Ultra Engine pricing

[Jules D.]

 Ok, as much as I don't like the Idea of subscription. From a business point, it is the better way to go.  Hey, instead of buying a pizza that week spend it on a subscription. I believe that Josh is putting a lot of work into this. And I guess if you are as brilliant as Josh, then build your own game engine. I also believe people are just scared of a subscription cause it is kind of new. But to pay a little money a month and keep Josh working on the engine is more of a sure thing than a one payment.

 Anyway I for one will be getting a subscription. It is worth it, for something most of us enjoy doing.

[Marcousik]

I think that a non-subscription modus for Indies is an art of quality garanty for customers, as it says: Look at that big studios which are owning over 50000 $ with our engine-made games. They have to pay a monthly fee, are not suffering for this, and we are stable.

That means nothing else than "pay our engine first after you get success with it" That's a warranty.

But the real question is imo which part of the market/customers is Ultra supposed to be attractive for ? Indies or profis ?

Maybe in a few years will seet Josh confortably with a big success thx to Ultra project and allow Indies to work or try to work with it for free or one-time payment. Who knows.

[WSI]

I'm not a fan of subscriptions for software in general. Moved away from Adobe completely when they changed to such an approach, etc.

However, ~$10/month is not really a huge ask. I can spend that much on a single visit to McDonald's (and I'm sure UltraEngine won't contribute to my midsection... at least not directly :p). 

My one concern is the long-term plans for UltraEngine once it's released.

One thing that's kept me away from jumping into Leadwerks is how it seems the latest version is barely out the door when work and focus shifts to "the next version". I never felt comfortable jumping into the TorqueEngine for the same reason. GarageGames was constantly working on "the next game engine", leaving their existing ones effectively abandoned.  It's like trying to put down roots in shifting sand.

I wouldn't even think twice about paying $10 a month to use UltraEngine, with the confidence that work on expanding and improving it would continue, instead of focus shifting to starting a new engine from scratch. 

Is that the plan with UltraEngine, Josh? To focus on building and expanding on one platform - at least to the point that it's no longer feasible and a complete ground-up rewrite is necessary? If so, just show me where to sign up :).

[Josh]

11 minutes ago, WSI said:

One thing that's kept me away from jumping into Leadwerks is how it seems the latest version is barely out the door when work and focus shifts to "the next version". I never felt comfortable jumping into the TorqueEngine for the same reason. GarageGames was constantly working on "the next game engine", leaving their existing ones effectively abandoned.  It's like trying to put down roots in shifting sand.

Is that the plan with UltraEngine, Josh? To focus on building and expanding on one platform - at least to the point that it's no longer feasible and a complete ground-up rewrite is necessary? If so, just show me where to sign up :).

That's a consequence of the one-time payment license, to some degree. I was able to take my time designing Ultra, and it is designed to be a foundation that can be built on for many years. I am very happy about the prospect of being able to just add features and steadily improve the same code base, instead of having to always come up with a new product. That can really only be done with a subscription model because it provides steady revenue that grows over time.

In the badly drawn graph below, I can guarantee you Garage Games' income looked like the image on the left. This is why they had to always come out with a new and slightly different engine. There's absolutely no way Ultra Engine can be fully developed, much less me being able to hire more programmers, unless the revenue looks more like the graph on the right, which is what I am trying to do with the subscription model.

I'm paying for a 3ds Max subscription right now, and I am personally would prefer to just buy it outright, but Autodesk is adding new features I want, so it is worthwhile to me.

[WSI]

2 hours ago, Josh said:

That's a consequence of the one-time payment license, to some degree. I was able to take my time designing Ultra, and it is designed to be a foundation that can be built on for many years. I am very happy about the prospect of being able to just add features and steadily improve the same code base, instead of having to always come up with a new product. That can really only be done with a subscription model because it provides steady revenue that grows over time.

