Interactive License?

outrider42 · November 2017

This certainly needs some tweaking...

I was looking to add a year of PC+ and the $50 Interactive License is available with PC+ membership itself...somehow I don't think that is correct. Unless it is, in which case you get a license to all PC+ content with this Interactive License! Better grab it quick before they pull it!

I also believe $50 for each product license is a bit high. IMO, $30 is more reasonable. I say $30 because a lot of Renderosity "Extended Licenses" are this price, which is their version of this. Some are indeed higher, and it makes sense to allow the PA's to decide. But I also think it should be within reason. After all, these items are not game optimized at all, so there is a lot of work to be done. Furthermore, Morph3D's licenses were not so expensive either, the license was included with the cost of their figures. Obviously something like $5 would be comically low. But the $20-30 range sounds more logical to me. Such license prices serve to drive additional sales...these game licenses are a nice bonus, IMO, on top of sales already made for the product itself. Its not like a PA has to do anything for an Interactive License. Unlike using the items in Daz Studio, there is no guarantee nor product support for the gaming side of things. And it is like selling the same item twice (or more considering the license cost.) When you sell a $20 product and then also get a $30 license on top of that, you are feeling pretty good about things. That would be a more attractive price to game creators. If you get more game creators on board here, there is a LOT of potential for extra revenue for Daz and PA's involved...and they don't even have to do anything. Money for Nothin', Chicks for Free. (Ok, not free...)

I happened to notice that the new VRV Scarves for G8 has a $10 license, and the Pepper character is $35 (these come from the same PA.) So not everything is $50, but many items are.

And there should be a bulk license. The way a bulk license works should be based on that PA's content. Somebody with fewer items perhaps doesn't need one. But some PA's have hundreds of items, then a bulk license would be sensible for all involved. The license can scale based on that PA's library. That would make it easier to track what licenses you have, too. The store should also track this, so if you already have a license for say i13, then a new i13 item will not ask you to buy one, the option is greyed out.

Maybe it didn't happen all the time, but selling the old game licenses must have felt like a sweet bonus to PAs when they happened. That would have been a sudden $500 revenue spike. That's like selling a 20 or 30 normal products in a single purchase (assuming a full price Indie, which I'm sure must have happened at least a few times over the years.) And that is not even including the actual products that were purchased. Even with a steep discount that still would have been $200-300 in a single swoop. So after the 50% take home that's a pleasant $100-150. "OH YEAH, I sold a game license last month...baby we are going to Red Lobster this week! You can have all the cheddar biscuits you want!"

jillval8 · November 2017

minhdinheeit said:

I just don't understand why we can't have both options. Just put the old license back, but this time limit the number of projects you can sell/publish with it, maybe only for 1 project (like the old license). That will be fair I think.

If someone buy that many items from one PA, then I think that PA will happily license them for a single project at the "$500-$1000" price tag. I don't know how PAs create their models, but I think they reuse some of their work elements too, right? And I'm talking about license for "Indie", who can't afford $10000 for 200 items. For big studio/company, just charge them as much as you want.

Again, give customers a chance to spend their money. I don't have $10000, so either take my $500 or my $0.

Well said, I couldn't agree more.

dreamfarmer · November 2017

Did anybody get a response back on opened tickets?

Kaleb242 · November 2017

I'm seeing the orange banner across the top of the website since I paid dearly for a Commercial Game Developer License for Daz Originals as well as Game Developer licenses for a select few PAs in order to use 3D data in my projects and not just 2D rendered content, and I'm actually a bit concerned about the latest EULA changes and product offerings, and what it will mean for the future...

I've read through the 5 forum pages and the new EULA, there is quite a bit of information to parse through on this topic...

It looks like several new business models are emerging out of the new EULA and Commercial License product line-up changes... not just for commercial interactive licenses (for games and interactive experiences that require the use of 3D data), but it seems to be paving the way for commerical 3D printing as well — which is exciting, but not very clearly & fully defined yet as to how (and where) someone can find and purchase products or individual licenses with the ever so elusive '5.0 Addendum' attached to it, since product pages appear to be offering only *Interactive Licenses as Optional License Add-Ons.

Maybe we'll see an option for Commercial 3D Print Add-On License in the near future?

(The 5.0 Addendum currently has a pretty big limitation in that one Commercial 3D Print Add-On License only grants 20 commercial 3D prints total; that doesn't seem very commercial though... you couldn't even print a single commercial 3D printed chess set in only 20 prints — a chess set requires 32 printed pieces (16 for each side). I guess you could try and merge all the pieces together into a single print, similar to what they do for injection molding, and then clip them out into separate parts in order to get 20 commercial 3D printed chess sets made under a single Commercial 3D Print Add-On license, but that would have to be a really high grade resin 3D print to even work right... but I digress.)

The Commercial Game Developer License for Daz Originals and PA Game Developer Licenses were major purchases for me, and I struggled very hard to pay off those debts on top of licensing the Unity Game Engine (and tons of other software, game dev content, and plugins) each month while developing my first game, and my indie game is still not complete or released, and the project has cost thousands of dollars (and hours) over several years now... but I really don't want to stop until I have created what I set out to create with time: my own game built from the ground up, some animated short films, and some entertaining virtual reality experiences using my own characters and storylines.

Quite frankly, actually owning a Commerical Game Developer License for Daz Originals encouraged me to purchase much more Daz Original content, probably more than I would have normally, than if I had to buy individual commercial licenses for each and every piece of content (like other places offering Extended Licenses on an individual basis, which I tend not to buy very much of, if at all). Paying upfront for the flexibility to use the full catalog of 3D data that I was licensing for game development purposes now and into the future, and not just being locked into developing standard 2D pre-rendered content as the Standard EULA restricts you into... was and is, absolutely crucial for my needs.

I've got to say, I am a bit disappointed that these License products were pulled from the store without warning, and are no longer being offered... but I am thoroughly grateful that my existing licenses are being honored now and into the future... I think the new offerings have their place, especially for items by Published Artists (especially those that may not have joined in otherwise), but they are not a good replacement for what the Commercial Game Developer License for Daz Originals provided. The PA restrictions locking assets down to a single project or game title were no good... I probably would have purchased more PA licenses if the terms were better, but the restrictions were just too much for my needs.

