said - only buy FG for what it is now...

[Iotatron]

As has always been said by the people in the know on these forums - buy Fantasy Grounds now for what Fantasy Grounds is now. Don't buy it based on what it may be in the future - whenever that is.

Right now Fantasy Grounds is not a legacy application. It's a full blown, main product with over 1,000 DLC titles, active support and development and many tens of thousands of sessions ran every year. FGU will be backwards compatible with any DLC products you purchase, so you can keep on going using the products you may purchase now.

If there's any concern over future upgrade costs and double dipping then, sure, wait for FGU to come out - whenever that may be. It's just a shame, because you'll be missing out on some great games and products for the next however many months/years before FGU comes out, gets stable and you'd be ready to migrate. That being said, I respect anyone's decision to wait. As I said - only buy FG for what it is now...

I'm not trying to argue the merit of buying now vs later; my decision has been made. I am trying to shed some perspective on why i disagree on the devs decision to double their workload. If they want to keep supporting FG with updates that's their decision, but since FGU is their future it makes more sense to me for them to focus on what's ahead of them, which they may be supporting for many decades as opposed to an already feature-rich product.

[Trenloe]

I am trying to shed some perspective on why i disagree on the devs decision to double their workload. If they want to keep supporting FG with updates that's their decision, but since FGU is their future it makes more sense to me for them to focus on what's ahead of them, which they may be supporting for many decades as opposed to an already feature-rich product.
FGU won't be out in the next few months, so the reasoning is pretty straightforward. Current users demand new functionality, new DLC, updates, bug fixes, etc.. Making sure FGU is backwards compatible with DLC and rulesets means that a lot of the work being done now in FGC (FG Classic - working title) is not double the work - it will be used in FGU too. This has to be done so that current customers, who may not make the jump to FGU, are serviced fully and correctly, and new products keep coming out - usually around half-a-dozen each week. But, if someone has been using FG for a long campaign, FGU has to be developed to allow them to migrate their campaign data to the new platform.

Sure, a hell of a lot of work in FGU is to support this backwards compatibility - but this has to be done to allow all of the loyal FG customers (new or long standing) to be able to migrate with the minimum of fuss when the time comes. Until then they (we) all still want regular updates, etc.. For example, here is what the next version will contain: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?46523-Beta-Release-v3-3-7 And here is an example of the weekly updates: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?46733-Release-Updates-on-November-27th-2018

I understand how someone looking in and waiting for FGU thinks this doesn't make sense. But I think you'll get very few people who use FG regularly agreeing that this approach doesn't make sense (even though a lot of them want FGU Noooooow!). It's building for the future, taking care of what is there now *and* continuing to move the current product forwards - with functionality that will also be used in FGU. For me it makes perfect sense - we'll just have to disagree on that. Which is OK - it's fine to disagree.

[Cluanar]

Welcome to the forums, Iotatron.

I typically refrain from commenting on the progress of FGU and I've asked lokiare1 to exercise the same restraint. It's best if publicly shared information comes from Doug and John (Moonwizard). They are the owners and face of Smiteworks and it reduces confusion to limit the number of voices. Unless you read something from them, it is best to view it as speculation.

Regarding, AAA games, comparing AAA games to Fantasy Grounds is like comparing apples to desk lamps. Other than both being software, there is little else in common. Prior to developing (the now defunct) Tabletop Connect, and subsequently joining the Smiteworks team, I spent 15 years in video game development. The last nine of which were exclusively working on AAA titles, primarily developing tools and pipeline. One the last titles I worked on, Call of Duty:Black Ops 2, had a 200+ member dev team and a budget close to a quarter of a billion dollars. In contrast, FGU has a single full-time developer (that's me) and John does both FGU development and continues development of the current version of Fantasy Grounds. Other than helping the users understand where and why FGU development is where it is, this is mostly irrelevant to the current or future FG user. You're only interest is when will FGU be available and what can it do when it gets here. I can assure you that no one wants FGU to launch more than Smiteworks.

Circling back to game development, there is a habit there to hit alpha dates by redefining alpha. That's not something Smiteworks is prepared to do. Post alpha will primarily be about performance optimization and testing, not bolting on whole features. Do I have a date for you? Nope. Are we close? Yeah, pretty close. Do I have guess? No. We have limited resources and don't have the luxury of a big dev shop that can just throw warm bodies at the problem. I appreciate that you are choosing to stick with Roll20 for now. If there is one thing that I've discovered during my time here is that Smiteworks wants you to be a satisfied customer and you're confident that the current offering isn't everything that you're looking for. FG has a lot of satisfied and passionate users and I'm confident that you'll become one of them when you're ready to come aboard.