In the badly drawn graph below, I can guarantee you Garage Games' income looked like the image on the left. This is why they had to always come out with a new and slightly different engine. There's absolutely no way Ultra Engine can be fully developed, much less me being able to hire more programmers, unless the revenue looks more like the graph on the right, which is what I am trying to do with the subscription model.

I'm paying for a 3ds Max subscription right now, and I am personally would prefer to just buy it outright, but Autodesk is adding new features I want, so it is worthwhile to me.

So UltraEngine is planned for the long-term, then. That's perfect. Exactly what I was hoping to hear/see.  Great! Thanks for the confirmation!
Also, those graphs are beautiful. Don't sell yourself short. :p. 

That's interesting about 3DSMax. May I ask why you prefer to use it in lieu of the "obvious"* free alternative, like Blender?  Not knocking you for using MAX. It's a powerful software. Just curious, 'cause I know it's far from cheap, even to subscribe.

* - I chuckle typing "obvious" regarding Blender, 'cause I started learning it years ago, before it went open source, and everyone was like "why are you using Blender? It sucks! Use a real 3D program, like Max or Maya".  It's cool to see it have come so far to where it's now part of major creators' pipelines... Just funny, considering where it started.

 

[Josh]

55 minutes ago, WSI said:

That's interesting about 3DSMax. May I ask why you prefer to use it in lieu of the "obvious"* free alternative, like Blender?  Not knocking you for using MAX. It's a powerful software. Just curious, 'cause I know it's far from cheap, even to subscribe.

I find it much easier to work with. There's an indie license that's less than $300 a year.

[IceBurger]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

I find it much easier to work with. There's an indie license that's less than $300 a year.

Being someone that started with Blender, I find it hard to use other tools. However I would like to. Blender has disappointed me recently with lots of crashes, slow downs, and freezing. I have 3DCoat, which I am trying to learn as a sculpting program. I previously used it for UV unwrapping and retopology, which it is great for.

[WSI]

2 hours ago, Josh said:

I find it much easier to work with. There's an indie license that's less than $300 a year.

Really?! So only $25 a month? That's actually not nearly what I thought it was. 
Interesting.

[WSI]

1 hour ago, IceBurger said:

Being someone that started with Blender, I find it hard to use other tools. However I would like to. Blender has disappointed me recently with lots of crashes, slow downs, and freezing. I have 3DCoat, which I am trying to learn as a sculpting program. I previously used it for UV unwrapping and retopology, which it is great for.

I haven't really been a fan of anything from 2.8 on. Especially after they got that influence... I mean "grant money" from EpicGames.  
I'm learning to use 2.9 since it's their LTS and so I know that it'll remain consistent at least for a while.

I still prefer and use 2.79b, though. Nothing added after that benefits me or what I want to use it for in any way. Its layout makes more sense to me, too. I found the .cubin files needed to support Cycles on my 2070 Super online, which was the only thing "holding me back". So I'm all set.

Anyhoo.. this thread is about pricing of UltraEngine, not 3D apps, so.. I'll stop derailing now 😛

[Josh]

Okay, the good news is that people want the new software, but there is a problem with this licensing model. A subscription model could work in theory, but it looks like its just pushing people away, regardless of what the price actually is.

Some interesting things I saw:

• A few times I saw people say "I can't afford that", even when the cost was very low. Like, even if it was $0.99 a month, I think people would still feel the same way.
• Someone offered me several hundred dollars to buy a perpetual license, rather than pay a lower amount for the subscription.
• Zero people said "subscription is okay, I just want a lower price".

I think this clearly demonstrates the problem isn't pricing, it's just that people just don't like the terms of that licensing model. It's fine for business customers, but I don't think it works for consumer software.

Therefore, Ultra Engine will also offer a conventional perpetual license. You can pre-order the standalone version now if you wish, and you will receive it upon release:
https://www.ultraengine.com/community/store/category/1-software/

Paid updates with major new features will be available approximately every 1-1.5 years, but you can continue using the version you own forever. This is a licensing model that everyone accepts as fair, and it does what we need.

