Terragen - annual payments?

[reck]

In previous versions of Terragen an upgrade purchase would give you all the incremental updates 3.1, 3.2, etc up to the release of the next primary release. Is this still the case or are we now required to pay an annual maintenance payment to continue to get these smaller updates?

[Oshyan]

We have moved to a Maintenance model, as you describe. Licenses that you purchase are still "perpetual", you may continue to use them forever, but updates are only available as long as you have current maintenance. All licenses come with 1 year of maintenance and you can purchase renewals on a yearly basis thereafter. You can read more about the maintenance policy on our Price List page by clicking the link on the word "maintenance": http://planetside.co.uk/terragen-price-list/

We have clearly noted the maintenance update policy on all Terragen 4 purchases since they became available in the pre-release period.

- Oshyan

[reck]

I completely understand this covering larger updates but traditionally the smaller updates in-between rarely contain any big features but do contain a lot of fixes. Doesn't this mean that important bug fixes for the 4.x series will now be behind a paywall?

If you intend to start adding bigger features in 4.1, 4.2 etc would you consider making two branches, one with new features for people that pay the annual fee and a separate branch that only contains bug fixes for those that have purchased 4 but are not paying the fee?

Presumably the version 4.x updates are going to follow a different route to version 2.x and 3.x as there will now be an exception that Planetside will be releasing $250 worth of content every 12 months.

Also previously major releases have been years in the making, I think on average between 2 and 4 years? The cost to go from 3.0 to 4.0 including all the updates in-between was $299 this time round. If it takes just 2 years for Terragen 5 to come out then we will be paying $500 or $750 if it takes 3 years, assuming prices don't increase. That's quite an increase from the past to go up one version.

[Oshyan]

By their very nature important bugs are generally identified and resolved within the first year of a product's life. If they're important enough to resolve, they generally affect numerous people, and are seen quickly. For that reason most people should receive any important bug fixes with their included 1 year of Maintenance.

Splitting the release process into 2 branches, a "critical patch" side and a "complete updates" side, would significantly complicate the development and release process. It's something we can consider if it ultimately ends up that this new Maintenance policy is unreasonably restricting some users from important bug fixes. But as I said above I don't think that's likely to happen. That being said this *is* a new direction for us and we're open to changes to make it work as well as possible for everyone. I should also say that if a truly critical issue shows up, we'll find a way to make it available to all who need it. That could take the form of a special, one time update for all licensees, regardless of maintenance status.

We do intend to be releasing new features more often, in fact we feel that the Maintenance approach makes this more sustainable for us moving forward. In the past there has been the need to "reserve" some new features for the next major release because we relied on a large influx of upgrade revenue that only came in when a major version increment happened (e.g. 3.x to 4.0). Now we have a (hopefully) more predictable annual revenue and much less need to think strategically about the financial implications of releasing a given feature. Instead we can focus on what's important to our users: is the feature or functionality useful, and is it in a good enough working state for people to benefit from it right now? If the answers to both are yes, we can release almost any given feature and worry less about whether doing so will mean our next major release is less impressive and worthy of an upgrade.

The costs of continuing to have current access to updates have admittedly increased with this release, but we intend to provide additional value along with the higher cost. And we balance it against the fact that the new purchase price has remained the same, while many other software products have gone up in price with every release, and comparable environment-oriented products in the market are notably more expensive still. Perpetual license owners always have the option of simply not renewing Maintenance until some major new feature comes along that justifies the price for them.

We realize this new policy is not going to be to everyone's preference, but we intend to use it as a springboard for better and more consistent development and releases. If we succeed in that it should be an improvement for all involved. If we don't, you can always vote with your dollars. But we're betting we'll be able to keep most people around, and I hope we're right.

- Oshyan

[Kadri]

Honestly i very much liked the policy Planetside had regarding of Terragen purchases in the past.
I can understand the new approach from an economic point of view... but this is the first thing since years i don't like much.

In general i stay away from maintenance and especially subscription based software.

Say it takes 3 years until another point release. When somebody buys it 2 years later he will give the same money to which version?
Probably for the last one that is out? If we don't buy the maintenance we won't get that version even if we payed the same price?
If yes that sounds not quite right to me. How will that work?

[Oshyan]

Kadri, I can understand you liking our previous policy, but I have to say it wasn't very good for Planetside's sustainability and growth. Remember, we're still a 2-person team (with some continuing contribution from Jo as his time allows). We'd like to be more than that so we can iterate faster and do even cooler things.

Anyway, I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. By "point release", what do you mean, 4.1 or 5.0?

Active software is always improved and almost inevitably you must pay for that improvement in some way, whether it is by waiting for a "major" upgrade (e.g. 5.0) and then paying an upgrade fee, or by purchasing a Maintenance period to maintain update access. Someone buying Terragen a year or two from now will get Terragen 4, most likely, and perhaps we'll be on 4.5 or 4.7 by then or something. If we come out with 5.0 within a year of their purchase, they'll get the 5.0 update included due to their Maintenance. Anyone who has valid maintenance during the 5.0 release will get that update.

However, the person who purchased a couple years from now did not have the benefit of using Terragen for those prior years. A benefit which anyone who purchases now does have. It's sort of like the computer hardware upgrade cycle. You know that a year from now computers will be better and faster and perhaps even cheaper (at least for equivalent performance). It can be tempting to wait for something better, faster, or cheaper before you buy. But if you maintain that stance forever, you'll wait forever, never having a computer to use. Even if you only wait a year, it means you have to make-do with a slower computer in the meantime. There's a price to pay for having access to software and to hardware, and a price to pay as well for keeping current with both.