I will remain cautious and a bit apprehensive about this change until more details emerge, and may even have to seek legal counsel at some point to sort out all the EULA details and implications. This really wasn't a very clean roll out... not only does the first line of the new 3.0 Addendum in the EULA have a typographical error of “Game Develoer License” (where's the p???)... but clicking the print icon on the EULA resulted in printing a blank page. Not good...

I hope I made the right choice in taking the leap to buy the Commercial Game Developer License for Daz Originals and Game Dev Licenses for the PAs that I did while they were still being offered... and all the years I have amassed licenses of Daz content for all of my artistic pursuits and endeavors. The only comfort came from the orange banner...

"Although we will no longer sell Game Developer licenses, rest assured that you still have all of the rights that you received when you purchased your Game Developer License(s). Those rights apply to all content that is owned by the artist you purchased a Game Developer License from that is currently in the Daz 3D store, or that will be released in the future in the Daz 3D store. As such, you do not need to purchase any interactive licenses for content by that artist or artists."

Atanacius · November 2017

Hello artists and game developers, so..
The new license is not really a great change, I was fear myself when DAZ_Steve announced changes for the license but even before when we was able to saw new term like "Standard License" in our product library (for instance, it left for some hours not for long before!)

Then now, I read carefully all of your discussion in this threads, I like discuss myself about things that concerns me but because I'm a 2D Game developer myself, not 3D, (And.. Hopefully! Due to the nature of the license's change...)

BeeMKay said:

Just a heads up, that the previous "Indie/Pro" Commercial license is no longer available in the store.

It would be interesting to know what someone who has one of the two sees when they are looking at the product page, as it was mentioned in another thread that those licenses remained valid and would continue to cover new content by that PA...?

Agree totally..
I discovered that theses licenses (lifetime license for most of products based on their originals artists) are gone for good..
Not really a great choice from DAZ3D I think.. Also.. as:

a-sennov said:

So, they have removed overpriced 'artist-wide' licenses and replaced them with even more overpriced 'per-product' ones?

Stonemason's products are good but they're far from being game-ready (no FBX sources, unoptimized textures and geometry, no LODs) and would require a LOT of work to be brought into game engine so I'm not ready to pay 3 times more just for right to use them. The license price should be 5$ instead of 50$.

Clarification of EULA for 'serious games' and visualizations is step in right direction thou :)

This is clearly overpriced.
Tell we, older Indie/Game Developer license would cost between $500 to $1500 (someway).. BUT apply to all products from a specific artists IN THE WHOLE STORE..
Now.. LOL... You must purchase each products from $10, $35 or even $50 to be able to using in your game (indie or not!)..

LOL, really ... Lol.
My fear about the new term "Standard License" was pretty good, .. I'm wasn't wrong... The old time is now finished, not, go to spend more time for same stuff (Licensing speaking of!)

A chance for me... the standard License cover 2D Render/Animation or use for background in VR games as IMAGES not meshes.
A chance... for me I said.

Anyway, the chance is not for those who invested $1000 in products thinking purchasing one day some additionnal license from artists license (Indie/Game Developer)... Fellows, I understand your pain..

Bear with it now I think DAZ3D will not revert their choice about licensing...

Thing is.. it's not very cool.

minhdinheeit said:

a-sennov said:

So, they have removed overpriced 'artist-wide' licenses and replaced them with even more overpriced 'per-product' ones?

Stonemason's products are good but they're far from being game-ready (no FBX sources, unoptimized textures and geometry, no LODs) and would require a LOT of work to be brought into game engine so I'm not ready to pay 3 times more just for right to use them. The license price should be 5$ instead of 50$.

Clarification of EULA for 'serious games' and visualizations is step in right direction thou :)

Hmm the old indie developer license, is it an one-game/product license? And how about the new "interactive license"?

Regardless, I think that the new license type is better. In 3D Games, I think not everything needs to be 3D? For example, with a fixed camera/POV, everything but movable objects can be 2D Images (rendered images). Now we can choose to buy what we actually need, not the whole "PAs-wide/ store-wide" overpriced license.

Tell we.. Are you serious when you said that?

I think the game you talk about is not really a 3D game but a visual novel a like in 3D, which not require any full environments set in pure 3D.
(can you give me the link of one of the game you talk about, yours, thanks!)

In example, myself, I do not any game in pure 3D (meaning: I only use renders/animations images in my 2D games, since they are 2D games)..
For me Interactive license is not useful, since all purchases fall under Standard License (the standard EULA I read carefully when DAZ changed their plans about license!)

Therefore, I know many many many Indie developer In Real Life that are forced to the create a true beautiful game in pure 3D within Unity/Unreal Engine 4 would never use 2D images for simulate their scene... So... This kind of license is not a great help for thoses Indie developers..
Also, top of that, the stuff is like this now, you like/you dislike.. It's like this: 3D games most of them use pure 3D assets not simulation of Point Of View for making the job of a beautiful game !
I'm feeling sad for them, really sad !

a-sennov said:

Games usually need many assets. Here are my numbers: currently I'm using assets from like 200 DAZ Original products (not every single mesh but at least something from each product), I've bought Indie license for 182$ (sales :) ). That means I've paid like 1$ extra for the right to use the product in my app - which is quite reasonable price, I think :) With current scheme it would be 10000$ - not acceptable.

So true.. This is not a great change, before it would cost an arm, now it cost the whole body xD.
All 3D game developers (small/mid) will just quit purchasing new assets from there and move on another store.
I don't really understand DAZ3D choice but I still love them :/
I mean I love DAZ3D contents and artists here, Therefore ... I don't see how the current new license would be adapted/better for Indie/Game developers, really, I don't see any benefits for them (Indie/Game Developers!)..

FSMCDesigns said:

jillval8 said:

Interactive License should be no more then 5 dollars. although i dont see it happaing. Like stated before both options should be there foe anyone with large projects, .

Totally disagree. Having worked on game development, if you don't have the skill, team or resources to develop your own assets for 'your" game, then you should expect to pay a much higher price for the license to use someone elses mesh for your game usage. I worked for an indie studio where we paid a pretty penny for a single game ready model since it was needed quickly and we didn't have time to develop it ourselves when needed. From a user POV, yeah, it will get expensive if you plan to use DAZ only models for your game, but there is the alternative and actually doing the work yourself, it's what modeling apps are for.