Reinforces my point in that the project is too large for staff in hand to handle to match our "need it now" mind set. We saw the picture of the cake now we want to eat it. :-)

But as I also said, as it stands FG is a far better option than anything else out there as my 6 months of research told me before I went all in. I can wait but "DAAAAMN I want it NOOOOOW" .

It will be worth it I am 100% sure of that.

[mghauber]

And again, I will re-iterate that our message has always been to buy what we have today, not what might be built in the future.

Regards,
JPG

A couple of weeks ago I flew to Florida to game FACE TO FACE with my brother and old friends. There was no Fantasy Grounds. No computers. Just pencils, paper, and real honest to God dice. It was a game. An escape. Great fun and lots of laughs.

I have had the pleasure of meeting and gaming with Carl, John and Doug. I assure you they are good people with a passion to bring the above mentioned tabletop gaming experience to folks where distance is an issue. Please....leave them be to do that. Enjoy gaming over the internet for what it is. They have delivered an awesome product for our hobby as it is right now. Most here at the forums know that already. Newcomers...try to understand this is not a video game. It is simply a way to "table game" over vast distance. Its been doing that for years....

Just play games. Leave the business to them...

My $0.02.

Peace

[Trenloe]

A couple of weeks ago I flew to Florida to game FACE TO FACE with my brother...
Really? I wouldn't have done that!

;)

Only joking - I'm really a little jealous! :)

[Iotatron]

A couple of weeks ago I flew to Florida to game FACE TO FACE with my brother and old friends. There was no Fantasy Grounds. No computers. Just pencils, paper, and real honest to God dice. It was a game. An escape. Great fun and lots of laughs.

I have had the pleasure of meeting and gaming with Carl, John and Doug. I assure you they are good people with a passion to bring the above mentioned tabletop gaming experience to folks where distance is an issue. Please....leave them be to do that. Enjoy gaming over the internet for what it is. They have delivered an awesome product for our hobby as it is right now. Most here at the forums know that already. Newcomers...try to understand this is not a video game. It is simply a way to "table game" over vast distance. Its been doing that for years....

Just play games. Leave the business to them...

My $0.02.

Peace

First off, i don't think this is a video game, i see it as a computer program to facilitate gameplay. Either way, it doesn't invalidate anything i've said. And I believe you when you say the devs are great people; but that also doesn't invalidate my criticisms.

Secondly, why are we not allow to post criticisms? Why should we just "play games, leave business to them," isn't a healthy interaction with criticism from community a sign of a strong business? I don't understand why people just ask the community to "let devs do what they do and not question it" when the community offers a lot of insight (and in FGs case a lot of content in the form of custom modules).

Being able to criticize something - while still recognizing that you enjoy it and are glad it exists even in its current form - is the basis for healthy growth.

[esmdev]

First off, i don't think this is a video game, i see it as a computer program to facilitate gameplay. Either way, it doesn't invalidate anything i've said. And I believe you when you say the devs are great people; but that also doesn't invalidate my criticisms.

Secondly, why are we not allow to post criticisms? Why should we just "play games, leave business to them," isn't a healthy interaction with criticism from community a sign of a strong business? I don't understand why people just ask the community to "let devs do what they do and not question it" when the community offers a lot of insight (and in FGs case a lot of content in the form of custom modules).

Being able to criticize something - while still recognizing that you enjoy it and are glad it exists even in its current form - is the basis for healthy growth.

Unless someone tells me otherwise you are free to criticise away. However on the counter side you should also be willing to accept when someone else criticises your criticism.

My opinion is we don't need FGU as much as access to 64-bit memory. They already sidelined the 64 bit FG in favor of FGU which made me sad.

[Iotatron]

Unless someone tells me otherwise you are free to criticise away. However on the counter side you should also be willing to accept when someone else criticises your criticism.

My opinion is we don't need FGU as much as access to 64-bit memory. They already sidelined the 64 bit FG in favor of FGU which made me sad.

I'm open to criticisms, and if the devs continue to support FG with new features despite delaying FGU that's there prerogative. I just wanted to share my opinion about what I believe is the best way to approach the situation of FGU taking so long.

I believe FGU should be 64-bit since the unity engine will handle that.

