Yes, I did because I had no choice in order to get the recent updates/bugfixes for Android, that you conveniently called new feature. I wouldn't call this "me taking advantage".

I bought a years new subscription as an act of good faith and as a tangible token of my appreciation of this great engine. I have no regrets as I think Greg deserves fair recompense for the hours he puts in and I did only pay $150 for my v2.0 license which was a bargain for sure.

However, I still have concerns regarding the subscription system that I'd like clarifying:

At the end of my years subscription do I actually own anything that I can continue to use should I stop subscribing at that point? Because otherwise it seems to me this is simply a rental system as opposed to a purchase system and at no point do I actually own anything.

Why might I stop my subscription after a year. Well because I have no indication up front of the actual additions to the engine over my paid up subscription period, and if nothing is added in the first year that is useful to me then I will be a lot more reluctant to subscribe for a second year.

My gut feeling at the moment is telling me that unless I get some clarification on this I should continue development with my frozen v2.0 engine as that's the only code I can currently rely on as being totally owned by myself and have a legal right to keep using. Hence gives me some feeling of security.

This lack of ownership is what makes me feel nervous here, as I think most Indie developers seek security over the short to middle term. We all know there is no long term security unless you write your own engine.

Thank you for the feedback, it is good to know the thoughts of my customers.

I'll give you a reply to your question soon, possibly tomorrow, as I'm still waiting for the majority of the forum to cast their votes on the 2 polls that I've recently created.

I hope you will be satisfied with the answer

(04-08-2014 10:32 PM)Pixel Perfect Wrote:  I bought a years new subscription as an act of good faith and as a tangible token of my appreciation of this great engine. I have no regrets as I think Greg deserves fair recompense for the hours he puts in and I did only pay $150 for my v2.0 license which was a bargain for sure.

However, I still have concerns regarding the subscription system that I'd like clarifying:

At the end of my years subscription do I actually own anything that I can continue to use should I stop subscribing at that point? Because otherwise it seems to me this is simply a rental system as opposed to a purchase system and at no point do I actually own anything.

Why might I stop my subscription after a year. Well because I have no indication up front of the actual additions to the engine over my paid up subscription period, and if nothing is added in the first year that is useful to me then I will be a lot more reluctant to subscribe for a second year.

My gut feeling at the moment is telling me that unless I get some clarification on this I should continue development with my frozen v2.0 engine as that's the only code I can currently rely on as being totally owned by myself and have a legal right to keep using. Hence gives me some feeling of security.

This lack of ownership is what makes me feel nervous here, as I think most Indie developers seek security over the short to middle term. We all know there is no long term security unless you write your own engine.

Read the terms of use:

Quote:You may use the Engine only as long as your license subscription is active. If your subscription ends and it's not renewed, you may no longer use the Engine.

you own your code right, thats why i am out

First of all Congrats Greg on your new transition. Another update and a new licensing model. I understand why you would head in this direction. Profitability, it makes sense. I've only seen a hand full of games actually published on EE. So per Development costs are not generating much revenue for you.

Second, you have some amazing talent. I wish I had some of it. I hope in time I can match your programming skills. That being said your are attempting to lay in bed with some of the most robust engines around (Unreal 4, Unity 3D, CryEngine, Havok / Vision ) and so on. No matter your talent the cry for features and the constant changing of the licensing structure along with the lack of features is going to start to cause you problems. I am a licensed EE 1.0 & EE 2.0 holder. None of that really means much to me if every version of the engine your going to force me to purchase a new license. Cause if I never sell the game and I make zero from not putting ads in or around my game i owe nothing. I take my hat off to you I really do. You are attempting to complete with some very large companies in solo shoes. However, reality is the engine is suffering from it. The migration from 1.0 to 2.0 set people back a bit. Re-engineering a product sucks and is a total buzz kill. Rumor has it the you have improved this process in 3.0 and hopefully that will help you lessen the shock for users.

Third, I have EE but I don't use it. I have a final project coming up in school and I was hoping the engine would mature a bit before that would happen. With the new licensing structure yet again I am not interesting in yet again moving. This is an unwanted process for me. Unreal offers several methods along with Unity 3D That do not force a customer out of a price model or a bully type tactic to generate revenue.. You have abruptly yet again killed an engine dropped support and levies new licensing fees. From the feel of the forums and the chats you pushing your long term customers away.

Finally, with all the mentioned above it's becoming clear you are definitely struggling for money. Yet I have a question? Do you sell a car with no doors or trucks because it costs you money to have a 3rd party company fab them up? Of course you don't because that is illegal. Yet you offer us EE with what some consider vital missing pieces / features and charge a premium in an effort to affect development. You know there was another company who tried this approach. That company produce an engine called Torque. Every revision they changed pricing and added minor features and a lot more bugs and never supplied the customer with all the pieces requested. They found themselves broke and open sourcing the engine.