Do not forget that you purchase also THE PRODUCT aswell a seperate (but tied) license price.
So... Here we don't say that it will cost only $5 per license of each product... (I mean, count also the product price!).
Also, skills for modeling is not possible for all, aswell hiring a team... mainly and especially for INDIE studios (that are for some just composed of 1 person..)
I don't talk from an User Point Of View but from a Developer Point Of View (anyway, my games don't use 3D meshes... hopefully..).
A mid price would be more acceptable, not the current licensing price that can easily often exceeding the product price itself.. (I know artists works hard for content, but do not forget, prices is also what customers seek for, less it would be (licensing purpose) more purchases triggers. (For Indie studio at least).

Daywalker Designs said:

AlienRenders said:

I don't really care about PA licenses. I like that you can buy licenses on a per item basis because sometimes items had 3 or 4 Artists and some of them didn't have licenses so you couldn't even use it in a game. Also, it was usually only for one game. However, I think DAZ should keep selling the Indie and Commercial Game licenses. These were great. You only needed to buy it once and you don't need to renew. This is decent value if you make more than one game. Also, the selection of DAZ products is quite nice as you didn't need any PA licenses if it was a DAZ Original.

Short story is that I'd bring back the DAZ game licenses along with adding the per item licenses. Having both options would be good I think for DO products.

edit: Can you buy the license after you've already purchased the item? Doesn't seem like it.

Yes; find it in your Product Library, go to the store page from there, and check the box for the license. The button on the page will change from Purchased, to Add License.

Saddly Not for Platinum Club Bundles Anniversaries (since product page of thoses disappear from the store some days/weeks it ran out..)
Anyway, as I don't find this so logic... I think it's because it was free for PC+ members.
So.. What about from those Anniversaries bundles that was paid (somehow of $9.95), the license option cannot be triggered/purchased/added to cart for old bundles since.. aswell product pages of the bundle has disappear from the store xD.
And as the "options" wasn't here in first place due to the recent addition of licensing feature... just ... strange.

FSMCDesigns said:

mikek said:

Dream Cutter said:

Game development is frankly far too much coding for most DAZ Customers, but many would like to save thier scenes in webgl and such to make walkthroughs and interactive scenes.

My impression was always they are trying to expand what customers they are reaching and try to get a piece of the cake game stores like unity have. Expanding their market is a good thing as artists here can earn more which results in more content for us. But if they make it to steep for the indy delvelopers maybe they aren't their target anymore.

I have followed the various discussions of users wanting DAZ assets to use in their game, seen the offerings from DAZ and Morph3d and never really thought Daz was trying to target the game developer market. If anything, seeing the abuse of daz and other game assets on the web and in other games, I always thought of the licensing as more of a cover your legal and monetary butt more than anything else. To me, if they really wanted their assets used in a game environment, the most basic first step would be better export options from DS like .FBX that actually works, LOL

unity has to cater to the game development crowd since that is what they are and do, a game engine first and foremost.

I think same.. Reading all thoses pages of discussion..
I think same.. I mean.. I think DAZ3D's choice about licensing was not really made while thinking about Games, but more about 3D Printing now..
Since the only ones licenses for Games taken down, the use for the assets in a game would be now really impossible to construct a decent game (small or mid) due to the nature of each per-product license cost (price I mean!).
Also, the optimized assets are for DAZ Studio or Carrara/Poser (for old content) not in a game format asset like .fbx ....
I know that we can decimate some assets with a plugin, but, if DAZ targetted Games developers more than other kind of usage of their store assets they would improved in first the DAZ Studio software to reflect that by adding an in-plugin that can decimate/export more easily for EACH specified game engine the assets.
Otherwise, if I'm wrong, I would be disappointed from the current lacks of use of Game Developer file format/methods !

Just my thought too.

jillval8 said:

AlienRenders said:

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

AlienRenders

You make great points, but I would like to answer your question: "If you just want a single item, maybe. But then, what's the point?"

As an indie licenses holder myself I recently started moving away from buying so much stuff from daz to creating my own. Hair, outfits, props and scense can get expensive. Which is why I bought the tutorials on creating hair and outfits. No doubt I will still buy Daz products but I do not buy them in the numbers that I used to

While what you say is valid, the reason why DAZ introduced the new licenses was to get more people to buy them. And I already said it does help in situations where there are lots of Artists on the products or would otherwise not be available for licensing. But coming back to DAZ wanting people to buy more items, you want to incentivize that. The DAZ licenses were great because you only needed to buy it once. The PA licenses OTOH needed to be bought for each game for each PA. This was the problem indicated. The new licenses fix the issue of buying one item. But the original issue still remains if you want to buy many items. So they didn't really fix anything on the PA side as far as I'm concerned.

well said....

Can't agree more, that's not in final a bad move, but this can become a bad move.
I think they must adapt/reflect the license for BIG projects.
-because lol, before the change, it was cost $2500 now... with the change, the cost is estimated at $9000+ :D (Houston, we have a problem in DAZ calculation!)

outrider42 said:

I like the interactive license. This is -almost- exactly what I asked for quite some time, in fact it is remarkable just how much it is like what I asked for, LOL. However, I never asked for the bulk licenses to be removed. There is no reason to pull them. The purpose behind my request for individual licenses was to grant the buyer the option of just buying a few items and a license for each. Key word: OPTION. Buyers should still have the option to purchase licenses that cover Daz's and PA's catalogs. Dude, they were just on sale a couple weeks ago. And now they are gone completely? Come on.

Its the old one foot forward, two steps back thing. Let's not do that. Bring the Indie and Commercial Licenses back. Hell, if need be, raise the price. But the way things are right now, the costs is too high for anyone who wants to buy a variety of assets for a game. Most of these licenses seem to be $50, so that adds up very quickly! So while this change made some people happy, it should be obvious it has made other people very unhappy. But it did not have to be this way! Just give us both options.

