Author Topic: Allegorithmic is joining the Adobe family (part 1)  (Read 175229 times)

Allegorithmic, if you waited a couple more years, you would be the ones buying Adobe instead. It was nice watching substance growing in popularity all these years, now I only expect watching it decline in popularity with each year to come.
2019


vs

2016


I hope Adobe will listen to Allegorithmic how 3D shoud be done and we will never again see a promo video like the most recen one
Indeed, that video trailer was probably the money maker for them. Another interesting thing is that audio was made by their ceo? if I remember correctly. It can be found on Soundcloud https://soundcloud.com/tall-in-japan/glitch-hop-28-06-2015-16-11 . Latest video was like "meh", having Adobe logo on it makes it even worse. When it says "Game on" I read it as "Game over"
Last Edit: January 26, 2019, 08:46:32 pm


I hope Adobe will listen to Allegorithmic how 3D shoud be done and we will never again see a promo video like the most recen one

The difference between those two is night and day, in that order.

Adobe will try to target a more generalized audience to ensure the shareholders get paid. I'm sure if not 0%, less than 1% of people here actually use Adobe Dimension. I had to look it up because I had never even heard of the software until it was posted in this thread, and I'm in constant communication with other 3D artists. Heck, I've never even come across a forum post recommending the software, let alone word of mouth.

I've worked with both publicly traded, and private companies. The customer shifts to the "shareholder" once they've gone public, and everything from there on out is made to target the widest range even if it means dumbing it down to rake in the profits. The target audience that allowed Allegoritmic to grow will most likely be left in the dust in the coming years. It all comes down to numbers now. How much can they make "as is", and how much can they make by merging software and catering to logo designers, and graphic designers in the corporate world making presentations, ect...
I teach people how to use Substance Painter. :)

About the video, I'll copy-paste what I replied on another forum:
Quote
Unfortunately, in the chaos of the announcement (because these things, like every announcement in any tech company, is being worked on overtime until the very last minute) this video was produced without our input and we only saw it later as it had already been shared and viewed many times.

But I have to say a little bit of miscommunication seems completely normal to me on the first day of a collaboration like this. Keep in mind that until a few days ago, only us and a small group of people at Adobe were aware of the acquisition. Our common communication is one of the things we'll work on improving during the transition.

Allegorithmic,

What do you have to say to all the commissioned artists, indie developers and hobbyists who propped up your product and got it pushed into production pipelines all over the industry to bring you to  where you are now?

What do you say to the people who will not be able to afford your product once its been re-priced and re-branded for the Adobe CC lineup?

I don't want to seem ungrateful, we are super grateful to the indie community, but I'd like us to be given props where due.

Indie developpers and hobbyists didn't push Substance into production studios. We did, by tirelessely vising every studio on earth over and over again for years and work them until we convinced them that these were the right tools for the job. The notoriety of the tools then trickled down from studios like Naughty Dog, Treyarch, Turn10, etc. into smaller studios and the indie community at large.
I personnally spent 2 years of my life constantly flying from country to country to present Substance Designer to studios who only swore by Photoshop, and slowly but surely, we changed their minds. And we're not going to abandon them, or the Indie guys, now.

As for the price, if you were able to afford Substance now, you'll be able to afford them in the future, don't worry.
Last Edit: January 26, 2019, 08:58:24 pm

I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords.
I'm already a CC subscriber, and look forward to Substance integration. Stuff I'm looking forward to:
  • Bitmap2Material built in natively as a Photoshop filter? Heck yeah.
  • Native DDS support in Adobe software
  • Better SVG support in Substance
  • Substances viewable in Bridge
...and probably more crap relating to inter-operability between different software.
Honestly, for the corporate market, this is a good thing - and for an individual, Adobe CC is still cheaper /month than your average cell phone bill (at least in the US).

(1) Seven months from now when I complete the 12 consecutive monthly subscription payments, will I still have the opportunity to purchase a perpetual license for $49?

(2) When the Substance tools are fully integrated into Creative Cloud - do current CC subscribers automatically get access to them all for the same CC subscription price we have been paying, or will that monthly CC fee increase? Or will CC subscribers only be given access to a subset of the Substance tools and have to pay extra for the others?  Now that would really suck!

(1) > Yes, definitely.

(2) > That's something we'll talk about later on. but depending on your situation, you will likely pay less or the same amount you pay today, not more.

(1) Seven months from now when I complete the 12 consecutive monthly subscription payments, will I still have the opportunity to purchase a perpetual license for $49?

(2) When the Substance tools are fully integrated into Creative Cloud - do current CC subscribers automatically get access to them all for the same CC subscription price we have been paying, or will that monthly CC fee increase? Or will CC subscribers only be given access to a subset of the Substance tools and have to pay extra for the others?  Now that would really suck!

