Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
The beta license we are selling is non-commercial, but it can be used to sell assets on the Steam Store. It is the same license as Substance Designer non-commercial.
If you want to use Substance Painter on commercial projects that are outside of the Steam marketplace, we are offering a commericla upgrade. Please check the FAQ for licensing information. http://www.allegorithmic.com/products/substance-painter#faq
If you buy the Steam beta $75 you also get a standalone version when the final release is ready. You can upgrade the final version to commercial which is $441. This ends up being cheaper at $516 than paying $590 for the commerial version alone.
We are offering a paid beta to give users the ability to get a license early while they test as well as a discount for early users. We will be offering the commerical upgrade license during the beta. However, we are allowing commercial work with the non-commerical license in the meantime.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Cheers,
Wes
Considing the whole purpose of this tool, the business model doesn't fit and seems to be more of a hook than anything. Once people actually realise that they can't really do anything with the $150 version they bought off steam and they have to pay another $440 in order to do anything with it, one of three things will happen.
1. They get stuck with a piece of software that is useless to them due to licensing.
2. They pay the extra money and have a bad taste of Allegorithmic software in their mouth and just blacklists you completely.
3. Use it in commercial work anyway and risk getting sued by you.
This is the same type of business model that N-Sided had with Quidam, and you know where they are? Gone, because they destroyed themselves with their money grubbing ways and rediculous licensing. Although they had an amazing piece of software that was in fact fantastic, they messed it up... It's a shame because many indie developers I know would have gladly purchased it had their pricing been reasonable...
All of your "non-commercial" versions would be good for indie devs that can't afford a whole lot but need good tools to use. Entire game engines don't cost this much...
Good luck with your software, I hope you don't shut down and adjust your pricing because I'd really like to get all of your software as part of my arsenal. Unfortunately I will have to pass at the moment. My pockets aren't fat enough, as I'm sure I'm not the only indie that just can't afford your tools...
If in fact your goal was to only target big companies, than you should be just fine, in which case I suggest making it even more expensive.
Just remember:
100,000 copies sold at $25 is $2,500,000
500 copies sold at $500 is $250,000
Not saying that you should sell this for that cheap, it's just a view point. It shows that sales in numbers is a powerful thing. The Android, iOS, and Windows 8 stores on mobile devices is a great example of just that.
How many people own steam?
How many of those users can afford a $600 license for this?
See what I mean?
One of the benefit of Steam is that there are going Steam Sales at some point and you should be able to get the program at a lower price point. (this is why we sold so many licenses of Substance Designer on Steam)
Regarding the price point in general, we are obvously much cheaper than Mari 2000$), cheaper than Mudbox (790$), in the same range as 3Dcoat (400 to 600$), and we believe we wil bring much more features than all these programm when it comes to painting at least when v1 will be released).
If we're talking about the current discounted price point (75$), it's easy, we are the cheapest professional 3D painting application on the market (if we compare wiht what's comparable, meaning that I'm excluding Blender here)
Finally, don't forget that you can use the non commercial liences to publish and sell asset on Steam which is, by far, the largetst usage of software on Steam. So for a majority of users, the non-commeercial license is good enough.
Hope it clarifies things :)
Maybe I'll throw this on my wishlist and watch for a 75% off deal on the commercial version, but I won't be holding my breath on that. I was actually pretty stoked about this product from the promotional emails (I own Substance Designer and B2M), but I had a feeling the price would be outside my range.
Anyway, best of luck with the product. I just can't justify $600 for a painting tool. Good work on the trailer video, btw. It looks very slick.
Thus its not even geared towards the individual.
So the real competition in this area is Mudbox and 3d Coat, which both target the game artist.
Mudbox ($795) was developed by Skymatter, which stems from a team of former WETA digital developers, then sold off to Autodesk. Their texture painting is some of the best on the market right now. In addition to that, its also a dedicated sculpting applications. So you can cover two major facets of the pipeline in Mudbox, three if you count the texture baking side.
3D Coat ($379), also acts as a texture painting application that allows the painting of multiple maps via photoshop like layers as well as Ptex options. In addition to that its one of the best retopology tools on the market right now. Its also a voxel sculpting application, with a very strong hard surface modeling side to it. It has dedicated UV mapping tools and a basic built in renderer. Lot of features, some are very well done, for a lower price point.
