Author Topic: Allegorithmic is joining the Adobe family (Part2)  (Read 158838 times)

Thank you, looking forward to it!

Hey Jon
1: not at all
2: definitely
3: no defined answer yet , but we have no reason to make it more expensive if it's your concern.

Cheers

Thanks for the reply Vincent.

While we seem to have your ear, there is another question that I have, although, admittedly it bears no relevance to the Adobe buy-out...

I have noticed that the 'Gallery' has disappeared in the last few days from the Allegorithmic website... Is it gone for good or will it make a return ?

This has actually nothing to do with Adobe^^
The gallery was outdated for quite some time now, as we are now using social medias (IG, Twitter, FB...) to showcase art from users.
If you want to see some pretty nice art, you should have a look at our « monthly selection » we post every month on FB.

Cheers
Head of Product Management


Once again nothing at all has been decided. We noticed (and already knew) that perpetual license would be on top of the list of the concerns (even if ironically it's by far the least purchased option, but the fact that "it's possible" is key)

So as we don't do bullshit messages: nothing is decided yet, multiples options are being discussed, for you guys, for current Adobe customers, so there are good chances to see different options to fit the different needs. So wait and see on this one.

For someone that doesn't invest emotion in to these things and I am new here (5 day old subscription) I was looking forward to getting a perpetual license as I feel SPand SD has everything I need at this point in time. Maybe a bit naive given I am just learning. But if Adobe was to scrap them then please make sure they drop the price to make it affordable in the long run like they did with Photoshop. I am one of the few that don't mind the Pricing and Subscription model of Photoshop only. :) It helped me no end to start to earn and now with SP and SD I can grow that business.

I understand where everyone is coming from. But everyone needs to take a chill pill. Lets be rational and look at this from a logical point of view.

1. To all the consumers, myself included. We do not own Allegorithmic nor do all of us hold any stocks in the company. What they do as a business to make sure that the company and their families are taken care of comes first. While we may not agree with this choice. Just take a breath and see how things play out.

2. To Vincent Gault. The majors fears that scare the crap out of us is not only loosing the option for a perpetual license and the Substance subscription plans being a possibility. But having Adobe break the software that we all love so dearly. A fear stemmed from what happened to Fuse and Mixamo after they were bought buy Adobe. And that it feels like Adobe is monopolizing the media creation industry. A lot of us view Adobe as the current John D. Rockefeller of today. I mean Quixel uses Photoshop to do texturing like Painter does (in a way).

Also that the headway you made in integrating Substance to work with any render and modeling software will be wiped clean. Becoming an Adobe's way or the highway.

That said this can be a good thing. If this the CC plans not only include Allegorithmic's software and lets them function as they are now, but create a modeling and sculpting software that can rival Autodesk and Zbrush. It could create an upset that could work in our favor. Because lets be real. Autodesk sub plans are the most expensive. Period.

Does the merger upset me. Yes. But I trust Vincent and the team. Hopefully this will become like with Blizzard and Activation. With Allegorithmic as Blizzard making great products like Overwatch. And Adobe as Activation.

Until then. Lets all take a moment to catch our breath please.

p.s. sorry for any grammar mistakes. lol

You could have alleviated some of the angst from your customer base by being prepared with two responses when the announcement was made:
  • the new licensing scheme over the next 24 months
  • why this move is beneficial to us


Once again nothing at all has been decided. We noticed (and already knew) that perpetual license would be on top of the list of the concerns (even if ironically it's by far the least purchased option, but the fact that "it's possible" is key)

So as we don't do bullshit messages: nothing is decided yet, multiples options are being discussed, for you guys, for current Adobe customers, so there are good chances to see different options to fit the different needs. So wait and see on this one.

For someone that doesn't invest emotion in to these things and I am new here (5 day old subscription) I was looking forward to getting a perpetual license as I feel SPand SD has everything I need at this point in time. Maybe a bit naive given I am just learning. But if Adobe was to scrap them then please make sure they drop the price to make it affordable in the long run like they did with Photoshop. I am one of the few that don't mind the Pricing and Subscription model of Photoshop only. :) It helped me no end to start to earn and now with SP and SD I can grow that business.

Seeing the immense success that CC was and the amount of people subscribed, I'd say you're one of many not few. Photoshop is dirt cheap and Adobe should be given credit at least for that. It's their flagship product and they didn't have to create such an affordable sub for it.

Other than that I'm not a fan of CC at all, and wish there was a perpetual or even a rent-to-own option, but I do feel this is one aspect that needs to be recognized. Photoshop is more accessible today than ever.

I don't think there was any need to create a new thread. I think staff are massively exaggerating the level of insults, trolling etc. in the old thread unless those posts were deleted before I saw them. I think the "summary" of the points the community made in the last thread in the first post of this thread is way more adversarial than 99% of the community's posts in the other thread.

