Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
I think other people have given the answer as to why selling the software is a losing business model in this game - fragmentation is the problem, and you end up with customers on multiple versions. Which means you are selling to a smaller group with any one item. As far as other businesses selling 3D content for DAZ, yes that is obviously going to happen. Of course vendors connected with DAZ will always have tools the other vendors will not have. So how many sites outside of DAZ sell HD versions of the models? There's a reason for that you know.
The Pro versions of DAZ, 3.0 and up primarilly were for the Content Creator Tools, you didn't need those unless you were creating your own content. Could DAZ go back to charging for those with a fully functional free version for everybody else? Sure, but since those items have to be created for the program to be useful to start with, why start charging the PA's a tax? DAZ probably really doesn't care if Poser is around, what they care about is building up their own business, and this business model is working.
The bigger the user community gets, the more people there are to buy content, and that's the business DAZ is in. No Rendo, DNA and the like aren't going to go away, they're just going to shift focus. And I don't think Poser is going to go away so much as find its next owner who hopefully will do better by it.
Good points, but in the case of 4.8 (as an example), it was out in beta for months, more than enough time for competors to get cracking, if they chose to. The advantage you speak of is nearly meaningless if Daz is willing to publicly demonstrate their new version. I suppose they could counter that by having shorter public betas, or only have a closed beta test, but neither seems a step in the right direction.
I have to get back to doing real work now, but just remember that competition is what serves customer long-term. This is why patents expire after 20 years. Without Poser as a competitor -- even a feeble one -- the nature of the marketplace changes, and never to the advantage to us customers. Sorry for those who cannot see this, but it's simple everyday business. It happens frequently, and the result is predictable.
Nor do I, really, but my main interest was to remind people that a HEALTHY market needs Poser, regardless of their feelings towartd Daz. Hopefully it'll be a robust Poser, with new features, and a renewed focus on stability. Some PAs may not like that, having to support two programs again, but that's just too bad.
Beyond that Daz has always had the best quality content with the tightest QA and the best return policy, unless they toss out those core business practices (highly unlikely) they will still be the market leader no matter how much half-assed content is whipped up and put on the other competing sites because it doesn't take long to realise it's a gamble if something works properly and you have no recourse at the other sites beyond contacting the maker and asking for help/refund/fix.
Unbiased renderer, yes, according to the latest word on the upcoming Poser 11. But not iray, something called "SuperFly" based on Blender's Cycles. Dunno if any other requested features like more cross-platform compatibility will make the cut, but we Poserites live in hope.
While (for some of us, anyway) trying to learn DS, whenever it and our hardware, decide to cooperate.
Studio is always being upgraded with new features, whether its called beta, alpha, public build etc. Their new version is always the current version. It is constantly evolving. No need to mark it as a 2016 release or Pro or some set version name. If they eventually get to the no.5 they will, but that has no impact on their business. It's not like Studio needs a 5 to get people interested in it. They could have made the Iray release version no.5, but would that have made any difference? It's just a number. If it was a selling program then yes, version numbers are important strictly from a marketing perspective.
I think DAZ will go the way of Adobe and move to a subscription service which will include the latest version of its software, cloud Iray rendering, and other services like the current PC club which it will replace. If you don't join you just use the old versions of DAZ Studio like some of us are using the old versions of Photoshop.
I don't see much of a future with Poser unless they retool to be compatible with the newer DAZ figures.
Well I think a subscription for a service like Iray cloud rendering is more viable, but I don't think they will do that for the app itself as long as content sales is paying the bills.
They go subscription with Studio itself and i am out. I absolutley loath that Adobe forced that one us. If i'm going to pay for software I darn well better OWN it. That ranks right up there with those game companys that want you to have an online connection to play a single player game, just no.
What does this have to do with the current conversation?
Innovation is fueled by healthy competition. I see no reason why Poser needs to be it.
Among other things, the different content providers provide another form of competition.
Or other bits of software with similar costs.
If you were trying to make my point, you just did.