A visual display for those who don't want to read my paragraph:

That's a true point of view I share also.
I asked for seperate license (per product) (thinking of my indie friends or fellows!).
I therefore never said at any time it would be preferable to remove old license format since for BIG projects they remain WAY MORE ADAPTED !
I mean, purchasing 1 item for $50 license fee is great if we only need that from a vendor, but... come one, if we need more than 1 item from that vendor, we could use the Full this-artist license, and we're okay! AHEM.. Wait... This is no more possible since.... There is no more way to purchase full artist license.. Come on... DAZ3D you're really making a mistake, anyway, I'm confident about you DAZ3D, I think you will really think twice in few days !

jillval8 said:

dreamfarmer said:

I don't have an indie license of the old form and I'm defending this! Honestly, I feel like the per-vendor license was a huge mistake. It was both too expensive-- because of the number of vendor licenses you'd have to buy to produce almost anything cool-- and not expensive enough, because it gave people an entirely inappropriate idea of how the business works.

That said, I am sorry so many people are disappointed. I wish there was a way to have both around, but it seems somehow unfair to do so.

(I am a little surprised at all the people who felt satisfied limiting themselves to Daz Original content, but were planning to use Daz3d exclusively as the content provoider. Really? Daz has the character stuff but they've always been kind of light on interesting complex environments.... What were you making?)

It's already been explain why this is only true for the 1 group of people that want to buy one 1 or 2 and that's it. But that's only for that one group, not for the rest of us in group 2. we know how to do math, you know. :) $500 dollar price tag is wayyy! more affordable then then the current one now, for group 2. The current license setup is not even worth it....again for group 2.

"That said, I am sorry so many people are disappointed. I wish there was a way to have both around, but it seems somehow unfair to do so."

not attacking you but I'm glad you pointed this out, because the truth is, it's not fair for everyone who miss the sale or didn't find out in time about the indie license beinig taken down, have to buy each induvival model, and have to be told by "some not all" who either got the licnese just in time, and will recieve all upcoming models from daz for free, OR by group of people who only wants to buy 1 or 2 items from the store..... "that this new setup works for all of us and this is much more affordable or better eveyone". That's not fair.

That's the exact feeling I have for them: NOT FAIR !

minhdinheeit said:

I just don't understand why we can't have both options. Just put the old license back, but this time limit the number of projects you can sell/publish with it, maybe only for 1 project (like the old license). That will be fair I think.

If someone buy that many items from one PA, then I think that PA will happily license them for a single project at the "$500-$1000" price tag. I don't know how PAs create their models, but I think they reuse some of their work elements too, right? And I'm talking about license for "Indie", who can't afford $10000 for 200 items. For big studio/company, just charge them as much as you want.

Again, give customers a chance to spend their money. I don't have $10000, so either take my $500 or my $0.

NO, JUST NO.
Impossible I think.
What I refer about? It's your change about OLD license that taken out "Limit OLD license by authorizing use of ONLY 1 time per license".. Since now, it would be NOT FAIR for those who (in the past) purchased the OLD license!
The fact is clear in DAZ head (as far I can understand): (1) Do not modify old licenses but remove the possibility to purchase newer OLD license (2) Add a per-product overpriced license (non-sense from my Point Of View) for new purchasers...
In the final: (3) OLD license still works as what they intended when people paid for them, but new license would be still applied to NEW (only new) purchasers!
So: no problem with "rights" and "ethics" I think (always, it's my assumption!)
The solution would be the: (4) Create a new OLD v2 license (without invalidate OLD v1 license) that are LIMITED to per-project use (even if I dislike the idea) !

Kaleb242 said:

I will remain cautious and a bit apprehensive about this change until more details emerge, and may even have to seek legal counsel at some point to sort out all the EULA details and implications. This really wasn't a very clean roll out... not only does the first line of the new 3.0 Addendum in the EULA have a typographical error of “Game Develoer License” (where's the p???)... but clicking the print icon on the EULA resulted in printing a blank page. Not good...

I also noticed the "p" missing from the word.
Aswell in old EULA we had "Daz" instead of (in new EULA) DAZ now!
Was funny.
But the per-product license is not funny at all !
I will never purchase a per-product license on that ammount of cash if I were in the need of creating 3D Games instead of 2D Games (like I create)..
The reason? I have bills to pay like normal people.

Kaleb242 said:

I hope I made the right choice in taking the leap to buy the Commercial Game Developer License for Daz Originals and Game Dev Licenses for the PAs that I did while they were still being offered... and all the years I have amassed licenses of Daz content for all of my artistic pursuits and endeavors. The only comfort came from the orange banner...

"Although we will no longer sell Game Developer licenses, rest assured that you still have all of the rights that you received when you purchased your Game Developer License(s). Those rights apply to all content that is owned by the artist you purchased a Game Developer License from that is currently in the Daz 3D store, or that will be released in the future in the Daz 3D store. As such, you do not need to purchase any interactive licenses for content by that artist or artists."

That's how it's unfair with new purchasers..
They like... "WHYYYYYYYY NOOOOOOOOO!" ..
Not my case since I, often said it, use 2D renders stuff in games I create and release for commercial (or free purpose when it's DEMO) !

So..
I will start to follow in next days how the "per-product" license will evolve, but.. I'm fairly sure that DAZ3D would want respecting their curstomers base aswell their artists base and we will come to get an arrangement !
Few days before the end of Platinum Club Sale, we will see a great bargain in the last days, but with that "announcement" of new licensing stuff.. It will be perhaps bad for DAZ3D if they don't change their mind about licensing stuff...
I mean: I LOVE DAZ3D, I will continue purchasing content and use in 2D Renders/Animations as long the license permit me to do it, if one day.. the license (standard one) will demand me to pay more the price of a product for purchasing a license, I simply and purely cut-out my PC+ member account and move to new horizon.. It will be sad since I love DAZ3D community/artists !

SORRY FOR LOOONG LOOONG SUMMARY OF MY MIND.
But I feel in the need to expose my reactions too :)

Have a nice day PA (artists) and Members (Customers) but mainly: Have a nice day all people I like here :)

mikek · November 2017

outrider42 said:

I also believe $50 for each product license is a bit high. IMO, $30 is more reasonable. I say $30 because a lot of Renderosity "Extended Licenses" are this price, which is their version of this. Some are indeed higher, and it makes sense to allow the PA's to decide.