Regarding renting, this actually depends on people usage.
It may seem strange for people on the forum as you are mainly « core users », but the Substance subscription is by far the offer which has the most of success (80% of our new users). The reason is that not everybody needs to use texturing tools on a daily basis, lots of users are using it « per project », and so are just paying for a few months, stop, come back later, etc.

My point is that there are different usage, and different needs. It’s all about the value you get in the offers.
That’s why we try to keep options, to answer users different needs.

But they still have the option to own. And if they ever go offline they can still have that.And while you say most are on subscription, it doesn't sound like actually most pay on an on-off monthly basis, just 'a lot'. But for those who have to go on-again/off-again, have you considered that they are stuck in a cycle in which they cant afford to own substance to practice more with it, cant showcase enough work with it, and therefore are in a cycle in which they can only occasionaly afford to take those types of jobs?

Regarding renting, this actually depends on people usage.
It may seem strange for people on the forum as you are mainly « core users », but the Substance subscription is by far the offer which has the most of success (80% of our new users). The reason is that not everybody needs to use texturing tools on a daily basis, lots of users are using it « per project », and so are just paying for a few months, stop, come back later, etc.

My point is that there are different usage, and different needs. It’s all about the value you get in the offers.
That’s why we try to keep options, to answer users different needs.

But they still have the option to own. And if they ever go offline they can still have that.And while you say most are on subscription, it doesn't sound like actually most pay on an on-off monthly basis, just 'a lot'. But for those who have to go on-again/off-again, have you considered that they are stuck in a cycle in which they cant afford to own substance to practice more with it, cant showcase enough work with it, and therefore are in a cycle in which they can only occasionaly afford to take those types of jobs?

We consider them, and that’s why we are offering options :)
My post was just to balance the fact between subscriptions and perpetual. Both are important, depending on users’ needs.
Head of Product Management

"We are scared to lose perpetual licenses because Adobe uses perpetual licenses"
This is one of the topics, where we don't have visibility yet, so you have the right to be skeptical until we deliver a clear model.

"I'll pay way more for the same products"
Even if I seriously doubt it, once again we don't have visibility so you can remain skeptical until we deliver.

2 days ago in the first thread your answer was a clear: "no, you will not lose your perpetual license" and also: "Yes, you still will be able to upgrade into perpetual license if you have an ongoing 12 month constant subscription right now"

And after 2 days it turns out that you do not have visibility due to this question? - It will not calm dawn the community I'm afraid.

Please, try to short it out as fast as posible. Please understand, that it's not about that non of us can handle the
financial loss, but psichologicaly it's a huge burden, that will block an ongoing constructive conversation about the future, about this change.

And please allow me immediately a question based on this subject:
- how you see, the future due to upcoming competition? Probablly a lot of comanies will try to grab the opportunity to develop a texturing system as you have. Why it's an opportunity? Becouse few days ago you were the lonely wolf rockstars of 3D DCCs, no one really wanted to go versus Substance, since the 3d content creator community would immediately digg a grave for him... But now! Now they would go versus Adobe and with that they will be able to even roleplay the wight-knights of 3d texturing community.
- Do you know how far Mudbox is from substance painter due to texturing for example? And do you know how much it cost right now? (of course it's not the right comparison, since Mudbox is an organic sculpting DCC tool in the first place)
- Do you know how far Houdini is from substance designer with their "COP" system? Do you know how much Houdini Indi cost? Houdini Indi! The most complex, most profesional 3D indi DCC tool in the market.
And probablly there are a lot who are lurking now in the shadows and will jump in the right moment.
- Can you imagine that if you add Alchemy to our existing substance bundle, and maybe lower the prices a bit for the new incomers, will it be able to keep the competition with the upcoming "siege tools" that will defenately be released by these giants?


Sorry for the misunderstanding: I was talking the evolution of the business model: existing perpetual licenses will remain (I will edit).

Competition: we had competition in the past, and we'll have in the future. The only answer is making great products, continue to innovate, and offering great support. We did it in the past, and there is no reason to stop it. Being with Adobe, we have to tackle a new challenge that have been illustrated by a lot of gifs/memes: many of the existing or the new actors will play the role of the rebel versus the Empire. This will be one of our challenges.

- I don't get you point with Mudbox and/or Houdini: as competitors? We are looking at everyone honestly :)

- Not sure what you mean with the last question: Substance alchemist? it's will come with the Substance offer when ready if it's your question.

Thanks!
That seems a really correct decision on your side. And I also can imagine that you had to even fight for this decision of yours with the management of Adobe.