A business model where you keep enabling others to compete against you can't last forever. Having Poser in the mix has allowed the other players to carve niche and specialty markets. Kept them at bay. If Poser is out, the competitors will go after the remaining platform with both barrels. That's the only thing they CAN do. And to think, Daz made all that healthy competition possible!
No, they won't change their business model, even though the 3D market has changed all around them. Yeah, right.
If the idea of no longer releasing Poser-native content was to "encourage" users to switch to DS, well it worked for me. I switched to DS because the quality Daz content was not usable without the stupid DSON bridge. And Genesis 3 was unusable altogether. And because of Iray of course. So for several good reasons I guess.
It wasn't.
I just want to point out.... that competition has always been prevalent. When it was largely poser content we were all making, DAZ managed to build DAZ Studio and perfect it to boot. So I dont think its going to result in diminished sales for DAZ. While I cant say I know for certain it would never happen, I think its pretty unlikely that DAZ would start pricing their software, since this marketing strat works so well.
As far as the topic itself goes... I can only echo what everyone else has said. I started out a Poser person... and ended up a DAZ Studio person. And Ive not regretted that decision. I know that its disappointing for some.... but can you imagine how difficult it is to support apps that are as different as night and day? Its like being a windows person, and trying to use a mac. When the sales were really viable, it made it worth that effort. Sadly, the sales dont reflect that anymore. I hung onto poser for ages. But at some point, the reality of it all sets in, and u do what u gotta do.
lol as if we are forced to do so. Its entirely optional what we choose to support. Poser could come out with something thats totally amazeballs.... and I could still refuse to support both. Thats the beauty of freedom.... there is no "have to"
I hope that DAZ will support poser formats in the future
I hope that Poser will support DAZ formats in the future !
I'm a Poser user, and I just spent a fair bundle in the PA sale, including Stonemason's Streets of Old London.
A few things keep me visiting the site and buying:
1. There's a tonne of Poser compatible stuff in the back catalogs, and I still have a huge wishlist full of it. There's no way I could afford everything I might want. :D
2. I use the DSON importer script for Genesis figures, and when I don't feel like doing that, I export them from DS and convert to a Poser friendly format (either CR2 or OBJ).
3. I'm totally willing to take a chance on converting/importing products by vendors that I know make outstanding quality products. I would probably have purchased the SM London set even without the OBJ's being available. But making them available erased any doubt in my mind that I could make the set work for me. And it does. I exported the entire set from DS as FBX and then imported it into Poser. A couple of the buildings have 2 or 3 warped polys. It's rarely noticeable, but if it should become an issue in a render, I know I can fix it by importing the OBJ's and scaling/positioning them where the imperfect FBX imported ones now sit. Other than that, I'll need to add some shaders here and there. But otherwise, it works for me.
My point is that I don't expect vendors to make a completely Poser compatible product if it's not worth it to them. But if they *can* include a package of just the OBJ's for architectural/nature/prop accessory type things, then users like me will know that the product can be used in Poser with confidence.
Really, the only thing I personally need is to know whether a product can be successfully converted for use in Poser by exporting from DS. If a vendor doesn't even own Poser, obviously they can't test this, and I wouldn't expect them to. But if they are able to include OBJ's with the DS package, that's all *I* need. :)
So... a big thank you to Stefan for doing that. I absolutely LOVE the set!
(And while I'm at it, a big thank you to those vendors who continue to offer fully compatible Poser versions. Or who continued, in any case, for as long as they could. Because even if they aren't doing so now, they'll still get some of my $$ as I shop the back catalog.)
Well, exactly! If not, eventually the content technology and availability will fall too far behind, and even I will make the switch. I haven't yet because I cannot get a good render out of DS to save my life, and without an Nvidia gcard, LRay is far too slow for my taste. At *some* point I'll be buying a new rendering machine, and I may wave goodbye to Poser at that time. The enormous drop in the Canadian dollar this year stopped me from upgrading my hardwear because I still can't buy a better machine than the one I bought two years ago without spending about 50% *more* than I did then. Eventually, that will change, I hope. LOL. We'll just have to see where Poser's at by then, I suppose.
There's a lot of in vacuo theorising going on, would the armchair CEOs turn their thoughts elsewhere please.