Again it really just comes down to the relationship between payment and updates, which can take many forms. We are hopeful that we can provide enough value to people for the Maintenance pricing to be worth it for a majority. And for those who don't find it of value, the license will continue to work and you can choose to renew Maintenance at any time and get access to all the latest features and functionality.

- Oshyan

[Kadri]

Should be clearer; i meant 5.0

Your answer is so or so what i kind of expected Oshyan. Thanks.

[reck]

By their very nature important bugs are generally identified and resolved within the first year of a product's life. If they're important enough to resolve, they generally affect numerous people, and are seen quickly. For that reason most people should receive any important bug fixes with their included 1 year of Maintenance.

Yes but come the end of the first maintenance period this time next year quite a bit of the new stuff will have been added and by the sounds of things Terragen is going to change a lot more over the next month period than it ever has in the past due to the ongoing maintenance. Therefore it's entirely possible that bugs may be present from features and changes that were only added months ago, not a year. So i'm not talking about fixing bugs in 4.0 released in Oct 2016, but features in 4.6 released September 2017 for instance.

I realise a common complaint, especially in the early days, was the very slow development and release cycle so at least this change should address that and hopefully mean more devs are added to the team. Maybe that library feature could get finished off 


As someone who is only a Terragen hobbiest it will be a lot harder for me to keep up with the Terragen releases going forward as I have now as I don't think ill be able to justify an annual payment. 

[reck]

Thinking about this it seems the maintenance payment is really only dictating when you get the features, not if.

So I guess one option would be to not pay any maintenance until the version 5 is released in a few years' time and then pay a single maintenance charge to get access to the 5.0 release (and everything that has been added since the end of the first maintenance period). This would work in a similar way to how payments worked previously.

If someone wants the features as soon as their ready then they would have to pay the $250 every year to get them. So in a way this new system is a lot more flexible than the old way of payment and if you have the patience could actually work out cheaper.

[Matt]

it's entirely possible that bugs may be present from features and changes that were only added months ago, not a year. So i'm not talking about fixing bugs in 4.0 released in Oct 2016, but features in 4.6 released September 2017 for instance.

This is an important point and something I've been thinking about. There will be times in future when a critical bug needs to be fixed. Whenever that happens we will find ways to do so without the maintenance expiry date getting in the way. Maybe we will patch it back into previous point releases or make exceptions for certain builds outside of the normal maintenance schedule. Not for every bug fix, but for some if they are important enough.

Thinking about this it seems the maintenance payment is really only dictating when you get the features, not if.

So I guess one option would be to not pay any maintenance until the version 5 is released in a few years' time and then pay a single maintenance charge to get access to the 5.0 release (and everything that has been added since the end of the first maintenance period). This would work in a similar way to how payments worked previously.

If someone wants the features as soon as their ready then they would have to pay the $250 every year to get them. So in a way this new system is a lot more flexible than the old way of payment and if you have the patience could actually work out cheaper.

You hit the nail on the head here. You can pay to update as frequently or as infrequently as you want to and can afford to. It's not so very different from the old system but it's more fine-grained. At the currently quoted prices though, it does work out more expensive than before if you keep up maintenance every year, but you don't have to. We are still thinking hard about these prices, and there might be adjustments as we incorporate feedback. We might offer other kinds of plans in future too. The more flexible we can be, the more it helps you as well as helping us to attract more users.

Matt

[Shigawire]

it's entirely possible that bugs may be present from features and changes that were only added months ago, not a year. So i'm not talking about fixing bugs in 4.0 released in Oct 2016, but features in 4.6 released September 2017 for instance.

This is an important point and something I've been thinking about. There will be times in future when a critical bug needs to be fixed. Whenever that happens we will find ways to do so without the maintenance expiry date getting in the way. Maybe we will patch it back into previous point releases or make exceptions for certain builds outside of the normal maintenance schedule. Not for every bug fix, but for some if they are important enough.

Matt

That is very good to hear, that critical fixes will be sent updates on regardless of maintenance.

I can understand perfectly that this was the only way for your company to be sustainable with a niche product. Hopefully the immense power of TG4 will become evident to all, and we'll see more and more artists adopt it at a greater degree. That is my hope.

In other news, I got an email saying that TG4 is released (no longer beta), so BIG congrats to Oshyan and Matt on that huge milestone!

[reck]

it's entirely possible that bugs may be present from features and changes that were only added months ago, not a year. So i'm not talking about fixing bugs in 4.0 released in Oct 2016, but features in 4.6 released September 2017 for instance.

This is an important point and something I've been thinking about. There will be times in future when a critical bug needs to be fixed. Whenever that happens we will find ways to do so without the maintenance expiry date getting in the way. Maybe we will patch it back into previous point releases or make exceptions for certain builds outside of the normal maintenance schedule. Not for every bug fix, but for some if they are important enough.

Matt

That's good to hear. I'm feeling a lot more positive about the change now and look forward to see what you come up with next in Terragen.

[SteveR]

That is good news I agree. Would that (major bugs fixed for all users regardless of maintenance) include anything that the OS provider breaks during the life cycle of TG4? I recognise that if Microsoft breaks something that's hardly Planetside's fault but Planetside is most likely the one to be able to fix it in that eventuality!

Thanks
Steve

[Oshyan]

Steve, we really haven't had anything like that I can think of in the past. The exception would be newer OS updates that are no longer compatible with the software, but I'm afraid that's not something we can commit to supporting for older versions. That's not to say it definitely wouldn't happen, but we just can't guarantee it.

- Oshyan

[SteveR]

Thanks Oshyan, I was just thinking with MS adding features to Windows differently now (for example the recent Win 10 Anniversary Update broke a few things) whether it might become an issue. Unlikely I agree. Cheers for the reply.
Steve