I just mentioned Mudbox and Houdini indi, (not if even they would be in the same shelf) but these are 2 softwares that can come up with some competition due to there great price range and already existing texturing, painting / procedural texture building contents.

And yes, you are right, I wanted to write "Alchemist" not Alchemy :) - mistyped - and I just wanted to share my (probably irrevocable) but determined opinion, that the existing Substance package must include it and do not publish it as an independent Adobe CC fragment.

I'd just like to say, that yeah, I can see why so many subscribe. Access to updates... and having the access to substance source makes it a killer offer. These are the reasons I have kept it going instead of going perpetual for the moment. But I think for myself, and likely most, the fact it can be perpetual should we become tight on funds (or just choose to make it so) makes it altogether more comfortable. I often cite alleg's pricing structure as being the best in this business. Rent to actually own software is cutting edge, as no one else does it (or at least none that I know of)

I want to stress that, the reason Adobe doesnt have me... is coz I find their pricing structure to be abysmal. If you just get PS, its not that bad. But most people want that +1 or 2 others. Well, they dont have any mid level subs, or pick your own package... its kind of all or one. I obviously wouldn't want to go for all... I dont use all of that, and deem it as a waste of money. And the fact they dont offer perpetual as a pathway, really just sucks. If they did.... they'd still be getting my money (and tons of other ppls as well) Because I don't consider here and now... I consider what if. What if money gets tight? My software gets cancelled and then I cant work to make it. Thats a recipe for disaster and any savvy business person would avoid that situation like the plague.

This software renting thing makes me think... if pencils and pens, paintbrushes and canvas were endlessly rented, instead of purchased right out... and if u stopped paying, they'd come to your studio and revoke them. Nothing in the world works like that... its ridiculous in concept. Think of how many businesses would be out of business if they had to rent the tools over purchasing them straight out as assets. OTOH, if u could rent to own stuff like that... hey, it might be a cool option for someone who is just starting out who has no real capital yet.

(ETA: ok apts and car leases do work like that... but I think its a minority that aspires to that. Most do it out of necessity. For everyone else, there's the option to buy outright)

So yeah, I get that for many, subbing is the way to go. And that's great, actually, as an option. But I think just as equally in portion, people are opposed to renting software, for very valid reasoning.... and having a perpetual pathway would also be awesome. If Adobe could understand the vast percentages they have lost in $$ from that, they might change their tune (tho I wouldnt hold my breath lol)
Last Edit: January 27, 2019, 06:59:35 pm

My primary concerns are these two, I´d appreciate any clarification on them that you can give us right now:

1. Will the UE4/Unity Plugins be maintained and free(no CC required) in the next 1-2 years?

2. Since the perpetual licenses will stay valid, I wonder what would happen if the activation servers went down or were merged with the CC activation System some time in the future. Can you guaranty an offline activation via downloaded license files in that case?

So an easy one: "You guys, sold your soul to the evil just for $$$"
If it was the reason then we would have been really stupid  ;D

Allegorithmic would have gained (a lot more) value just by waiting 1 or 2 years.
+ we have received a lot of offers in 2018 (investment funds, other companies): we just chose it because of it the best option regarding of the goals we want to achieve.

So cash was low in the list, regarding the decision to join Adobe (sorry I have to go: my private jet is waiting for me to go to Ibiza)

This doesn't help. The reason? Simple. On page 2 you admit that the sale to Adobe is for a "legally undisclosed number". Furthermore Jerc also dropped this in another thread, he said and I quote "Allegorithmic was too attracted to the financial backing Adobe can bring to the table."

So this mixed messaging is doing you no favors, especially now that the community is more or less on guard due to Adobe worming its way into the picture. One cannot say it was not about the money at this point based on those to comments alone. If you sell out, you sell out, regardless of the reasons. Granted, I think Allegoritmic's reasons might be different than a quick "get rich" scheme, but it still involves caving in and giving away the IP to a corporate entity for the sake of financial backing.

For many of us, this move was unnecessary. You don't need a massive team and high cost offices with massive bills to pay in order to "innovate" and develop great software. Many other independent studios have done this with as little as 1 to 2 highly skilled developers. The Affinity team which competes with Photoshop and Designer only has between 13-16, 3D Coat has 1 primary developer and some helpers...

...Thus many can only take an educated guess as to why Allegorithmic went with Adobe. Either its because Allego was impatient to get to their perceived finish line and took what appears to be an "easy route", or the offer to play in the "big league" was too attractive, thus the sale was also a mix of a "job offers" for a higher profile company. Both come across as developer centric decisions (whats in their own best interest) as opposed to whats in the best interest of the end user.