[epithet]

It seems like some of the tension could be diffused if the "full credit" purchase date were to be set. That way, people could buy with confidence now, and enjoy the program and get to know the quirks while confident that whenever FGU was finally released, they'd be covered.

[Iotatron]

It seems like some of the tension could be diffused if the "full credit" purchase date were to be set. That way, people could buy with confidence now, and enjoy the program and get to know the quirks while confident that whenever FGU was finally released, they'd be covered.

I think that's a great idea. It would certainly push me onto the FG train sooner. Though I still truly believe that it makes most sense to freeze feature development on FG to focus on FGU (aside from bugfixes and major modules from WOTC).

[Ken L]

https://i.imgur.com/ePd4LNN.jpg

[Bidmaron]

I know, Ken, but there is (at least) one more counter point. He argues that Moon Wizard's work is double the effort for the need to do it again in FGU. That is almost completely inaccurate. The only thing he loses is that he is not working on FGU while he is improving FGC. The reason he isn't going to have to duplicate the work is because almost all of what he does is ruleset coding -- Lua and XML. This will be completely portable over to FGU (the definition of backwards compatible). To the extent that FGU is perfectly backwards compatible, zero of his effort on improving FGC will need to be duplicated in FGU.

To say that Adobe users didn't gripe is disingenuous. Comparing SW, a tiny programming staff to Microsoft or Adobe is really pointless. The economies of scale associated with the businesses just make such comparisons essentially useless.

[dellanx]

Any date yet on Unity? Although if players have an SSD on their system it helps a lot.

[Trenloe]

Any date yet on Unity?
Nope.

[Honken]

Any date yet on Unity?

I am fairly sure that when FGU is about to happen, you will know about it.

/H

[Jiminimonka]

...or else all the Roll20 converters are quicker gone than u think .
I know this will put a lot of pressure on you, but its a great chance you shouldnt throw away 

I don't understand the urgency for the unity version. FG as it is works very well, and buying this version will support the unity development and release cycle.

[lostsanityreturned]

I don't understand the urgency for the unity version. FG as it is works very well, and buying this version will support the unity development and release cycle.

At the moment the major benefits are

- much improved netcode handling (major point for dsl users and ipv6 folks)

- native 64bit support and better memory management

- better image handling tools by far, really valuable with how awful FG3s are. (Also dynamic fog of war + line of sight extras)


I can wait longer, but it has been a long time since they thought it would hit beta so I can see why people are antsy.
Those changes are pretty massive.

[Jiminimonka]

As has always been said by the people in the know on these forums - buy Fantasy Grounds now for what Fantasy Grounds is now. Don't buy it based on what it may be in the future - whenever that is.

Right now Fantasy Grounds is not a legacy application. It's a full blown, main product with over 1,000 DLC titles, active support and development and many tens of thousands of sessions ran every year. FGU will be backwards compatible with any DLC products you purchase, so you can keep on going using the products you may purchase now.

If there's any concern over future upgrade costs and double dipping then, sure, wait for FGU to come out - whenever that may be. It's just a shame, because you'll be missing out on some great games and products for the next however many months/years before FGU comes out, gets stable and you'd be ready to migrate. That being said, I respect anyone's decision to wait. As I said - only buy FG for what it is now...

This whole argument about waiting for unity is nonsense. People pay subscribtions for games like world of Warcraft, then pay out for expansions and cosmetics. Or they buy FIFA 98, 99, 00, 01 every year for a game that barely changes. Fantasy Grounds works. You don't have to rebuy the DLC and I am sure FGU is not going to cost more than any other game. I don't want a discount based on the fact I already own it. I will pay the full price for a new ultimate license. It's a new product with loads of new features and I will treat it as such.

[Honken]

https://i.imgur.com/ePd4LNN.jpg

I just feel I like to repost this...

/H

[Mytherus]

Having just recently (between modules, books and the ultimate license) spent over $200 on FG - and after having spent many hours playing around with it, FGC classes, and several hours watching various videos on how to use FG -- I'm finally just starting to feel comfortable enough to take the plunge and DM a module. With that all considered, while I know no one would force me to upgrade to FGU --- let's be honest....everyone wants to support the latest and greatest product of just about anything. Especially in this setting -- as a DM once FGU is out , you probably want to take full advantage of FGU features and therefore be able to tell your players "I support FGU" or whatever.

I'm cool with it taking more time --- let's me feel like I get more value of my money I just spent before its like "oh now you have to pay us X$ to upgrade to FGU"....