Thus Substance Painter has to find that competetive range which will not only attract indie developers but game artist (at home) or in studio. For pure texture painting applications and a game oriented target market, lower is better since these will have to be considered companion apps. I would recommend staying in the 3d coat range to be honest, perhaps lower for v1. Raise it based future upgrades or do a bundle where substance designer and painter are part of one $700 suite, thus putting it in the range of other dual purpose apps such a mudbox, zbrush and the like.
Pure texturing applications probably shouldnt be going over a $1000. I see SD and SP as part of the same software solution package, so combined they cover eachothers weaknesses but still only manage to hit one part of the asset creation process.
Just because popular things like TF2 and others have an abundance of workshop type things doesn't mean it's for everything...
The same non-commercial non-sense is in B2M as well which is why I'm not going to be able to purchasing that either now. I may as well get XXXXXXX for $14.99. Granted, B2M might have a few more things in it, but B2M is over 3 times the cost. Furthermore using alternative such as XXXXXXX, at least I can use what I make with it... Also, if all you're concerned with is being the cheapest on the market what happened to B2M vs XXXXXXX? why isn't B2M $9.99 to be cheaper than XXXXXXX $14.99? Think about it, this thing could be FREE, but if you can't use what you make with it, you may as well not even have it. No, I haven't purchased XXXXXXX either, in fact I was waiting to puchase B2M instead until I found out that I couldn't use what I made with it. Now I'm disappointed that your licenses are so horrible... I've used "XXXXXX" to maintain my professionalism and not spam this thread with alternative software as no company deserves that as I know creating software isn't always that easy.
As for pricing, I'm basing my purchase on the current price of $75. You can sell it to me for $5 and I still wouldn't buy it because I'm unable to use it... You can be the cheapest all you want, but preventing people from using what they make in a project they have make the tool litterally useless to any indie or any other studio for that matter. Saying to wait for a sale is basically admitting that the software is overpriced and you make money when it's on sale anyway...
I hope people read this thread and realise what they're paying for before purchasing ANY Allegorithmic software because I'm sure there are people out there that are going to be supprised that they can't use what they purchased and steam isn't going to be refunding them for it either... Unfortunately, it looks like there's already a handful of reviews about the software that people think they can use it in their next game and pipeline...
Also for the record, I was going to get painter today until I found this out. I to got the email about it and was very excited for this program to be released. Even in it's infant state. But now I just can't buy this useless piece of software... You've already made it clear enough that I can't use it even if I purchase it.
Finally I'd like to say that I'm not bashing your software. I was looking forward to using two of the three that are on here. The software itself looks fantastic, there's no doubt about that. However, the pricing and the licensing should be on failblog...
Allegorithmic is already giving away a free texture map solution. Its called Map Zone, its literally the precursor to Substance Designer. On the scale of normal/texture map generators B2M is actually fine along side the others in that category (ndo2, crazy bump..ect). B2M is also a substance that exists on its own, and quite frankly map generators are oversaturated in this market, most are pretty poor.
As for the painter version being completely pointless. This depends. For starters, the steam workshop is revenue generator for the artist who can get their stuff in. Last year Valve handed out around $10 MILLION dollars total to workshop artist. The average artist earning $15,000, and others up to $100k-500k. There is revenue to be made in the workshop, though its extremely difficult to get your items in. Additionally, the look and feel of painter doesnt really mesh well with Dota 2 and TF2 assets. Maybe Counter Strike, but I dont really know how that market place is right now. Gabe Newell also made it quite clear that future developments, including the next source engine, will be heavily focused around workshops and asset creation.
So I dont think its fair to say its entirely useless. Its not if you are thinking long term. Pricing wise, its probably not the best range. Modo SE for example is going for $150, it has texture painting in addition to modeling, sculpting, UVing..ect, 3d Coat is only $99 for its steam version as well. Both can make that hand painted asset style we use with TF2 and Dota, which are the two primary workshops for commercial gain right now.
Right now the uncertainties are probably having some hold off on the purchase, not necessarily if its tied to the workshop or not. Uncertainties include upgrade cost, substance designer user pricing, scope and direction, range in the type of assets produced..ect
People wanting to sell their assets on steam, and that's their main focus and what they want to do, then have at it. However like you said, with the amount of people on steam and that submit things for review, don't expect to quit your day job.