The extended licenses on renderosity looks to me pretty much dead. I did search there for some time to see if they have something interesting but it was mostly to expensive for me and most artists seem to have stopped completely adding the extended license option for their new products. My take from it is developers didn't buy enough to make it worthwhile for artists. The question is why. Was it only the visibility (which is far better with daz) or also the price. Will be interesting to see if daz high priced version of it can convince enough developers to jump on. Even though its mostly to expensive for me I hope it adds enough to the artists income to continue offering it or daz adds options which work for developers who have a smaller budget (likey we had with their old license).

3DMinh · November 2017

Atanacius said:

Tell we.. Are you serious when you said that?

I think the game you talk about is not really a 3D game but a visual novel a like in 3D, which not require any full environments set in pure 3D.
(can you give me the link of one of the game you talk about, yours, thanks!)

In example, myself, I do not any game in pure 3D (meaning: I only use renders/animations images in my 2D games, since they are 2D games)..
For me Interactive license is not useful, since all purchases fall under Standard License (the standard EULA I read carefully when DAZ changed their plans about license!)

Therefore, I know many many many Indie developer In Real Life that are forced to the create a true beautiful game in pure 3D within Unity/Unreal Engine 4 would never use 2D images for simulate their scene... So... This kind of license is not a great help for thoses Indie developers..
Also, top of that, the stuff is like this now, you like/you dislike.. It's like this: 3D games most of them use pure 3D assets not simulation of Point Of View for making the job of a beautiful game !
I'm feeling sad for them, really sad !

Have you played the Resident Evil 3: Nemesis. Or any game from the old Resident Evil series that features Fixed Camera/POV. Or Commandos, Diablo 2 etc.. Their characters (main characters, zombie etc..) are fully 3d, but the background are 2d images rendered by the studio. It sucks, yeah, but if it's done right, can result in very beautiful games. Hey, I'm not trying to defend this type of "interactive license", I'm just saying that for some people (myself included), this license is better for them in terms of overall costs and flexibility.

Atanacius said:

NO, JUST NO.
Impossible I think.
What I refer about? It's your change about OLD license that taken out "Limit OLD license by authorizing use of ONLY 1 time per license".. Since now, it would be NOT FAIR for those who (in the past) purchased the OLD license!
The fact is clear in DAZ head (as far I can understand): (1) Do not modify old licenses but remove the possibility to purchase newer OLD license (2) Add a per-product overpriced license (non-sense from my Point Of View) for new purchasers...
In the final: (3) OLD license still works as what they intended when people paid for them, but new license would be still applied to NEW (only new) purchasers!
So: no problem with "rights" and "ethics" I think (always, it's my assumption!)
The solution would be the: (4) Create a new OLD v2 license (without invalidate OLD v1 license) that are LIMITED to per-project use (even if I dislike the idea) !

I think there is a misunderstanding. The sentense "Limit OLD license by authorizing use of ONLY 1 time per license" is yours, not mine. The old license that people have purchased cannot be changed in anyway, even if Daz3d wants to. Anyone who purchased it should feel very happy now. When I said "put the old license back", I meant the old TYPE of license just like you said about "OLD V2 license". This type of license is Pa-wide, for one project, and for future customers. So yeah, old customers will not/ cannot be affected in anyway. Maybe it's my fault for not explaining it clearly, sorry.

Unless I'm wrong, the old PA-wide license is always for one project. Only the Daz3d Indie License is for unlimited projects, but just for the Daz Originals Items.

Midnight_stories · November 2017

minhdinheeit said:

Atanacius said:

Tell we.. Are you serious when you said that?

I think the game you talk about is not really a 3D game but a visual novel a like in 3D, which not require any full environments set in pure 3D.
(can you give me the link of one of the game you talk about, yours, thanks!)

In example, myself, I do not any game in pure 3D (meaning: I only use renders/animations images in my 2D games, since they are 2D games)..
For me Interactive license is not useful, since all purchases fall under Standard License (the standard EULA I read carefully when DAZ changed their plans about license!)

Therefore, I know many many many Indie developer In Real Life that are forced to the create a true beautiful game in pure 3D within Unity/Unreal Engine 4 would never use 2D images for simulate their scene... So... This kind of license is not a great help for thoses Indie developers..
Also, top of that, the stuff is like this now, you like/you dislike.. It's like this: 3D games most of them use pure 3D assets not simulation of Point Of View for making the job of a beautiful game !
I'm feeling sad for them, really sad !

Have you played the Resident Evil 3: Nemesis. Or any game from the old Resident Evil series that features Fixed Camera/POV. Or Commandos, Diablo 2 etc.. Their characters (main characters, zombie etc..) are fully 3d, but the background are 2d images rendered by the studio. It sucks, yeah, but if it's done right, can result in very beautiful games. Hey, I'm not trying to defend this type of "interactive license", I'm just saying that for some people (myself included), this license is better for them in terms of overall costs and flexibility.

Atanacius said:

NO, JUST NO.
Impossible I think.
What I refer about? It's your change about OLD license that taken out "Limit OLD license by authorizing use of ONLY 1 time per license".. Since now, it would be NOT FAIR for those who (in the past) purchased the OLD license!
The fact is clear in DAZ head (as far I can understand): (1) Do not modify old licenses but remove the possibility to purchase newer OLD license (2) Add a per-product overpriced license (non-sense from my Point Of View) for new purchasers...
In the final: (3) OLD license still works as what they intended when people paid for them, but new license would be still applied to NEW (only new) purchasers!
So: no problem with "rights" and "ethics" I think (always, it's my assumption!)
The solution would be the: (4) Create a new OLD v2 license (without invalidate OLD v1 license) that are LIMITED to per-project use (even if I dislike the idea) !

I think there is a misunderstanding. The sentense "Limit OLD license by authorizing use of ONLY 1 time per license" is yours, not mine. The old license that people have purchased cannot be changed in anyway, even if Daz3d wants to. Anyone who purchased it should feel very happy now. When I said "put the old license back", I meant the old TYPE of license just like you said about "OLD V2 license". This type of license is Pa-wide, for one project, and for future customers. So yeah, old customers will not/ cannot be affected in anyway. Maybe it's my fault for not explaining it clearly, sorry.

Unless I'm wrong, the old PA-wide license is always for one project. Only the Daz3d Indie License is for unlimited projects, but just for the Daz Originals Items.