That and the whole release it when its ready not before thing...I rather wait 9 months (or whatever) for a polished product, rather than it being out in 3 months and its simply not ready for prime time.

[DwightLee]

Nope, release it when they are ready. Not a moment before. Furthermore they should give no indication whatsoever when they expect to release it, until it is fully ready to release. Gamers are not very forgiving for moving deadlines, so... dont create one. Say nothing about the release, until you are fully ready to release it.

[M3TAL]

Nope, release it when they are ready. Not a moment before. Furthermore they should give no indication whatsoever when they expect to release it, until it is fully ready to release. Gamers are not very forgiving for moving deadlines, so... dont create one. Say nothing about the release, until you are fully ready to release it.

As a new comer to FG, I would like to know the expected date of release for the FGU update. Also would like to know the cost if I just wait until it is released versus buying existing version and then paying for the FGU update. Will the costs be relative? etc..

[Nylanfs]

Welcome to the forums and FG Community M3TAL! There is no release date announced, They have talked about the cost being a sliding scale for a minimal or no cost for users that just purchased the license, to full cost for long time users like myself. They have stated that there should be no cost for any DLC to change over.

If you have a sub there will be no difference.

[DwightLee]

As a new comer to FG, I would like to know the expected date of release for the FGU update. Also would like to know the cost if I just wait until it is released versus buying existing version and then paying for the FGU update. Will the costs be relative? etc..

I would like to be the king of all Londinium and wear a shiny hat!

[Trenloe]

As a new comer to FG, I would like to know the expected date of release for the FGU update. Also would like to know the cost if I just wait until it is released versus buying existing version and then paying for the FGU update. Will the costs be relative? etc..
Welcome to the FG forums.

See the FGU FAQ here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?43254-Fantasy-Grounds-Unity-FAQ

Buy Fantasy Grounds for what it is now. If you want to use Fantasy Grounds now, then buy it now - don't wait for FGU to come out because that is unknown and you could be missing out on many months of great online gaming with the current version of Fantasy Grounds. See the FAQ linked above for other information.

[Trenloe]

Keep the discussion civil and on topic everyone please.

Just because regular community members have heard the same questions and discussions about this over and over and over, newcomers won't necessarily be aware and it's valid for them to ask questions.

[Ampersandrew]

I would like to be the king of all Londinium and wear a shiny hat!

You shall go to the Ball!!!

[M3TAL]

I would like to be the king of all Londinium and wear a shiny hat!

Wow....Everyone Look At Me....I'm Funny. Not enough attention for you today DwightLee.

[M3TAL]

Trenloe,

Thanks for the welcoming..I had seen some videos that implied that the release would be soon. That is the reason for my questions. Thanks for the link. I will check it out.
I know this is not the proper thread but, Is there actual game modules/campaign that may be purchased that are already set up to work with FG. My daughter is wanting to DM a group for the first time and was hoping to cut out a lot of the leg work.

[Trenloe]

I know this is not the proper thread but, Is there actual game modules/campaign that may be purchased that are already set up to work with FG. My daughter is wanting to DM a group for the first time and was hoping to cut out a lot of the leg work.
There's lots and lots - over 1,000 DLC products. Depending what system your daughter is interested in, there could be a huge amount, or not so many.

Check in the store - use the filter to specify the RPG system you're interested in and "Adventures". For example, here are the official 5E adventures: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/?sys=16&pub=-1&typ=3&search=&sort=1 or third party 5E adventures: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/?sys=17&pub=-1&typ=3&search=&sort=1 These span multiple pages - use the "Next page" link in the bottom right...

[LordEntrails]

Is there actual game modules/campaign that may be purchased that are already set up to work with FG. My daughter is wanting to DM a group for the first time and was hoping to cut out a lot of the leg work.
Other than the FG Store, their is also the DMsGuild that is the official community outlet for unoffcial D&D 5E community stuff. Their are lots of FG modules there as well; https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?filters=0_0_0_0_0_0_45545_0

You will also find their are a one or two (?) third party distributors that also sell (with a license) FG content, the only one I know of is AAW; https://adventureaweek.com

[Brigonos]

Trenloe,

Thanks for the welcoming..I had seen some videos that implied that the release would be soon. That is the reason for my questions. Thanks for the link. I will check it out.
I know this is not the proper thread but, Is there actual game modules/campaign that may be purchased that are already set up to work with FG. My daughter is wanting to DM a group for the first time and was hoping to cut out a lot of the leg work.

