Sorry your browser is not supported!

I think that whould be a GREAT idea for FPS Creator. It defanatly makes me consider the product more.

1) Do you feel there is a 'sense of ownership' in having to pay for a product vs. getting it for free?

If I purchase a product, I expect a certain level of quality to be maintained as well as it actually doing what the people selling it (company or retailer) have claimed it will.

I think one of the worst purchases I feel I've made in the last year was Corel Painter. As while it is by far the best art software I've ever used, it's so unstable under Windows that quite frankly I never have it running long enough to have ever finished a peice of work yet. Technical support never seem to want to know (if they even bother to respond) or they just tell me that there is a patch comming soon.

In the end I've felt like I've waisted A LOT of time and money on something that while looks good on paper was never able to deliver it - particularly for the professional uses I'd purchased it for.

On the flip-side I've had just as much trouble with Paint .NET, and while I can be guarenteed someone who is working on the project will listen to what I say about it; it was free so I feel like I can either take it as-is or leave it. More so given the source is open as well, so if I ever feel really strongly about something I can always try my hand at doing it myself.

2) Does this 'ownership' make you feel any more or less loyal to a brand, or do you find there is a price point below which it doesn't make any difference?

I will feel loyal to a brand dependant on how much I enjoy using it. I've used Borland C Builder and Visual C++, both of which cost for professional use... both provide their own add-ons to the C++ language while supporting the core functionality.

I side with Visual C++, not because it's Microsoft but because it's a damn sight easier to use and much friendlier to do anything in.

3) Would a 'tiered product' structure appeal? Taking DarkBASIC as an example - a free version could offer you the core basics for game making, but all games have a pop-up screen at the end. A 'bronze' version does away with this. A 'silver' version adds in lots more 3D functions / features, perhaps shader support. A 'gold' version allows commercial release of your games, plus various other features (these are all just hasty examples, but I hope you get the idea) - does this alienate or interest you?

I personally love Microsoft's idea of their Express, Standard and Professional versions of their software.
It allows everyone to use their software without having to fork out money in order to even try it.

I think that while trials are a good way of demonstrating a project, we are now moving into an era in the development communities where 30-days to try something is just not enough and placing restrictions on what you can do doesn't really help to show off the potencial of the product.

Personally I think that the best route to take given the market with this sort of thing would be a 3-Tier System... but not only for the developers but users as well.

Let's use Half-Life 2 and Steam for the example on how this would work. The tools to develop a mod for Half-Life 2 are provided free when you purchase Half-Life 2.

So let's say that Bronze Subscription provides this feature. You're able to develop, but you can only run what's developed IF you also own a copy of Half-Life 2. This would also extend to anything added later, let's say a new weapon in Episode 1. If someone used that new weapon then without Episode 1 you wouldn't be able to run the mod created.

Silver Subscription, would however allow you to export you're mod so that anyone can use it provided they have Steam. So it'll appear as it's own game no longer requiring Half-Life 2; but it'll still rely on the Half-Life 2 libraries to be pre-loaded to run.

Gold Subscription, would basically allow people to create their own executables using the Half-Life 2 engine which they can then sell to whichever publisher they wanted or however they wanted.

In a nut-shell each subscription would basically only limit what is available for people to export for, and play. In the same breath though even the Bronze level would allow people to develop with anything provided they've preloaded each of the add-ons.

So basically what I'm saying is:
Bronze (free) = Development Only
Silver (not free) = Develop and Use
Gold (not free) = Develop, Use and Export

I also believe that having it as a subscription service, would also really bolster support. I mean many people pay for Xbox Live! you know that a yearly subscription entitles you to certain things, over the free account.

So support for example would only be open to subscribers, but the forums would be open to all. I honestly would believe that such a system would be well accepted, provided it could be achieved without any major issues.

Doing it through a Steam-like application would also allow users to get constant updates, and provide better security against piracy. Obviously a non-digital, service would come with the ability to activate without being online.. but digitally would provide a good base for whatever the company can provide.

It would also mean that as long as the product was capable of keeping peoples interests it would just grow while providing a central hub for all of the development community.

I mean there are number of ideas there, to what could work and what might not. Development-wise, I think a free version that will provided everyone with every single add-on released if only for development means would be a very good idea. I also think that anyone who purchases the product digitally or physically being given the ability to have access to certain things the free users can't would provide incentive to purchase atleast the base product, if not more. Lastly I believe a premium subscription service that allows users to download and use the tools for as long as they're subscribing would also provided an added incentive to become a loyal users.

Lower prices also provide more incentive for more customers which means that overall profits would go up provided that the incentive price wasn't too low as to really make it pointless selling the product.

As I said, I'm sure that not all the ideas would be feasible or work well all together; but I think the core idea would be something many people would be very interested in, if it went ahead.

No, it might be easier for people to decide if they want to stay with the product or not because there's a free verison, but it would only make it harder for everyone else. It would be hard to keep track of upgrades and which tier they go to, or what tiers need different bug fixes. It would be a waste of time to worry about what to put in each tier. Besides, if you can program you can be sure that Dark Basic Classic or Pro is going to be well worth the money. The trial verison is the only tier needed, there's enough tutorials out there to teach someone to program and they will probably want to buy the full verison once they've had a taste of what it's like.