You got it right! daz explained it to me, and all old Licenses will be good forever and a day. If you're like me and have a Daz Games License then you get to use all future figures and clothes. But let's face it, no individual makes money out of games, it's an expensive hobby at best, but you have great fun doing it, and it could lead to jobs with a AAA company if you are good enough. So how's the C++ programing going ;)

gab.henson_c9ae967dac · November 2017

dreamfarmer said:

I don't have an indie license of the old form and I'm defending this! Honestly, I feel like the per-vendor license was a huge mistake. It was both too expensive-- because of the number of vendor licenses you'd have to buy to produce almost anything cool-- and not expensive enough, because it gave people an entirely inappropriate idea of how the business works.

That said, I am sorry so many people are disappointed. I wish there was a way to have both around, but it seems somehow unfair to do so.

(I am a little surprised at all the people who felt satisfied limiting themselves to Daz Original content, but were planning to use Daz3d exclusively as the content provoider. Really? Daz has the character stuff but they've always been kind of light on interesting complex environments.... What were you making?)

Just an example to answer your last question: I was (maybe will be when I recover from that blow and find another solution) making a a 3D game which requires many NPC and wanted to offer customization possibilities for the player character. So I was using Daz only for characters : genesis 3 with morphs, hair and clothing. I would never use Daz items for environnement or props.

And for character stuff, there are many Daz Originals hair and clothing that covered my needs. Sure, there were some Non Daz Originals stuff that I liked and would have been a good fit for me, but I ruled them out and sticked to Daz Originals since I knew I would only purchase the license covering them.

In the end, this new interactive license stuff would have been pretty good if it comes on top of the Daz Originals licensing : in my case, I would purchase the Daz Originals license to get access to the whole Dar Originals catalog and also buy interactive license for the one or two PA clothing that looked good for me. Now, I just won't purchase any license at all and no stuff anymore.

nmargie_d65db43582 · November 2017

I am starting to think this change is to help PAs out. Most people I know and many on this thread have said they do not use PA items because of extra license cost. Wonder if PAs started complaining to DAZ that they feel daz was under cutting them. Getting a cut from all sales allowed Daz to sell its licenses and products cheaper than any PA could.

I see a lot of people talking about all the items they need to make their game. I been there, staring at the computer screen during a Daz sale with a list of 100 items I need for a project. DONT do that, there are much cheaper and free alternatives. Sure there will always be that character, hair outfit ect that you can not make and can only find on Daz site, but if your spending hundreds on models you may need to rethink what you need

jillval8 · November 2017

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

I am starting to think this change is to help PAs out. Most people I know and many on this thread have said they do not use PA items because of extra license cost. Wonder if PAs started complaining to DAZ that they feel daz was under cutting them. Getting a cut from all sales allowed Daz to sell its licenses and products cheaper than any PA could.

I see a lot of people talking about all the items they need to make their game. I been there, staring at the computer screen during a Daz sale with a list of 100 items I need for a project. DONT do that, they're are much cheaper and free alternatives. Sure there will always be that character, hair outfit ect that you can not make and can only find on Daz site, but if your spending hundreds on models you may need to rethink what you need

There is nothing to rethink, honesty. No one is going to folk over any amount, knowing they cant afford the rest. No one is going to pay just to snag a pair of shoes, hair, morphs, and whatever. There's no logic in that , and not worth it. Daz3d.com was great for a reason for indies, and this model alone change that.

Many people have allready stated they would have probably would have bought a PA product or 2, on top of daz originals indie license, but i can garentee its a no go.

marander3d · November 2017

outrider42 said:

I like the interactive license. This is -almost- exactly what I asked for quite some time, in fact it is remarkable just how much it is like what I asked for, LOL. However, I never asked for the bulk licenses to be removed. There is no reason to pull them. The purpose behind my request for individual licenses was to grant the buyer the option of just buying a few items and a license for each. Key word: OPTION. Buyers should still have the option to purchase licenses that cover Daz's and PA's catalogs. Dude, they were just on sale a couple weeks ago. And now they are gone completely? Come on.

Its the old one foot forward, two steps back thing. Let's not do that. Bring the Indie and Commercial Licenses back. Hell, if need be, raise the price. But the way things are right now, the costs is too high for anyone who wants to buy a variety of assets for a game. Most of these licenses seem to be $50, so that adds up very quickly! So while this change made some people happy, it should be obvious it has made other people very unhappy. But it did not have to be this way! Just give us both options.

Completely agree to this.

For users that buy large amount of content from DAZ or PA's, the one-time developer license should still be available. For buying additional / single assets the new model is also great. But I would prefer to see the interactive license pricing in additional % of the current (and reduced) price, right now you pay the same for a one hair asset as for a complete pro bundle or a single DO character. Or an old M4 character morph priced around $1 costs $35.

I understand the effort that goes into the asset creation and $50 for the interactive license for a good character is more than fair in my opinion but it would be easier / more fair if it's calculated in % (or double / triple price for example).

Brysey · November 2017

marander3d said:

hexadecimalentertainment said:

So instead of paying 500$ to be able to use daz mesh into my game i have to pay 35$ each?

Are you kidding me? so i just invested 1K over the last month for nothing?

Are you kidding!!!!??!!!!!

There was an information about this in the forum from DAZ previously and therefore I bought the game developer indie license last week at a discount for $75. When I see now that each DAZ Original character is $50 for the interactive license then I'm very happy that I purchased the indie license beforehand.

Hi previous posters. Noting the discounted $75 dollar discount was this in the PC sales? Personally I'd have appreciated a big banner highlighting the last gasp chance to pickup the DAZ indie gamer license before the licensing change somewhere on the mile long daily PC deal lists (did I miss it as was checking sales daily but not the forums?). I may never produce a game but would feel I was doing my bit to be legit when bringing content into other software outside of DAZ. Any chance it could be brought back briefly in the PC catchup sale? Doubtful I know.

nmargie_d65db43582 · November 2017

jillval8 said:

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

There is nothing to rethink, honesty. No one is going to folk over any amount, knowing they cant afford the rest. No one is going to pay for a licesne just to snag a pair of shoes, hair, morphs, and whatever. There's no logic in that , and not worth it.

Many people have allready stated they would have bought a PA product or 2, on top of daz originals indie license, but i can garentee its a no go.