There really is no knowing how soon it will be. The devs may think it'll be out in a matter of days only to encounter a setback that takes several months to overcome. They don't give dates for precisely that reason. The only thing that can be stated definitively is that they are working on it and would rather be done sooner than later. I'm sure they're trying really hard.

[M3TAL]

Thank You. I did find them. Sorry I did not get back to you to save you your time. Do you have one you would recommend for a beginner. Obviously Level 1, 5E, 4 -6 players.

[damned]

Thank You. I did find them. Sorry I did not get back to you to save you your time. Do you have one you would recommend for a beginner. Obviously Level 1, 5E, 4 -6 players.

There are many good 3rd party products but Lost Mines of Phandelver is very good.

[M3TAL]

Thanks. will check it out!

[LordEntrails]

Thank You. I did find them. Sorry I did not get back to you to save you your time. Do you have one you would recommend for a beginner. Obviously Level 1, 5E, 4 -6 players.
Lost Mine is excellent, and really a pretty standard one. If you want something a little different, PM your email address and I send you a complementary copy of Balance Disturbed; https://www.dmsguild.com/product/180749/Balance-Disturbed-BDC1
It's pretty open and can be hard for a new DM to run (because the first combat that the party has to retreat from), and I have never published the follow on adventures. But its at least another thing to take a look at.

[Xemit]

Lost Mine was designed for new players and new DMs alike. It is a great choice for 5E starters. Most of the content is all ready to go. Maybe a supplemental map such as the original ambush encounter would be nice but it is easy enough to make your own, or just sketch out on the party sheet. Pregenerated PCs makes for a fast start up, but you can easily roll your own to replace them.

I just drew up my own map for the ambush encounter. Prep work is basically setting the start point masking on any maps. Also a good idea for the DM to read through all the content at least once so they are aware of how everything hooks together. And this isn't a very large campaign, so not a lot to read (~64 pages, a big campaign can easily be 300 pages and only partially define all content needed to play).

[Trenloe]

Maybe a supplemental map such as the original ambush encounter would be nice but it is easy enough to make your own, or just sketch out on the party sheet.
Check the "Maps" section in this thread: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?27298-Extensions-Modules-Pregens-and-other-5E-resources

[DwightLee]

My point ( which was only meant in humor, and several caught as a reference to Firefly ) is that it is not about what we want. It is about what is best for the people developing Fantasy Grounds Unity to give it the best chance of sucuess. If they give any indication of when they hope to release, their toes will be held to the fire on that. They are better off not saying anything about release timing until that timing is cast in stone. That will not happen until it is actually ready to release. From what I have seen FG Unity will be a fantastic and much desired upgrade to Fantasy Grounds that I will be more than willing to pay for. But I dont want some half baked bug filled monstrosity, I hope they take their time, and get it right. It is too important of an update to release before it is ready.

[tgvarney]

My point ( which was only meant in humor, and several caught as a reference to Firefly ) is that it is not about what we want. It is about what is best for the people developing Fantasy Grounds Unity to give it the best chance of sucuess. If they give any indication of when they hope to release, their toes will be held to the fire on that. They are better off not saying anything about release timing until that timing is cast in stone. That will not happen until it is actually ready to release. From what I have seen FG Unity will be a fantastic and much desired upgrade to Fantasy Grounds that I will be more than willing to pay for. But I dont want some half baked bug filled monstrosity, I hope they take their time, and get it right. It is too important of an update to release before it is ready.

On the other hand, I think they shouldn't let themselves fall into the trap that Star Citizen has gotten themselves into, where they are contently trying to improve on something to an extent where they just never release it. At this point it's been pushing on five years of development. I'm sure they are working hard on it, but if they can't release a virtual tabletop experience in over five years without it being a "bug filled monstrosity" then that is a problem in and of itself. I don't want a situation where they keep thinking they need to take their time and just never release it.

[Jiminimonka]

Star Citizen is a completely different scenario than Fantasy Grounds. Also a hundred million dollar venture. Not comparible situations at all. Doug and the rest of Smiteworks team have been giving updates but not making promises, and rightly so. It's ready when it's ready sounds right to me. CD Project Red do the same and look at Witcher, Blizzard also do the same and look at their catalogue.

Mostly this thread is nonsense banter anyway. 2 cents....

[iotech]

To be sure. Apples to Oranges... Star Citizen has a team of about 400 people working on it. Smiteworks is... what? 8 people?
We're all excited to see what FGU brings, but FGC is a complete, stable product, with hundreds of addon products, and is ready... now.