Bottom Line here is simple:
if you want to sell assets you make with it and that's your plan, then by all means buy it and do your thing. If you want to make game assets and textures etc for that $4.99 indie game you want to greenlight on steam, don't buy it because you're not allowed to use the stuff you make.
It's a shame really. If the price was more attractive and the licensing wasn't so bogus it would be useful and accessible to more devs...
I'm not mad in the slightest, I'm disappointed as are many of the devs I speak to. We were all looking forward to B2M and Painter...
Also when you say "One of the benefit of Steam is that there are going Steam Sales at some point and you should be able to get the program at a lower price point. ", if you are not selling the commercial upgrade on Steam how does this apply to the discussion?
An indie lisence for companies under a certain income might be worth considering to increase your sales.
It may not be glamorous or your dream game, but any Indie who can do solid work should be able to sell enough copies to pull it off. You can even make it with a free game if you want to put those dang banner ads in it. Not my style but to each their own right? Game design is not a get rich scheme. It is hard work (and a lot of luck), and most of what you make gets put right back in to equipment and software to remain competitive. Indie development is rough. Not many make it rich. For every Mike Bithell or Markus Persson there are about a thousand of people like me, just scraping by but having a blast doing their art and programs. You will have to make sacrifices to fund your dreams. That is part of the package of being Freelance(Indie) Artist or Designer.
I'm sorry to sound harsh, but a lot of complaints about "overpriced" software (read the Pixologic forums used to have tons of posts like that) sounds like it comes from younger people (under 30) who haven't thought the business side of game development through. If you want or need something bad enough, you will find a way to earn the money for it. Last resort is to take out a business loan. Most banks are recognizing "indie start up" as a valid loan opportunity.
Personally I paid for the Beta. I'm not swimming in a Scrooge McDuck vault myself so it was a purchase I had to think about. I think it was money well spent. I've already spent 6hrs today playing around with it. I got a full character, and a good portion of a ruined alter room textured. Can I sell it? No. I wouldn't anyway because it was a personal challenge and just for practice. I'm so satisfied I've already planned to start putting aside a little bit of each contract sale (or maybe crank out some models for TurboSquid or the Unity Asset store) so I can buy a full license after the Beta.
Just thought I'd chime in with another view on this issue, and I wish you luck in your game development.
erm... 2 + 2 = 7.3
Did you mean to say 2000?
$600 is actually quite a bit for a pure texture painting application with a game asset focus. The pipeline for this kind of art often requires many tools to be used, it adds up. Usually the leading texture painting apps that are around the $700 price point also hit other parts of the pipeline, sculpting, uving, retopo..ect Game Artist generally dont work with the money wasting budgets associated with film and tv... so much of it is about knowing your target audience.
For the most part I agree with the rest of what you said. A lot of these skills learned carry across multiple apps, getting better at art in one app usually means leveling up as an artist across all apps and mediums.
When cash comes in, hopefully it comes in, then buy a license. This happens all the time and is completely fine if you just honor your own promise and respect the industry, and your own business. That is, if you get paid from the project, buy the software and balance out the karma within a reasonable time.
Nobody is going to sue anyone. Allegorithmic won't discover that you used the program on a commercial project! You're an existing paying customer and indie developer. Allegorithmic wants you to succeed. "Allegorithmic sues its own customers" won't be a hacker news story any time soon. :-)
The price point isn't as bad when you're earning money from your software/games/. When you have cash, you might even be tempted to buy Mari :-)
p.s it's probably not possible to officially endorse the above, but life's too short to be official all the time.
Sorry to see that our EULA / licensing policies generate that much confusion / potential issues with you guys. With our previous tools, and as OvenBaked just said very well, we always had that unofficial-but-tacite level of flexibility that would allow for an indy to actually utilize the Non Commercial license for its job, or during the preparation phase of a game before it is released / published.
It has been a tacite agreement, but I realize it should have been made more clear indeed. So, we are currently working on the EULAs (for all our tools) to reflect that we are fine with indy developers to use the NC version, as long as their annual income related to the tool does not exceed 10,000 dollars (we have to put a hard line here for the legalese to mean anything). And no limit when it comes to income coming from selling assets on the Steam Workshop.
I hope this will make things more clear, and I surely hope you find the tool good/fun enough to integrate your pipeline, whether it is for pleasure of texturing mastery or for actually generating some income and/or working on the next big huge game success :)