Note the pricing is different from Leadwerks. There is no separate DLC required for the pro version, it's just $99, and the standard version is priced to be competitive with a new video game. A .NET version may arrive in the future, but I don't have any more information on that for now.

Thanks all for your honest feedback. Sorry for the drama. 

 

[havenphillip]

https://media.giphy.com/media/dVTnzQa3xUlKo/giphy.gif

[khotan]

Hi Josh !

Long time not here but I keep an eye on your new product from time to time . Great news for preorder but I suggest you make an early access in Steam for 100$ or 60$ it works better for us and I am sure other may be agreed on that, are you agreed, Josh ? That mean we can use your early access and be improve in time when a release is out. Because we need a program to test it and easy to find or update as auto when there is a new version, so all are good, right ?

Keep it up and good luck to you and to all !

[Marcousik]

@Josh Great great news to read. Any idea when will it be avalable on steam ?

[Josh]

Can't say exactly when. Right now I am working on viewport navigation, selection, and object properties. The last remaining big items are:

• CSG editing
• Terrain editing

This stuff can be time consuming, but I also feel like it is a lot simpler than the hardcore research-and-development I was doing. I'm back to coding on a simpler level, like when I made Leadwerks.

[AnthonyPython]

50 minutes ago, Josh said:

Can't say exactly when. Right now I am working on viewport navigation, selection, and object properties. The last remaining big items are:

• CSG editing
• Terrain editing

This stuff can be time consuming, but I also feel like it is a lot simpler than the hardcore research-and-development I was doing. I'm back to coding on a simpler level, like when I made Leadwerks.

that's actually good doing the base core stuff is way more time consuming than doing higher level stuff, still takes time but less though when the core is mostly there

[jmacklin308]

Looking forward to the release!

I really enjoyed watching its progress over the last year and some change. I think your perpetual license model + updates will work out great for a smaller business like yours. It might not get a lot of initial sales, but if the engine works as expected here, and actually provides value, people have no problem paying for that and letting everyone know.
 

[havenphillip]

I'm super pumped about this decision but I still think you should keep the subscription option.

Buying the standalone one-time payment, then buying all the DLC separately should be the "hard way" to do things. A subscription that was like 75% of the cost in one year of what it would cost to buy the standalone plus all the DLC  separately would appeal to a different kind of person (or whatever just so that subscription is the much better deal). I'll happily do things the "hard way" because that's just my own matrix of wants/needs but I think subscription could still work relative to the standalone option. It changes the payoffs. Instead of "paying rent" I'm "paying less so I don't have to pay more like those nerds over there."

I don't know the industry but it seems like maybe the people you're selling the subscription to may be serious game developers who don't like the way Unreal essentially punishes people for being successful.

I've seen your blog posts and all the work that went into it. I think your work speaks for itself, and Ultra does like 10X what Leadwerks 4 does and I bought Leadwerks for $100 like seven years ago. I'd gladly pay $150 - $200 for Ultra (I probably shouldn't say that but it's true. I mean some guy was willing to give you $700 for it).

 

[Josh]

I think the lower price will result in higher revenue. Like, I think more than twice as many people will snatch it up at $99 than would buy it at $199.

Standard, Pro, and a possible .NET version will each be a separate app ID on Steam, so that means if everything was exactly the same, sales of Ultra would be three times what Leadwerks sales are now.

There is a HUGE pool of people who bought Leadwerks on Steam, and convincing them to upgrade to the new engine is the easiest way to get new users. If 10% of them buy the new engine right away, that's $350,0000, which is not a bad start.

Unlike Leadwerks, where I had sort of painted myself into a corner, there is a plan for expansion and paid updates for Ultra for years to come.

My goal is to get popular again in the indie space, then use that popularity to get business sales going with a more expensive enterprise version, costing around $999 a year, focusing on VR.