You are still assuming competition where there really is none.
The market for poser items is drying up, that is seen clearly by us PA's, and is also becoming evident as other marketplaces carry more and more d/s only products. Are those other marketplaces competition for daz?
Not really, Daz can survuve without those other marketplaces. Daz has a very strong marketing department that is constantly working to expand the customer base, and has been doing so with great success. Daz does not get any revenue from the other marketplaces, so there is nothing about them that Daz can take into consideration for their continued success. You can only factor in variables which you have control over. Daz has no control over them, so they cannot base their business on them.
Several years ago Daz learned very clearly how dangerous it was for their business to be dependant on outside elements for their own success. That was when poser had its first near-death experience before being bought by SM. Then it looked alot like poser was going to die, and then Daz would have gone with them if they didn't do something. So since then they learned that the only way to make a solid future for themselves is to be truely independant and in complete control over their own future growth. With this they have done very well and are only getting stonger.
Other marketplaces do not even come on their radar for such things, because it is irrelevant.
What's amusing about this is how analogous the situation is to other stuff.
For example, Velvet Goblin's comment about back catalog is a lot like my attitude about G3 -- even if all producers stopped producing anything compatible with prior generations (which they won't, because even if you discount figures, morphs, and clothes, props/vehicles/environments/shaders are figure-agnostic), there are probably close to 1000 items already in the shop I'd like to get around to buying some day.
Second, for all the gamers, this is reminding me SO MUCH of D&D 3e's OGL and related arguments.
I play Pathfinder.
D&D 3e's OGL
I do not know what any of the above abbreviations mean. The only D&D I have heard of is Dungeons and Dragons
I'll try to keep the off-topic brief. ish.
Dungeons and Dragons third edition came out in 2000. With it came a dramatic and amazing thing... Open Game License. ANYONE could publish D&D material, compatible with D&D, so long as they included the license and a certain amount of THEIR material free for other people.
Also, the core rules were available online for free.
The result was that D&D, already the 800 lb gorilla of RPGs, pulled the entire industry into it's mighty gravitational pull. Everyone was rushing to put out compatible material -- it meant your small game idea had a much greater chance of reaching a wider market than before, and people could be familiar with the basic system already. It also made it a lot easier to create or write for D&D. I was a freelance writer for 3e stuff, and being able to use whatever skills and familiarity I gained in one company with stuff in another company was a huge plus.
However, there were several potential problems. There was no quality control, so a lot of stuff was shovelware, just... really horribly written/thought-out stuff flooding the market.
Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro (who own D&D) had limited control of their brand. People came out with things like 'Book of Erotic Fantasy' and if WotC didn't like that, tough.
Paizo is a game company that made it big making modules and adventures, and they really thrived under 3e, producing some of the best campaign books. Shackled City is a huge 416 page book that is a massive adventure series going from level 1-20.
With fourth edition, WotC rather dramatically decided to go back to their traditional licensing -- the OGL was DONE. They couldn't stop people from doing stuff with 3e (OGL is forever), but no more. They then dragged their feet about third party licensing.
Paizo faced a big problem. Could they keep making modules under 4e? It was a big departure, system-wise, from previous stuff. And WotC kept waiting and waiting and waiting about exactly what permission people would have to produce compatible material.
Eventually, Paizo decided the dramatic break... they made their own variant form of 3e. Very open to all, just like other forms of 3e.
WotC had created a monster, basically. Paizo's Pathfinder was at least as popular as 4e; the changes 4e had made didn't really please a fair number of people, and the way a lot of business stuff had been handled had incurred some bad blood. Paizo was cutting into WotC's market share.
One could conclude either: never make stuff open and let other people take your market share; once you open everything up, KEEP everything opened up.
(D&D is now on 5e. I'm not sure how it's doing, but Pathfinder is still going strong)
One could cast Daz3d in the role of Paizo in the above scenario. And I would argue the second lesson... once everything is open and permeable, KEEP it that way, or you are likely to be cutting your own throat.
You had to ask !!!!
3rd edition game rules under the Open Game License
LOL
Thanks Timmins. Good job I did not ask for the long answer!