Thanks for the feedback and keep it coming. I want to hear what people have to say about it -- even if it's a simple "I don't like it." or "I do like it."
Printable View
Thanks for the feedback and keep it coming. I want to hear what people have to say about it -- even if it's a simple "I don't like it." or "I do like it."
So to answer my one and only question, you plan on sticking to the rented license structure.... That is very unfortunate, but I will no longer have any use for Smite Works or Fantasy Grounds.
That being said, now that Autodesk vs. Vernor has affirmed that we may legally sell our used licenses, and with the luck of Smite Works being purchased by an American Company, I have roughly 3 Full, and 15 lite licenses that I am willing to sell for around $10 each to whomever may want them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unerwünscht
That seems kind of a hasty post considering nothing has been carved in stone yet and the new owner has stated that he WANTS the thoughts of this groups members in deciding how things WILL go about. All change is not bad, and for software especially change is needed to keep it relevant. I don't post here often, but have bought this software because I like what it brings to my game play. For my money I have a working program that does what I need it to do. Yes, I would like to see floating licenses and am not a huge fan of the monthly pricing structure...but until it actually happens I'm more than satisfied enough with this product to give the new owner the benefit of the doubt. Sorry, I'm rambling. I guess I just want to say...wait and see before any "I'm leaving" statements are bandied about.
Heads up, bislab, your ten posts indicate you likely don't know unerwünscht's status here. Don't bother trying to convince him, and if you're unsure why: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)
As for the floating license issue, it seems fine to me, but I am not the target audience.
Well EugeneZ, I happen to agree with bislab. The application as stands is great for a fixed group that never (or rarely) has old players move on and new players join. This sadly is not the case with our gaming group. I have a list of around 160 people waiting for someones character to die so they can hop in.
But while we are on the subject of name calling and finger pointing did you notice that my posts are all on the topic of the floating license structure and your post is only a link to "a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community"
Look in the mirror next time, and/or die in a horrid accident that kills you slowly. :-)
Edited: Ooops forgot the smiley to let you know that was in jest.
Just a minor clarification, the subscription setting I'm looking at would not be every month but would be a small amount once every 6 months. I guess that could be considered basically the same as the cost divided by 6 each month, but I just wanted to make sure you read the pricing structure I proposed correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by bislab
I am willing to listen to feedback from everyone, however, even those who think my proposal is a bad idea. If you can make a counter proposal and more people are in favor of that idea and it still helps move things the way I think they need to go for the company that I would like to hear them.
I'll add my two pence worth.
Whilst my groups are pretty static with all players currently having purchased lite licenses I can understand the appeal of a floating license structure as it offers flexibility for getting new players into FGII.
However it strikes me that the proposed 6 month subscription will NOT appeal to those who will compare the costs of a subscription vs lite license and determine its not cost effective if you have a large group of dynamic players (as in Unerwünscht's case).
So, if the desire is to introduce some annuity revenue into the business why not consiider the following:
1) Offering a lite license equivalent (available to GM Full licensees only) that can be used in a true floating manner with ANY player at an affordable price. The floating licenses will need to either be transferable to lite licenses or offer some sort of concession for referal to a proper lite license.
2) Introduce new feature sets such as a hosted offline campaign management/wiki space, HTML versions of PC's/NPC's, that integrate with FGII and allow GM's/Players to interact outside of game sessions. This service could be subscriber based and would deliver the annuity revenue your looking for. At the same time it would alleviate the need to turn the floating license model into a rental license scheme and at the same time deliver a richer and more complete experience to our RPGs.
3) At the same time perhaps also introduce some sort of subscriber based matchmaking service whereby if I, say as a user, finds some spare time on the spare of the moment I can fire up FGII and connect to the matchmaking service which finds me a GM and game and connects me straight in, a sort of drop-in/drop-out dungeon delve service perhaps.
Anyways, just a couple of examples of alternatives for generating annuity revenue.
I like that one, it's sort of on the same lines of the chat system we suggested, but its a nice spin on that idea, and would work well in tandem with a global chat system.Quote:
Originally Posted by zephp
Personally, I would only need floating licenses a couple of times a year (to demo the product at FUMCon) so the currently proposed subscription looks expensive to me. If I could purchase the licenses (say for $25 each) then I could justify the cost as a one-off. If I had licenses available, I could possibly invite new players to try before they buy - but I'm not willing to pay a large subscription on the off-chance. Again, if I had the option to buy, I could justify this as a one-off expense.
One thing a friend of mine brought up: A one time expense for a floating license would be a good idea. You could share it easily with others for one shot adventures or bringing in new folks. Very nice.
But, a reoccuring cost for a floating license would make it more economical to purchase a light license, then share the license number with other people as needed. Granted, this would be in violation of the license agreement, but let's be honest, someone would do it if it meant saving money. You could stop it with a central server that keeps track of things, but the first time that went down and prevented people from doing a gaming session, everyone would be looking for new products.