I will follow your development process but I suggest you consider that you are a company. You are attempting to place the burden of features on the customer community and that is a cost the company has to eat and then calculate into the cost of selling the engine. Just some friendly advise. If I have learned one thing from all this is I no fantasies about ever making a game engine anymore. Good luck my friend. if you play your cards right once the dust settle you might come out of this on top of things. Only time will tell.

Hi,

Thank you for your opinion.

Quote:I am a licensed EE 1.0 & EE 2.0 holder. None of that really means much to me if every version of the engine your going to force me to purchase a new license

Every single business out there is built around the fact of bringing constant income. You don't just get money from a customer once, and then say thanks, goodbye and forget them. This doesn't make sense, a good business is a constant relationship. Especially in an engine related business. Customers have constant expectations, for new elements, and this what the engine creator needs to provide. This is constant need->develop->get->need another->develop another->get another feature, and the subscription licensing system is almost perfect for that.
I think you're ignoring the fact that all of Unity, Unreal, CryEngine do exactly the same.

Quote:charge a premium in an effort to affect development

I'm not in any way charging any premium. Esenthel has always in the past been much cheaper compared to the competition, and now its prices are comparable to other game engines on the market. I'm in the process of gathering feedback about the subscription prices, which may slightly change the situation.

Quote:Do you sell a car with no doors or trucks because it costs you money to have a 3rd party company fab them up? Of course you don't because that is illegal

I'm sorry I don't think that's a good comparison. Yes there are other engines that have some cool features that Esenthel does not. But so does Esenthel has some features that other engines don't have. It's all about what is important for you, and what you like working with better.

Quote:That company produce an engine called Torque. Every revision they changed pricing and added minor features and a lot more bugs and never supplied the customer with all the pieces requested.

Thanks, however I'm always proud of the fact that I keep engine's bugs to zero amount. The need for new licensing system comes from the fact that industry/competition/situation changes and evolves all the time.

In business and in life in general there are no fixed rules for success, you need to adapt all the time.

(04-08-2014 11:43 PM)Esenthel Wrote:  Hi,

Thank you for your opinion.

Quote:I am a licensed EE 1.0 & EE 2.0 holder. None of that really means much to me if every version of the engine your going to force me to purchase a new license

Every single business out there is built around the fact of bringing constant income. You don't just get money from a customer once, and then say thanks, goodbye and forget them. This doesn't make sense, a good business is a constant relationship. Especially in an engine related business. Customers have constant expectations, for new elements, and this what the engine creator needs to provide. This is constant need->develop->get->need another->develop another->get another feature, and the subscription licensing system is almost perfect for that.
I think you're ignoring the fact that all of Unity, Unreal, CryEngine do exactly the same.

I know they do. It's exactly why I am aware the industry is trying very hard to put their product into the hands of the indy developers. It is why I reached out to you with my point of view. I have not faulted you for your change. I think in the end it is a wise choice. I think it will keep you afloat. But in keeping with the big picture I urge you look slightly deeper into my post. If you don't find anything of interest or value to you. No offense taken, we all have our own goals and ideals.

Quote:In business and in life in general there are no fixed rules for success, you need to adapt all the time.

No there may not be no any hardened rules. But there are some highly effective and widely known business models. No one model fits any one company perfectly. Is your business model working for you? Does it fit your structure. Nobody can solo everything all the time. Time becomes a horrible thing to manage in a state like that. In that state will never exist a reality in which you can accomplish everything you want. So I ask you. Is your business model working for you? Your burn out rate is the biggest thing that is scary. You had a bout with that late last year. A simple google search of your name will held some interesting results. After several failed investments I look deep into what I am about to buy or fully invest in. Why settle for a lone developer when I can get Unity, unreal, cry, vision support teams / communities. You have a decent product Greg but you have no visibility in the market. You need some titles to help push your name / brand / product. These are the type of thoughts you will be facing when attempting to sell / recruit your product into the future. I wonder if you realize how deep into the pool you've jumped. With Unreal and Cry being so affordable now. Unreal offering SteamOS and linux along with a road map of compiling windows clients on Mac or linux and vise versa. It's going to be an interesting next couple of years. Everyone seems to want a piece of Unities pie.

Greg, thanks for your time. I won't continue on. Thank you for more updates to the engine. I look forward to more demo's and prospects.

Respectfully,
Sean

(04-09-2014 12:22 AM)aceio76 Wrote:  In many ways, there is a feeling that you aren't investing in the success of your users because there hasn't been much done from your part that shows that.

I'm sorry, I think you're being completely un-fair in your statement.

What about releasing the next paid release (current engine version aka 3.0) 6 months later than it should be.
What about releasing new WEB platform support completely free of charge.
What about fixing all bugs/issues in the engine ASAP with updates in next release everytime.
What about my constant devotion to improving the engine by working 7 days 8-12 hours a day.
I could keep going but I don't see the point.

I'm completely aware that some people will never be satisfied.

As Esenthel is aware, there will always be clamoring for change; then, when there is change, there will be complaining and griping. You see it every time any product is changed.
Everyone also needs to remember that 2.0 is still around and that the license purchased is still valid. No one is being forced to update/pay more. EE2 works quite well and is capable of releasing games.