A reminder, a lot of the willingness to buy into and support Allegorithmic's products, to help give them the financial backing to keep going, had a lot more to do with the fact you were NOT Adobe, and could grow up to compete with them, rather than just the product itself. I think you guys over at Allego believe it was just because you made a great product, that really isnt the case. Obviously you need a decent product sell, but a lot of people were also buying into the potential of the said product. Potential includes not being part of Adobe's lineup. So in that sense, it really does look like a kind of betrayal to some users. Buying products in this industry is in part a kind of user investment into its future. If at any point you say "our ultimate goal is to sell to adobe/autodesk", then that user support will largely vanish.

Whats the point of starting new companies and supporting them if they are just going to turn over and sell to the giants that are hated? You see where we are coming from? Allegorithmic, rather Adobe, will probably never get to the point where you guys are going to be accepted now. The close knit, community trust factor, is largely going to diminish.

You guys might not even like how the corporate structure changes who you were, and will end up leaving and moving on to something else, much like what we saw with Luxology turning into Foundry. Everyone went in with high expectations and hated the stiffling corporate culture that creeped in. There is that sense that you can go in and change everything from the inside, but in reality its the opposite. It changes you. At the end of the day, your own IP is no longer in your hands and you just don't want to be a part of it anymore. If someone calls you guys "naive", it would most likely be based on that understanding of how this all plays out.

Anyways... as for as where to go from here (positive feedback). I highly recommend doing everything in your power to remain, at least on the surface, visibly, as independent from Adobe as possible. Keep the Allegorithmic branding, separate yourselves from CC, treat the products as a subsidiary rather than part of Adobe's main lineup, otherwise the affiliation to Adobe alone will be a major deterring factor. Too many of us will not, ever, install CC (not anymore). This is in everyone's best interest, yours, Allegorithmics...and Adobes.

Cheers


Add: Also want to point out that the concerns over perpetual vs subscription needs to be presented in a slightly different light. What some fear, legitimately, is that the loss of perpetual is going to happen. What does this really mean? Its the difference between selling a product and selling a service. The user base likes to buy a product, or have the option to do so, not get locked into a service. This is how the subject regarding perpetual options vs subscription only needs to be phrased.
Product vs service.
Last Edit: January 27, 2019, 07:20:24 pm

I'd just like to say, that yeah, I can see why so many subscribe. Access to updates... and having the access to substance source makes it a killer offer. These are the reasons I have kept it going instead of going perpetual for the moment. But I think for myself, and likely most, the fact it can be perpetual should we become tight on funds (or just choose to make it so) makes it altogether more comfortable. I often cite alleg's pricing structure as being the best in this business. Rent to actually own software is cutting edge, as no one else does it (or at least none that I know of)

I want to stress that, the reason Adobe doesnt have me... is coz I find their pricing structure to be abysmal. If you just get PS, its not that bad. But most people want that +1 or 2 others. Well, they dont have any mid level subs, or pick your own package... its kind of all or one. I obviously wouldn't want to go for all... I dont use all of that, and deem it as a waste of money. And the fact they dont offer perpetual as a pathway, really just sucks. If they did.... they'd still be getting my money (and tons of other ppls as well) Because I don't consider here and now... I consider what if. What if money gets tight? My software gets cancelled and then I cant work to make it. Thats a recipe for disaster and any savvy business person would avoid that situation like the plague.

This software renting thing makes me think... if pencils and pens, paintbrushes and canvas were endlessly rented, instead of purchased right out... and if u stopped paying, they'd come to your studio and revoke them. Nothing in the world works like that... its ridiculous in concept. Think of how many businesses would be out of business if they had to rent the tools over purchasing them straight out as assets. OTOH, if u could rent to own stuff like that... hey, it might be a cool option for someone who is just starting out who has no real capital yet.

(ETA: ok apts and car leases do work like that... but I think its a minority that aspires to that. Most do it out of necessity. For everyone else, there's the option to buy outright)

So yeah, I get that for many, subbing is the way to go. And that's great, actually, as an option. But I think just as equally in portion, people are opposed to renting software, for very valid reasoning.... and having a perpetual pathway would also be awesome. If Adobe could understand the vast percentages they have lost in $$ from that, they might change their tune (tho I wouldn't hold my breath lol)


Nothing to add on this, but thanks for sharing your feeling/concern

My primary concerns are these two, I´d appreciate any clarification on them that you can give us right now:

1. Will the UE4/Unity Plugins be maintained and free(no CC required) in the next 1-2 years?

2. Since the perpetual licenses will stay valid, I wonder what would happen if the activation servers went down or were merged with the CC activation System some time in the future. Can you guaranty an offline activation via downloaded license files in that case?


1: no reason to change this (same for the other integrations
2: I don't yet the technical way we'll male it work, as we are not there yet. (To be defined)