(1) > Yes, definitely.

(2) > That's something we'll talk about later on. but depending on your situation, you will likely pay less or the same amount you pay today, not more.
Thank you Jeremie.  I will continue my subscription and my learning path.

Allegorithmic,

What do you have to say to all the commissioned artists, indie developers and hobbyists who propped up your product and got it pushed into production pipelines all over the industry to bring you to  where you are now?

What do you say to the people who will not be able to afford your product once its been re-priced and re-branded for the Adobe CC lineup?

I don't want to seem ungrateful, we are super grateful to the indie community, but I'd like us to be given props where due.

Indie developpers and hobbyists didn't push Substance into production studios. We did, by tirelessely vising every studio on earth over and over again for years and work them until we convinced them that these were the right tools for the job. The notoriety of the tools then trickled down from studios like Naughty Dog, Treyarch, Turn10, etc. into smaller studios and the indie community at large.
I personnally spent 2 years of my life constantly flying from country to country to present Substance Designer to studios who only swore by Photoshop, and slowly but surely, we changed their minds. And we're not going to abandon them, or the Indie guys, now.

As for the price, if you were able to afford Substance now, you'll be able to afford them in the future, don't worry.

No one is saying you didn't have to do any footwork. But Naughty Dog, Treyarch, Turn10, etc... the artists there are the ones you effectively had to woo to get in the door right? Am i wrong here? I can be absolutely wrong, but usually it starts with the artists all around the industry finding interest in your work right?

 They wanted to get away from adobe, you came in and showed them they could, so there is no way you were not aware that that was a massive selling point. It wasn't just the software, it was the COMPANY behind it, and that's part of what is driving people insane.

Adobe's licensing scheme does not GEL with artists who are limited in their income. Sure, it works great for a multimillion dollar company, but for the people in this industry who's pay has stagnated for 15 years,  the slow choke of adobe pricing has been a pain in every honest paying persons pockets.

And supposedly their pricing is even worse over seas?

On Top of that, we keep being told that you all have control over the product, but we just saw adobe release a video -without your input- showcasing EXACTLY what they want to push your product for... not gaming, not development, not even entertainment... Product Packaging and Identity branding.

Adobe Dimensions, good grief. You guys can not be comfortable with that one, and its worrying that that video got out without any input while we're being told that everything is still being controlled by the Allegorithmic team.

I really hope you see that we're not all just complaining to complain, there are some Very concerning issues already going on.

Here, a question you can answer:

Adobe vs Allegorithmic : How is subscription only licensing (without the ability to roll onto an indefinite lisence with 12 months support) fair to consumers?

Last Edit: January 26, 2019, 10:12:53 pm

But for the present time we can still buy a perpetual license and get of the train offline completely without some secret code pinging Adobe ?  Move that license to a second computer in the future - no online b/s ?

https://theblog.adobe.com/adobe-acquires-allegorithmic-substance-3d-gaming/
'I know that the addition of Allegorithmic will further that goal and I’m looking forward to sharing more details about how we’re incorporating Allegorithmic’s Substance tools into Creative Cloud over the coming months.'

meaning:
'perpetual licenses will stop receiving updates without Adobes monthly extortion over the coming months'

well, since Adobe will add only meaningless features and UI color changes for the next decade, offline should be safe?

1) It makes Painter look easy to use
There's no fast mouse movements or anything too complex going on. It makes the viewer think "hey, I could easily stamp my logo onto a 3D product! That's awesome!"

THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING. We are using and want PROFESSIONAL software, not Adobe Stock 3D Asset Stamp and Post Instagram bait.

2) It makes Painter look like it's on even-footing with Dimension
I think it's more than likely that the low frame-rate was a conscious decision. If Painter's viewer both looked nicer and ran better than Dimension's, it would reflect poorly on Adobe's own product.

Now this is downright delusional. Come on, man. They made Substance look laggy to make it fair for Dimension? Anyone that cares for 3D already understands that a render is a slow thing, and them trying to hide that shows they aren't marketing towards people who do proper 3D work.


I cant wrap my head around this. Allegorithmic is 20 years ahead of Adobe with its 150 employers versus Adobes 30.000.
It just doesnt makes sense.

What they will tell you is that they got some 100+ employees after taking Adobe money 2 years ago. I also wonder how many of those employees are actually developers or are just the usual non developer roles, such as marketing, sales, HR..ect

This was posted in another thread, read point #2

Two things are obvious.
1) Allegorithmic did not realize how much their user base actually hates Adobe. Their user base was drawn to them being a newer independent studio that was not Adobe.
2) Allegorithmic was too attracted to the financial backing Adobe can bring to the table. This obviously was bait, and it worked. Allegorithmic didn't need to do this in my opinion, they didnt even need to expand as much as they have already. The users were fine with the basics of designer and painter, even if they were updated at a slower pace. All the other stuff is just fluff.