People will still buy from Daz, they will no doubt cut back but will still buy. You really think Daz did not think this out? Somehow they feel they will make money

As far as who would have bought what when it comes to licensing all we can look at is past behavior. Since it is easy to say what you would have done if given another chance

BeeMKay · November 2017

Well, there's always the option - if you really need 5000 items of the DAZ catalogue for your game, contact CS and negotiate your very own "Indie License" with them. If that fails, well... but chances are that you'll be able to negotiate something that will keep both you and DAZ happy. If enough people approach them in that way, and they see it's viable to re-add a new version of the Indie/Pro license, then even better.

I mean, you won't find out unless you try, and if you feel that the price they ask for the negotiated bundle is too much, you still can always bow out and not do it.

nmargie_d65db43582 · November 2017

mikek said:

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

under the current plan PA are on an even playign field with Daz.

Only if devs actually jump on to keep the revenue up. Daz isn't a plug and play store for games like the one from unity or unreal. Here one has to invest a lot extra time to get it running on a similar level. And the price isn't attractive anymore. Its a bit like suggesting to use one of the 3D stores who offers a figure for $200 which isn't daz compatible to a daz user.
Additionally concerning haven even playing field I wouldn't say that. I would probably just buy the Daz bundles as those cost the same $50 for license like a lot PA items. If one got the PA license in the past he had good reasons to use it to its full extend and buy as much items from the PA as usable. Now I would think twice to buy any item that is not really really necessary from a PA or isn't a big fat bundle.

True, again I have no idea if this was meant to keep PAs happy but it does help make sense of the new system. Daz may not be plug and ready for game engines liek Unity and Unreal but it is very close. The biggest issue I had to ovecome bringing Daz into UE was the UV maps. There are alot of folks with how to vidoes on youtube that show how to import Daz models into unity and UE

On a side note,

As someone who owns the indie license I will repeat this suggestion, which is something I do myself. Instead of buying items this week or month buy a few good tutorials on creating daz content. Learn to make your own hair and clothing. What a few youtube videos and learn to use blender to make props. The money you save making you own customer props and other items will more than cover the cost for those items you must buy from Daz

jillval8 · November 2017

All I can say is if someone were to buy a outfit, I really wouldn't blame them if they were like screw it, might as well use the whole entire outfit, since they paid enough for it. I can honestly see that happing in some cases now.

nmargie_d65db43582 · November 2017

Ran some numbers and this is what I came up with

1. Genesis 3 starter essentals - free - license =100

2. Victoria 7 - 41 pro bundle (which is 10 cheaper than the starter bundle) License = 50 (seems 50 per character is standard no matter which version you buy)

That's 150 for licensing one character. A few key notes

1. Future characters like Micheal 7 will not have the 100 essental cost and will be 50

2. Add on characters (not the main daz characters ) have a cost of 35 each

3. Morph kits seem to be 35 each

So if you buy Victoria and Micheal 8 with the head and body morph packs for males and females you come up with (100 (Gs) + 50(V8) + 50(M8) + 35(FM) + 35(FBM) + 35(MBM) + 35(MHM)) = $340 license cost which gets you

6 chracters - both bundles have the main one and 2 extra

2. Hair pices

4 outfits

Some extra stuff

Head and body morph kits for both male and female which shoudl allow you to create a few

The items come to a total of 208 which gives us a gran total of 548. Which I admit seems high but for what you go it does seem to be within current market standards

Ghosty12 · November 2017

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

I am starting to think this change is to help PAs out. Most people I know and many on this thread have said they do not use PA items because of extra license cost. Wonder if PAs started complaining to DAZ that they feel daz was under cutting them. Getting a cut from all sales allowed Daz to sell its licenses and products cheaper than any PA could.

I see a lot of people talking about all the items they need to make their game. I been there, staring at the computer screen during a Daz sale with a list of 100 items I need for a project. DONT do that, there are much cheaper and free alternatives. Sure there will always be that character, hair outfit ect that you can not make and can only find on Daz site, but if your spending hundreds on models you may need to rethink what you need

I would think any game developer worth their salt basically who has the resources would have someone designing the models and textures needed for their game, via Maya, 3D Studio Max even Blender (possibly).. As they know exactly what they want and how they want it..

What will be interesting is what this change to licensing does will it kill the market or will it grow it.. Only time will tell, eitherway for me I am not affected as any game I would likely do would be a visual novel using pre rendered 2d images since there is just oo much work in making a 3D game and much more expensive..

mikek · November 2017

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

$340 license cost which gets you

6 chracters - both bundles have the main one and 2 extra

2. Hair pices

4 outfits

Some extra stuff

Head and body morph kits for both male and female which shoudl allow you to create a few

The items come to a total of 208 which gives us a gran total of 548. Which I admit seems high but for what you go it does seem to be within current market standards

2 pieces of hair for six characters.
But what kind of game would it be where the girl with post apocalyptic clothes meets casual summer girl, the leather vigilante biker and the medieval austrani?
You see the problem? With a game one of the biggest challanges when using store items is to make it look like its one piece and not some thrown together styles. Thats where the old license was far far better as one could mix and create one coherent look without paying thousands of dollars just for license.

mork · November 2017

Uhm. I welcome the per-asset license, but if that means that the DAZ and PA licenses are now gone, that is a very bad tradeoff. I'd prefer to have both options.

Also, as others have pointed out, the per-asset license implementation is still a bit buggy - makes no sense to purchase a license for a PC membership, does it? ;)

nmargie_d65db43582 · November 2017

ghosty12 said:

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

I am starting to think this change is to help PAs out. Most people I know and many on this thread have said they do not use PA items because of extra license cost. Wonder if PAs started complaining to DAZ that they feel daz was under cutting them. Getting a cut from all sales allowed Daz to sell its licenses and products cheaper than any PA could.

I see a lot of people talking about all the items they need to make their game. I been there, staring at the computer screen during a Daz sale with a list of 100 items I need for a project. DONT do that, there are much cheaper and free alternatives. Sure there will always be that character, hair outfit ect that you can not make and can only find on Daz site, but if your spending hundreds on models you may need to rethink what you need

I would think any game developer worth their salt basically who has the resources would have someone designing the models and textures needed for their game, via Maya, 3D Studio Max even Blender (possibly).. As they know exactly what they want and how they want it..