I'm also excited to see what Windows 15 brings (not really) but I'm not nagging Microsoft to release it RITENAO!

Anywho, I know Doug, Moon, and all the Mighty Smities are moving as fast as they can, and I (for one) am very very happy that their bar is quality and not speed. Sure, we get impatient and most of us are not rude about it (not saying anyone here has been rude, but it has happened). Even if Smiteworks never finishes FGU, I have got my money's worth from FGC and continue to do so every week.

Doug, we trust you guys or we wouldn't be here. Take as long as you need to get it right. Most of us will still be here when you're done.

[DwightLee]

I am sure FG would LOVE to be in the position of Star Citicezn, as the most successful crowdfunding of all time... not just games, but ALL crowdfunding. And Star Citizen makes my point... they have proven that it is better to not predict release timing at all

[DwightLee]

Lost Mine was designed for new players and new DMs alike. It is a great choice for 5E starters. Most of the content is all ready to go. Maybe a supplemental map such as the original ambush encounter would be nice but it is easy enough to make your own, or just sketch out on the party sheet. Pregenerated PCs makes for a fast start up, but you can easily roll your own to replace them.

I just drew up my own map for the ambush encounter. Prep work is basically setting the start point masking on any maps. Also a good idea for the DM to read through all the content at least once so they are aware of how everything hooks together. And this isn't a very large campaign, so not a lot to read (~64 pages, a big campaign can easily be 300 pages and only partially define all content needed to play).

yes... after doing LMoP as my first Fantasy Grounds game as a DM... I was ready to strike out on my own with a homebrew campaign... it has been fantastic

[NJL]

where is the downvote button?

[JohnD]

where is the downvote button?

We've already had 16 pages of essentially down voting. What's a button going to do?

[DwightLee]

I am fine with FG at present and would rather wait until Unity is finished. .

This is correct

[ddavison]

Well, it is now in official Alpha stage and has about 100 people using it. It's getting there. :)

[YAKO SOMEDAKY]

Looking forward to the beta phase to get to know FGU in depth

[DaddyNugget]

I don't think they should release the software if it isn't ready. Also, the beta access was a perk to the Kickstarter crowd, so beta is locked down for that.

I would like to request a definite pay structure for upgrading/time window to buy old license but all in on the unity release. I've been curious about FG for a long time, but now have to wait a few more months so I feel I get my money's worth out of it (I'm a buy it for life kind of person). I'm tempted to pay for Premium for a month or two so I can play some Pathfinder 2E with some friends, but it seems somewhat wasteful knowing a lifetime license could be around the corner.

[Aniond]

Fg is a great platform. As a Dm and a player the real issue is LFG. That is the one huge thing that roll20 has over FG. I wouldn't think it would cost too much resources to invest in a similar tool.

[LordEntrails]

Fg is a great platform. As a Dm and a player the real issue is LFG. That is the one huge thing that roll20 has over FG. I wouldn't think it would cost too much resources to invest in a similar tool.
I don't think its about cost. I think its about available resources and lack of an agreed upon LFG model. Though you mention Roll20's LFG platform, many Roll20 veterans think it's method for LFG leads to a poor player/group environment. So, finding when SmiteWorks has the resources to revamp the current LFP platform, they may first need to define what that platform should look like and do.

[Aniond]

I don't think its about cost. I think its about available resources and lack of an agreed upon LFG model. Though you mention Roll20's LFG platform, many Roll20 veterans think it's method for LFG leads to a poor player/group environment. So, finding when SmiteWorks has the resources to revamp the current LFP platform, they may first need to define what that platform should look like and do.

The LFG tool just gets people interested in your game. You still have have to talk to them, get to know them, and make a decision on if you want them in your party. I never just invite someone to a game that I never talked to before. That is asking for failure.

[deer_buster]

One option, though I am not necessarily suggesting it, is to release a test version to people actually interested and able to test/play with a non-release version. I know I would do this even if there were bugs and such.

If only they had provided an option during the FGU kickstarter to allow people to participate in the alpha version before it is released to the rest of the backers when it reaches beta release. Hope you didn't miss it;)

[deer_buster]

I would like to request a definite pay structure for upgrading/time window to buy old license but all in on the unity release. I've been curious about FG for a long time, but now have to wait a few more months so I feel I get my money's worth out of it (I'm a buy it for life kind of person). I'm tempted to pay for Premium for a month or two so I can play some Pathfinder 2E with some friends, but it seems somewhat wasteful knowing a lifetime license could be around the corner.