I don't think that's a good idea. You can get a very good idea of what the products are like here on the forums. Even though I only have 1 of them I can get a pretty good picture of what the other ones are like. For a long time I had been programming in QBASIC, and I thought that making a 3d game was a pipe dream, until I found this site. I knew Dark Basic Pro was what I needed and expected it to be very expenive, if it was free I would have suspected that the features were very highly exaggerated.

Also, when I pay for something, I will usually stay with it. It is a waste of money to buy something and not use it, so if a product is free not many people would take the time to learn how to use the software, they would just fool around with it.



I don't think many people would explore further beacuse anthing that is free ususally isn't very good. If something is expensive and there's a huge list of features and lots of recommendation for it then a lot more people would buy it.



All bug fixes and enchancments for the core product should be free. Enchancments keep everyone interested, it could be easy to get bored with game creation software that never has anything new. I do think that the expansion packs should be priced, though. I like that the expanision packs give you lots of help with narrow topics. Like, if you are bad at math you would buy EZ rotate, or if you aren't good at AI you could buy Dark AI, or if you don't know how to model you would buy Dark Matter. You can buy an expansion pack for your weakest area and greatly improve the games you make.

I spent like $60 on DBC and $80 on Pro. A little expensive for software in my opinion, but the product was worth the price because of how much I used it. I think DBC came out when I was around 16 or so. That far back, my alternatives at the time was spending the next few years learning C++ and DX, which at the time wasn't the dominating graphics platform it is today, or spend money and get coding right away with an awsome sphere on a matrix demo!

Would I have spent that much now that I'm closing in on my mid-20's? Probably not. I've been moving towards learning more marketable languages like Java. But it was a good hobby when I was in HS and some years after. Because I think DB is a larger target for younger people it should have a lower price, just for the sake of helping them afford something to keep their interest in computers.

I like the idea of a tiered system. I bet most of the people who've bought DB weren't programmers already. And for some people that are interested in programming, price can decide whether you wanna risk seeing how long you'll stick with it.

Unlike Jeku and Philip, I'm sure I would've invested time if DB was free. Before it came around I was real big into the whole QB scene.

1.I do get a sense of ownership when I pay for software.As for free software anyone can have and there is no sense of ownership. I didn't have to work and save for it.
2.As to loyal to a brand now that depends on a lot on the software.As long as I feel it is the best out there.I will keep buying newer versions.The price makes no difference on being loyal.
3.As for a tiered product structure.Great ideal but I think you will find out most people will buy the Gold version.I am only doing this as a hobby.I would still buy the gold version just so I would have all options on making a game.

it really doesent make a difference for me if i get something for free or not. the feeleng of owership is the same. but if there is a better version with more stuff out there, and i like doing whatever with the version i own, ill try to get my hads on the better version.

usually these kinds of things atre worth paying for

If the programs were free then I:
would get DBPro
think it would be a disaster
think it's silly
well it is silly!

I mean who would give away superfantastic products for £0?

Expansions for development tools are frustrating. I want to be able to buy the product once and be able to use all of it and without any limits in terms of what I can release.

Programming is about freedom of creativity, if a programming language does not let you do something because it's missing a bit that's not freedom.

If a language has a license agreement that prevents me from releasing something that is even worse.

If you are in the business of making tools for people to express themselves and their creative art, getting legal is the wrong way to go about it. The tool should work, and it should be complete.

Rich, why have you stopped responding through email? I hate to stalk you here, but I don't have much of a choice.

ya, sorta. especially if the program is good.



ya, i guess. if the product is good and cost a lot of money, i become loyal to the brand really easy.



the tiered product structure appeals to me -100%, yes, negative... products like these usually have very expensive 'gold' products(implying that i wont buy it) and they make me feel poor and insignificant to the other people who were lucky enough to obtain the gold... personally, i wouldnt like it that much if darkbasic comes to that in vista; if thats what u were thinking anyway....

I took time in think in diferrent options and that are me results:

-DarkBASIC Tourist: This is a FREE (non trial) version whit watemark, splash screen, logo, etc. Is functional and have a lot of thinks (but not all), and dont let commercial use.
Why I have called "Tourist"? Because works like a tourist. If you go to a country and like it, you would recomend to your friends that country.
Is the same. If you test a programing language and you like it, you will recommend to your friends.

-DarkBASIC Citizen: This is COMMERCIAL and you must pay. Paying you recieve a version whit more features, whiout any whatemark, and you cand do commercial use.
You are a citizien that live in a house at the DB city. You have more "sense of ownership".

Ok, Later you can buy addonds to your house ( More AI Feauteres, A Level Editor, A Shader Developer Tool, More physics functions, More Multiplayer functions, A Model Pack, etc.)
You buy it paying, like the DBP plugins.