We know the indie game developer market, including free users who will never pay for anything, is about 2,000,000 people. Leadwerks got about 1.75% of that. It's not a stretch to imagine that 10% of VR games could be made in Ultra two years from now. In that case, it would not be hard to go to large businesses and say "lol I'm from NASA, look how popular this is becoming, here is why it is so great, how many do you want to buy?...". That's always been my plan, and that's why I did those VR projects and spoke at that conference about VR technology.

[reepblue]

I'm surprised that you are reconsidering Steam, but I understand a lot of people prefer it that way. I personally would like to still do business with you directly as I don't want Steam to be open all the time when working on stuff. I also noticed some licensing checks you've slipped in and I would hate those on top of Steam DRM checks on top of it. 

If you are going to release on Steam, please make the Steamworks integration a source available plugin. The code in Leadwerks is outdated and doesn't work right. I wrote my own systems for achievements because a callback wasn't set up properly. The API also updates with new features and fixes all the time. Don't repeat the mistakes.

[IceBurger]

On 5/25/2023 at 10:51 AM, reepblue said:

I'm surprised that you are reconsidering Steam, but I understand a lot of people prefer it that way. I personally would like to still do business with you directly as I don't want Steam to be open all the time when working on stuff. I also noticed some licensing checks you've slipped in and I would hate those on top of Steam DRM checks on top of it. 

If you are going to release on Steam, please make the Steamworks integration a source available plugin. The code in Leadwerks is outdated and doesn't work right. I wrote my own systems for achievements because a callback wasn't set up properly. The API also updates with new features and fixes all the time. Don't repeat the mistakes.

I'm on a similar boat, I would still purchase it if it was a steam exclusive but do not really find the idea of software on steam attractive. Personally, there is no basis for my position. It's just one of those "I don't like it and that's why I don't like it" things lmao.

[ERK Games]

5 hours ago, IceBurger said:

I'm on a similar boat, I would still purchase it if it was a steam exclusive but do not really find the idea of software on steam attractive. Personally, there is no basis for my position. It's just one of those "I don't like it and that's why I don't like it" things lmao.

Steam have a good online, so no matter how we all feel about this platform, we can use it to make our product more popular. A Steam release is the best way to "passively promote" an engine/software/game when the product is not very popular at start/doesn't have a huge advertising budget.
Me and my team would like to see Ultra Engine on Steam, even though we're not a big fan of the platform, we (ERK Games) embrace the benefits that Steam provides. Fun fact: at first, we planned to promote SALVATIONLAND in our own way, but later we decided to use Steam Direct. And we don't regret this decision, especially considering how cheap it was for us at regional prices (the ENTIRE game budget is around $200 and I'm not kidding now).

[ERK Games]

By the way, we are really looking forward to the release of a new engine. We're aiming to port a new project in development to Ultra Engine - yes, it will take a certain amount of time and push forward the release date, but I think it'll be the right decision if the engine is really better than Leadwerks in terms of speed and stability. We're especially excited about the new terrain creation tools and the 64-bit code that will remove memory limits.
I know that this will be a bit offtopic, but can you tell me please, what is the state of the Lua wrapper now? The thing is that we have our own technical base, the code of which is 95% Lua code, and we would like it to be relatively easy to port to Ultra. This moment really worries us.

[Josh]

I have not gone through and tested every Lua command, but most of it is working now. Debugging Lua in VSCode is very good.

I plan to use the ChatGPT API to auto-generate Lua documentation from the C++ docs, and then go through and make fixes by hand. My initial tests at this gave very good results.

[ERK Games]

52 minutes ago, Josh said:

I have not gone through and tested every Lua command, but most of it is working now. Debugging Lua in VSCode is very good.

I plan to use the ChatGPT API to auto-generate Lua documentation from the C++ docs, and then go through and make fixes by hand. My initial tests at this gave very good results.

Great, thanks for the reply!

[Mr_SquarePeg]

Hey Josh, I just saw the video on the LeadWerks Software YouTube page about the editor. Super excited for the new engine. I am going to pick up a standard edition pre-order when I have money around the 15th.