No reason to wait, you can be a player for free with the demo version. Lots of GMs post Looking for Players for their games (either on the forums, discord, reddit, or other platforms), so if you want a taste now, start tasting. Try checking out Fantasy Grounds College...they have demo games, classes on how to get the most out of your experience (player and GMs), etc. Also, FG Con is soon

[deer_buster]

The LFG tool just gets people interested in your game. You still have have to talk to them, get to know them, and make a decision on if you want them in your party. I never just invite someone to a game that I never talked to before. That is asking for failure.

Unless you are posting a pay for play, GMs typically get pretty good response rates on the LFP channels on the official FG discord...

[LordEntrails]

Let's move LFG discussions to a more appropriate thread, like this one; https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?51287-What-Would-the-Ideal-LFG-Platform-Look-Like&p=456138#post456138

[DrakosDJ]

I don't think they should release the software if it isn't ready. Also, the beta access was a perk to the Kickstarter crowd, so beta is locked down for that.
I totally agree.

[Gissur]

As someone currently using Roll20, am considering FG, but am about to start a new campaign, is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
I want to move to FG but if so I need to do that now or within the next week.
So Either I buy the ultimate version now, and in a week or 2 months I need to pay for the upgrade to unity.

Or I opt to continue roll20 where if so I am looking at starting and buying a new campaign, which probably will last 6-8 months.

That said the extra money is not a problem for me, Im more after dynamic lightning and the network hub, as I feel the current port forwarding and sharing of FG right now seems just, well quite honestly, its back to the 80s, compared to Roll20 where everything is online on servers run by Roll20.
Why does not the devs have their own servers? I understand its an economical questions but frankly, 2-3 racks with a total of maybe 15 servers, a monthly cost of not too much, will be enough for probably the entire FG community.
Then again I have no idea of the financials of the dev team.

Back on topic though, I would not mind buying a test version thats not complete, and then get a free upgrade once done.
It will either be bought this week or possible never, but I really would like to give FG a shot, as I feel it might give a new spark for our DnD sessions.

We have a player group going on 25-30 years, and will use the platform for atleast 10-15 years. after that we all have alzheimers and dont play anymore. Ok maybe in 25 years but hey. We are all friends since childhood and simply through the years continued to dive into our sessions even though we live in different countries across the globe, the discovery of Virtual tabletops a few years ago was fantastic.

After 3 years on Roll20 things have happened within our group so that we either stick to Roll20 or move to a new platform, hence my new and current interest in FG, and trying to learn all about it.
The bad timing though of Unity being released so soon but not soon enough, is bothering me.

[Zacchaeus]

As I suggested in your other post take out a subscription for the classic ultimate license and then buy the Unity ultimate when it releases. If Unity releases in December you will have paid a maximum of $30 for the sub, and the upgrade from classic to Unity will likely be more than that. Of course if the Unity release is delayed the figures will change.

[Ampersandrew]

Fantasy Grounds has a different architecture than Roll20. In Fantasy Grounds all of your data lives on the GM's machine. They can't just put up servers, they'd need a fundamental rewrite of the whole thing, that would be even more radical than the move to Unity.

[Andraax]

Why does not the devs have their own servers? I understand its an economical questions but frankly, 2-3 racks with a total of maybe 15 servers, a monthly cost of not too much, will be enough for probably the entire FG community.
Then again I have no idea of the financials of the dev team.

You do realize that technically, if SmiteWorks or Roll20 hosts your content, they own it? I prefer to have stuff I've developed on my computer where I own and control it.

[ddavison]

The subscription is probably the best route for you at this time. Note that we also offer 30-day money back guarantees on all purchases - subscriptions and content. If you look at the bundles that are available for D&D (if that is what you plan to play), then there is also a pretty significant cost savings and more content available for Fantasy Grounds overall. Those purchases will work with FGU when it is released.

[Mytherus]

...or else all the Roll20 converters are quicker gone than u think .
I know this will put a lot of pressure on you, but its a great chance you shouldnt throw away 😄👍

....then they are gone.

Seriously, not JUST a sarcastic sounding reply --- but an honest one. Any business, that rushes product out the door SOLELY for idle random threats like "Well ABC company if your product isn't out NOW then I'll take my business elsewhere"......then that company isn't truly concerned of quality. You can't please everyone -- its just one of those facts of life things. You have to be true to yourself, your vision and maintain the quality you want to seek. If people leave because they perceive it takes you too long...well such is life. The mature business owner will turn that to "ok well that's unfortunate, but now I'm gonna bust my arse on making my product the best it can be -- and perhaps that will drive them back to me in due time."