1) We knew, If anything we underestimated how much people loved us rather than how much people disliked Adobe.

2) You are right, we didn't need to at all, but we wanted to, because it's an everyday frustration to have ideas you know will revolutionize 3D creation and not being able to carry them further than the idea stage because of a lack of resources and time.

I don't buy this completely due the fact you don't need a big team to "revolutionize 3D", which we have seen in the past. Just one or two insanely good developers can do magic, you don't need a ton of money and a giant team with nice offices with massive bills to pay. Its like wanting to get to the finish line (big successful studio) without running the entire race. So what if it takes a bit longer to get where you want to be? Whats the rush?

3D Coat was basically done by 1 guy with some helpers, Zbrush started with a small team, Affinity which is competing with Adobe for photoshop and designer only have around 13-16 people if I remember correctly. History shows that you can "revolutionize" and simply design good software with just one person, you can do it with a small highly skilled team.
Thus, this idea that you need big "publisher like" money to help you "produce" or shape the industry (when you already had a strong following) is simply not believable.

What they also don't realize is that no matter how good they do at Adobe, its going to go to waste for a lot of people since they will NOT be installing Adobe's CC. Allego can tell me all the great stuff they plan on doing, and it won't matter as long as I am told I have to use CC to use any of it.

At this point I can appreciate the argument coming from those in favor of open source software. Users were drawn to Substance in large part because it wasn't Adobe. I stopped using Quixel back then, not because I thought it was worse, but because it forced me to rely on Adobe Photoshop. This was a choice a lot of artist had to make back then, which one got us away from Adobe.

Allegorithmic, some advice. Don't force the use of the CC going forward. Too many of us will not install it.

1) It makes Painter look easy to use
There's no fast mouse movements or anything too complex going on. It makes the viewer think "hey, I could easily stamp my logo onto a 3D product! That's awesome!"

THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING. We are using and want PROFESSIONAL software, not Adobe Stock 3D Asset Stamp and Post Instagram bait.

2) It makes Painter look like it's on even-footing with Dimension
I think it's more than likely that the low frame-rate was a conscious decision. If Painter's viewer both looked nicer and ran better than Dimension's, it would reflect poorly on Adobe's own product.

Now this is downright delusional. Come on, man. They made Substance look laggy to make it fair for Dimension? Anyone that cares for 3D already understands that a render is a slow thing, and them trying to hide that shows they aren't marketing towards people who do proper 3D work.

For years allegorithmic has been building not just nice software, but also a nice utopian community which had almost nothing else to say about them but praise.
Then Mr. Deguy sold us all into slavery to no one else but the corporation whose bad business model brought us here in the first place. We are just not the targeted audience anymore. There's no amount of sugar coating that can make this seem fine. This whole situation seems like tv drama material. Time to swallow that truth pill and move on. It's hard, obviously I'm having a hard time moving on myself or else I wouldn't still be here. But time heals they say. At least we learned our lesson about trust

Allegorithmic,

What do you have to say to all the commissioned artists, indie developers and hobbyists who propped up your product and got it pushed into production pipelines all over the industry to bring you to  where you are now?

What do you say to the people who will not be able to afford your product once its been re-priced and re-branded for the Adobe CC lineup?

I don't want to seem ungrateful, we are super grateful to the indie community, but I'd like us to be given props where due.

Indie developpers and hobbyists didn't push Substance into production studios. We did, by tirelessely vising every studio on earth over and over again for years and work them until we convinced them that these were the right tools for the job. The notoriety of the tools then trickled down from studios like Naughty Dog, Treyarch, Turn10, etc. into smaller studios and the indie community at large.
I personnally spent 2 years of my life constantly flying from country to country to present Substance Designer to studios who only swore by Photoshop, and slowly but surely, we changed their minds. And we're not going to abandon them, or the Indie guys, now.

As for the price, if you were able to afford Substance now, you'll be able to afford them in the future, don't worry.

Well you've adapted to the Adobe Corporate Arrogance pretty well.

1) It makes Painter look easy to use
There's no fast mouse movements or anything too complex going on. It makes the viewer think "hey, I could easily stamp my logo onto a 3D product! That's awesome!"

THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING. We are using and want PROFESSIONAL software, not Adobe Stock 3D Asset Stamp and Post Instagram bait.

I have to point out one very strange thing going on in this thread. On the one hand we have calls like this for professional software, on the other we have probably the same people complaining that CC rental scheme is too expensive... at 10 bucks a month for Photoshop. I'd say at least pick one, because both is pretty silly.