-DarkBASIC Noble: You must be a DarkBASIC Citizien to buy this. This is a yearly subsbription (more more hight price). Whit this, you dont need to buy any addon to your house.
You will recibe free any addon /expansion that TGC makes (during the susbcription year).
This members can acces a private area. In that place can have more contact whit the TGC staff.
This create a full "sense of ownership".



As you said, Making a DB version the first Programming Language / Engine for Windows Vista will be very very very very great. I hope that comes very soon.

Well there is the honesty-in-advertizing issue. If software doesn't do what's advertized, that's probably some legal liability. On the other hand, it'd probably take an army of lawyers to carry that in court, not to mention that if that precedent was established, every EA game would be a huge liability for the company, so I'm probably not onto anything after all.

The whole tiered product sale approach does appeal to me. As to the ownership questions, yes, there is more of a sense of a) ownership and b) trust with something I pay for, but if a free product works right I'll come to love it just as much.

I've heard a lot of EA bashing here and on different forums, but are you saying every EA game doesn't do what's advertised? Please explain.

No, it was a generalization . I'm sure some fine titles come out of the company - i don't game on my PC anymore to really know what they've been doing lately apart from this BS, but I was speaking about their general tendancy to release games before they're ready, ala the latest Battlefield, sometimes before advertized things work at all.

That's more a downside of putting a game to market as quickly as possible. Worst case of this in gaming history was Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness.

It doesn't affect EA games more, but it might seem to given the sheer number that hit the market. Especially noticable in high-profile titles, such-as Battlefield2.

Personally have found myself playing games less, because all of this modern day spying and crap does have me a little irritated.
My computer is like my home, if I invite you in then by all means come in... but I don't want to wake up at 4am to find some advertisement agent drinking all of my Coke because he wants to know why I prefer it over Pepsi. Nor do I want the US Army to be putting bloody picketts up in my front yard demanding that I "JOIN TODAY".

I seriously believe that the Data Protection Act should be altered so we have more privacy on our own computers, also firmly believe that these EULA should NEED to be passed by a governed body in order they don't have ridiculous things in them.

I don't mind waving the right that someones software could potencially require me to reinstall my OS. I do however mind the fact that legally someone can demand $10 every day I use their software after accepting their EULA. Might not be ethical but it's still technically legal.. and stupid.

Don't even get me started on software that advertises to do something and then either doesn't do it, or has used a play on words, or have it there only under a 'technical' sense of it being there.

Software companies have Beta Testers... FFS USE THEM!
One thing I've always liked about Microsoft is, while sure they're software isn't going to win any stability awards; atleast it bloody does what it says on the box!

I would like some examples please, as I can investigate more. I don't play any EA games on PC, just console, and I can't think of one example where they release a game before advertised features are working. Not trying to annoy, but I honestly want to know!

I personally think gettign the core product free and then buying expansions would interest me the most and for sure I would buy expansions. This way, I think there would be a lto more interested as they could try out the features and use that for as logn as they want and then hopefully decide to buy expansions.

It is hard to answer these questions and not be biased.



For me sense of ownership is not based on price. I think it is more about quality and usefulness. I have downloaded VB.net express but spend very little time with it. The reason is that I like the easier to use programs such as DBP and another basic language for applications which I won't name as it is not important to the subject. These are both programs I bought; not only because they were inexpensive but because they were (IMO) easier to use.

That being said; I feel a sense of ownership with openoffice. It is free, but also it is the one I verbally promote and use and give away when I make freeware CD's for friends to fix thier computer systems.




My loyalty to Dark Basic (as an owner of Classic and Pro) is based on the forum and its user base. If this forum dried up tomorrow; I would probably find another alternative. The usefulness of this forum, and the people on here are the reason I purchased your products and would continue to use them. No matter how good the product, if I don't feel like it is supported. It tends to lose value to me. That is regardless of price point.

For the record; I used the trials but was unable to really do anything in the time period allowed. This was as much a lack of drive as time pressure, but I saw enough to know that this product had potential for me.



I think a free basic version is a good idea so people can learn the basics of game design before they are ready to run with advanced commands. The trick gets to be when your reach paid versions.
When I bought Classic; I was never happy that the enhancement pack (to use DLL's and Memblocks was an addition purchase for a product that had already been replaced by a newer and better version (DBP). I moved to DBP pretty quick but the enchancement issue still bothered me.
That is an issue that will be derived from a multi tier approach if you have different commands available in higher tiered products. Not to mention the forum issue of people not knowing which version created an app, when they try to help someone out.

I like the idea of a free version as I wait intently to see how you intend to make it work. I don't intend to buy Vista but will probably wind up with it anyway.

[Edit because I forgot about expansions.]
I think the expansion approach is a good one. There have been many usefull and needed expansions (which i don't have the money to buy now) that really expand and make DBP easier to use. As long as you don't cripple the base or core application to sell more expansions; I think I would be willing to buy them. If you cripple the functionality of the core. Then i feel you are robbing me. That won't get repeat customers or good word of mouth.

Saying that I could be comfortable with tiered approach as long as it makes sense and I don't feel like you are just doing a bait and switch. TGC has a pretty good rep (to me) and that is something that would be hard to repair.