Such is life.....you want to go--- go then. Just go.

[ddavison]

The original post was made in October 2018. Since then, we have run the Kickstarter, announced a target release date in December and gone through most of an Alpha test. Beta should be starting this month. At this stage, I think most people a content to wait for the planned process to play out.

[DrakosDJ]

Why does not the devs have their own servers? I understand its an economical questions but frankly, 2-3 racks with a total of maybe 15 servers, a monthly cost of not too much, will be enough for probably the entire FG community.
Then again I have no idea of the financials of the dev team.

Personally I like that it is not run on online servers and is a stand alone application. Two of the main reasons I never used Roll20 was the online servers and web based front-end, there is also the issue with the owner but I won't go into that.

[lostsanityreturned]

As someone currently using Roll20, am considering FG, but am about to start a new campaign, is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
I want to move to FG but if so I need to do that now or within the next week.
So Either I buy the ultimate version now, and in a week or 2 months I need to pay for the upgrade to unity.

Or I opt to continue roll20 where if so I am looking at starting and buying a new campaign, which probably will last 6-8 months.

That said the extra money is not a problem for me, Im more after dynamic lightning and the network hub, as I feel the current port forwarding and sharing of FG right now seems just, well quite honestly, its back to the 80s, compared to Roll20 where everything is online on servers run by Roll20.
Why does not the devs have their own servers? I understand its an economical questions but frankly, 2-3 racks with a total of maybe 15 servers, a monthly cost of not too much, will be enough for probably the entire FG community.
Then again I have no idea of the financials of the dev team.

Back on topic though, I would not mind buying a test version thats not complete, and then get a free upgrade once done.
It will either be bought this week or possible never, but I really would like to give FG a shot, as I feel it might give a new spark for our DnD sessions.

We have a player group going on 25-30 years, and will use the platform for atleast 10-15 years. after that we all have alzheimers and dont play anymore. Ok maybe in 25 years but hey. We are all friends since childhood and simply through the years continued to dive into our sessions even though we live in different countries across the globe, the discovery of Virtual tabletops a few years ago was fantastic.

After 3 years on Roll20 things have happened within our group so that we either stick to Roll20 or move to a new platform, hence my new and current interest in FG, and trying to learn all about it.
The bad timing though of Unity being released so soon but not soon enough, is bothering me.

As others have said, get a sub until unity releases. All your purchased content will transfer over and while you have to do without dynamic lighting for a bit... It is worth it if you are playing on a supported ruleset.

I am saying this as someone who spent 3 years as a roll20 GM and paying the sub all the way as well as being a character sheet contributor. FG is a better platform to GM from by far with exception to the awful drawing tools.

Being a host/client architecture helps a lot as well and means there is next to no latency experienced in play. Unlike the sluggish web experience that is roll20. Roll20 is good for initial accessibility, but when it comes to actually managing any sort of complex campaign I would never go back to it.

[gaara6666]

ahem... ill just leave this here https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/smiteworks/fantasy-grounds-unity/posts/2657265

[hawkwind]

question about the beta coming out on the 28th, can you host a game in it for other players who also have a beta key? I assume you can't host a game with anyone yet though i happy to be corrected.

[Moon Wizard]

As the KS announcement mentioned, we are not ready for live play, and there are known issues with multiplayer networking that will be in beta. The primary goal is to flesh out all the features and work towards being ready for live play during the beta.

Regards,
JPG

[Henrique Oliveira Machado]

...or else all the Roll20 converters are quicker gone than u think .
I know this will put a lot of pressure on you, but its a great chance you shouldnt throw away 😄👍

Why would anyone want to go to roll20? Current FG is better than it.

[TheCosmicHand]

What is different between this Fantasy Ground version and the Unity version? Do the Ultimate Edition owners get this for free?

[Zacchaeus]

What is different between this Fantasy Ground version and the Unity version? Do the Ultimate Edition owners get this for free?
No, there will be an upgrade cost from classic to Unity. Unity is 64 bit, better networking and many new graphical features.

[dragonheels]

Hello all,
Is there a tread to report some issues when testing FGU ?

[ddavison]

Post into this thread please: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?107-Fantasy-Grounds-Unity-Playtest

I'm locking this particular thread because it is really old and no longer relevant.