Although it is costing me more, I support this transition in the interest of keeping the Esenthel engine active, updated, and moving forward.

(04-09-2014 03:33 AM)Rubeus Wrote:  As Esenthel is aware, there will always be clamoring for change; then, when there is change, there will be complaining and griping. You see it every time any product is changed.
Everyone also needs to remember that 2.0 is still around and that the license purchased is still valid. No one is being forced to update/pay more. EE2 works quite well and is capable of releasing games.

Although it is costing me more, I support this transition in the interest of keeping the Esenthel engine active, updated, and moving forward.

According to Esenthel himself 2.0 is being retired. So yes you will be forced at some point to upgrade if you want continued support and patches.

Esenthel Wrote:Also, because I'm releasing a brand new engine version, there won't be any more updates to 2.0.

2.0 is end of life. No more upgrades or patches. That will put you a bad sport without the original source to add features to that product or to self patch.

(04-09-2014 12:48 AM)Esenthel Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 12:22 AM)aceio76 Wrote:  In many ways, there is a feeling that you aren't investing in the success of your users because there hasn't been much done from your part that shows that.

I'm sorry, I think you're being completely un-fair in your statement.

What about releasing the next paid release (current engine version aka 3.0) 6 months later than it should be.
What about releasing new WEB platform support completely free of charge.
What about fixing all bugs/issues in the engine ASAP with updates in next release everytime.
What about my constant devotion to improving the engine by working 7 days 8-12 hours a day.
I could keep going but I don't see the point.

I'm completely aware that some people will never be satisfied.

I agree with Esenthel, completely unfair and the opposite is true!
The license doesn't include support and yet he takes the time to provide personalised support, introduce requested features and great updates (linux! wow!).

IMO Esenthel is a unique engine, and I don't see the point in comparing other engines licenses.
Greg will find a balance of what benefits him and the community, and I applaud him for giving us a voice in his decision making, even tho it's not our business.

So here's an idea, and I suppose someone will explain to me why it's bad. But I'm thinking of a little compromise that would make me at least very happy.

If you are no longer supporting EE 2.0, couldn't you at least give us the source code for it, so we can improve it ourselves if we need to? I would be willing to pay a bit extra (one-time-only of course ) if I could do that.

(04-09-2014 06:37 AM)gwald Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 12:48 AM)Esenthel Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 12:22 AM)aceio76 Wrote:  In many ways, there is a feeling that you aren't investing in the success of your users because there hasn't been much done from your part that shows that.

I'm sorry, I think you're being completely un-fair in your statement.

What about releasing the next paid release (current engine version aka 3.0) 6 months later than it should be.
What about releasing new WEB platform support completely free of charge.
What about fixing all bugs/issues in the engine ASAP with updates in next release everytime.
What about my constant devotion to improving the engine by working 7 days 8-12 hours a day.
I could keep going but I don't see the point.

I'm completely aware that some people will never be satisfied.

I agree with Esenthel, completely unfair and the opposite is true!
The license doesn't include support and yet he takes the time to provide personalised support, introduce requested features and great updates (linux! wow!).

IMO Esenthel is a unique engine, and I don't see the point in comparing other engines licenses.
Greg will find a balance of what benefits him and the community, and I applaud him for giving us a voice in his decision making, even tho it's not our business.

I realy would have payed for an Upgrade to 3.0 for 1 year 100$, because i can use 3.0 after this certain time.
Look @forum discription how many month there where no support.
Webplatform....i did try this and did not work to me (and most work goes to emscripten but another point is security in this)
fixing bugs is a service (you bought 1 year)
Linux support....yeah it was a maximum contribution and a feature, that wasn't necessary to me.

But hey, he did his choice. "Rentalservice for a Gameengine" He changed whithout comunicating to us, it is like the roadmap and eta.
Yeah you are completly right, it's not our business.

Quote:You may use the Engine only as long as your license subscription is active. If your subscription ends and it's not renewed, you may no longer use the Engine.

To me, that's the biggest issue. If you look at the other engine (like UE4), they simply stop giving you updates if your license expires. But you can still continue to use the software.

On top of that, I think it would be great to have an estimated roadmap for the coming year. This doesn't have to be set in stone, and of course, bugfixes come first; but at least we get an idea of what we are getting for our money.

Features like web support, oculus rift and Esenthel Store in the engine are great, but they get pushed to the top without anyone knowing about it.
I like suprises, I really do, but I looked at the roadmap when Esenthel 2.0 was released, and most of the things that were at the top back then are still there. They have even moved down.

I think these are the issues that a lot of people struggle with, not the price.

In any case, good luck, it's exciting anyway!

early sometimes, when i used this engine i think, creator if this engine : when he made engine and all who want - already buy this licenses...what he will do next, he need money for life. develop new feature for 200$ in month is not enought for this.
going to subscription system is logically should be happens. it's liitlebit sad for me but i good understood the Author. may be with this license mode he will be more happy and will make engine better...)