What will be interesting is what this change to licensing does will it kill the market or will it grow it.. Only time will tell, eitherway for me I am not affected as any game I would likely do would be a visual novel using pre rendered 2d images since there is just oo much work in making a 3D game and much more expensive..

To be honest I fell into the buy everything from daz trap. It gets so easy to say "well I will spend 100 on these items to save time in making them." Then before you know it you realize you told yourself that 8 times in the past few months

When learning Daz everyone looks at lighting, importing models and such but the most important part of using Daz, shopping on daz, is overlooked. Knowing how to shop on Daz can save you hundreds of dollars. As you rightly point out only time will tell when it comes to this new license pricing

jillval8 · November 2017

mikek said:

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

$340 license cost which gets you

6 chracters - both bundles have the main one and 2 extra

2. Hair pices

4 outfits

Some extra stuff

Head and body morph kits for both male and female which shoudl allow you to create a few

The items come to a total of 208 which gives us a gran total of 548. Which I admit seems high but for what you go it does seem to be within current market standards

2 pieces of hair for six characters.
But what kind of game would it be where the girl with post apocalyptic clothes meets casual summer girl, the leather vigilante biker and the medieval austrani?
You see the problem? With a game one of the biggest challanges when using store items is to make it look like its one piece and not some thrown together styles. Thats where the old license was far far better as one could mix and create one coherent look without paying thousands of dollars just for license.

haha, pretty much this ^

nmargie_d65db43582 · November 2017

mikek said:

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

$340 license cost which gets you

6 chracters - both bundles have the main one and 2 extra

2. Hair pices

4 outfits

Some extra stuff

Head and body morph kits for both male and female which shoudl allow you to create a few

The items come to a total of 208 which gives us a gran total of 548. Which I admit seems high but for what you go it does seem to be within current market standards

2 pieces of hair for six characters.
But what kind of game would it be where the girl with post apocalyptic clothes meets casual summer girl, the leather vigilante biker and the medieval austrani?
You see the problem? With a game one of the biggest challanges when using store items is to make it look like its one piece and not some thrown together styles. Thats where the old license was far far better as one could mix and create one coherent look without paying thousands of dollars just for license.

Actually it should be a 4 hair pieces, but I agree that is not enough in itself to make a game. It is plenty to give you more than a solid foundation to make you game. Willy ou need more, of course but your character needs should be well met unless you need children or elderly people which will require 1 or 2 more add ons. Of course no matter where you buy your models you will have the same issues with getting all the items you want in the bundle packs

As for hair and clothing learning to make you own will go a long way.

nmargie_d65db43582 · November 2017

mork said:

Uhm. I welcome the per-asset license, but if that means that the DAZ and PA licenses are now gone, that is a very bad tradeoff. I'd prefer to have both options.

Also, as others have pointed out, the per-asset license implementation is still a bit buggy - makes no sense to purchase a license for a PC membership, does it? ;)

Well that really depends on how Daz answeres the following

1. Does the PC license include the starter essentals which normally carry a 100 fee by themselves

2. Does one keep the license for things they buy even if they do not renew their PC+ membership

3. With items always being added and removed fromt he PC+ options how does one keep track on what they have the license for and what they dont

Daz really needs to explain some of the finer detals along with their line of thinking for the overall license

mikek · November 2017

nmargie_d65db43582 said:

As for hair and clothing learning to make you own will go a long way.

With that approach PAs likely would earn less from devs if they start doing hair and clothes themself and just buy the bundles for base char and morphs. It's not that I'm saying doing a game now is impossible but rather for someone like me it has lost attractiveness using daz content for a 3D game.

nitijjp · November 2017

So I have read almost every comment and can say that introducing a new Interactive License for every individual asset is Good, but removing the old bulk license is very very Bad. It is actually a cheap shot made by Daz because they did it un-announced. They should have sent emails about this kind of major change weeks before it was about to happen like good consumer friendly companies do, but no they suddenly removed the bulk licenses.

If any of you think that Daz is not doing this to make extra cash is in delusion because would this move had been announced a couple weeks before so many indie game developers like me would have purchased the bulk license and much of the prospect income from individual assets would have been lost.

Now all my time and money spent on rigging and fixing Daz characters to be used in game engine has basically gone down the drain. I have actually written thousands of lines of Daz scripts to rig the models for animations.

What a Shame and what a Waste!! Also every 2d game dev who is thinking that they are spared from this nonsense; well I have news for you. Sometime in the future you will switch to creating 3d games and then you will realize the pain in looking for good quality decently priced 3d assets.

I also read someone wrote that most 3d assets in the market are priced this way, well then why would anyone lurk around here in Daz store to shop for 3d game assets? They will look for other vendors which can provide much better quality.

I have cancelled my Platinum Club payment subscription now that I don't see any use of it. I am very frustrated because I have worked so much on my project thinking that I will buy the indie games license before launch but now I am not really sure what to do next.

dreamfarmer · November 2017

So, while waiting to find out if Daz is going to adjust the options, it could be a fun and productive option to figure out just what games you COULD make on a $500 licensing budget. And while you do, keep in mind these games: Gone Home. Bendy and the Ink Machine. The many games like them that use very limited 3d environments. And then-- I know 2d is passé-- but you can do stuff like Limbo using Daz assets too... You want to make games! You can still do it!

(Yes: I know there's frustration and disappointment in not being able to make the game you wanted at the price you planned. But there's other ways to have fun still.)

So: Victoria in an Austrani outfit, given a unique face by a morph set. In a first person game, she can be the NPC! Ooh, maybe it's a game about time travel? Hmmm....

Daywalker Designs · November 2017

dreamfarmer said:

So: Victoria in an Austrani outfit, given a unique face by a morph set. In a first person game, she can be the NPC! Ooh, maybe it's a game about time travel? Hmmm....

Or you could look at older figures like Genesis or Genesis 2, since PA content for them is likely to have a lower licensing cost (I was checking out Lyoness' store earlier). Or you could take a cue from movies like The Road Warrior and have the bad guys in straps and ragged outfits (the aforementioned Post Apocalyptic outfit) and the good guys in more modest attire.

Tigerschnecke · November 2017

Does anybody know if academic usage is still possible without an extra license? There used to be a passage about the possibility to arrange that, I believe (not using assets interactively at this time, but I had been planning on it...).

Notifications

Interactive License?

Comments

Adding to Cart…