Blender Foundation releases Attract and Flamenco.

#21

Hi CerberusC,

Seems that we agree to disagree :slight_smile:

I wish i would have the time to answer all the points. But with this wall of text i can just grab a few important points.

That’s wrong. You have full access and can modify the source code of Unreal in any way you want. For a fact, that’s the definition of open source.

On the contrary, the so called open source GPL license from the FOSS arsenal is one of the most limiting licenses around. Where is my freedom as a developer to add the code that i really need? In Unreal you can happily add any proprietary code you want. The trouble starts when you try to add so called free code under an open source license. GPL is imho a nasty license. For a fact: The source code of Unreal is more free than the Blender GPL code.

[quote=]
Secondly, the free version of Unity is limited both in licensing and features, something that don’t happen with Blender and with that free
version you can’t access the source code so… not the same again.[/quote]
I still disagree. You can access the BASE version of Blender for free as you can access the BASE version of Unity for free. Blender as it is now is limited in feature set as Unity Free is limited in feature set. You can do everything with both. You don’t have to buy anything for both. But in Blender you have to buy the cloud and the addons at Blender Market to get access to the rest. And in Unity you have the asset store. There is imho absolutely no difference.

[quote=]Now regarding the secon paywall, the paid addons… yes… you may want an specific tool that suits your specific needs, but that specific
tool is not done by the Blender Foundation or by the Blender team at
all, this specific tool is done by a guy in his home, or by a studio in
their offices, and they may choose to release it for free or not, it is
their decission, so you may argue with them about this, or you may try
to tell THEM to release it for free, but don´t mix this with Blender or
BF itself.[/quote]
That’s wrong. The Blender Market has a clause that so and so many per cent of the sold addons goes into Blender Development. Blender Market and BF are directly connected. And this means you will not see the features of those addons any soon in Blender trunk. BF will for sure not want to loose the money they generate here.

That’s wrong. The GPL license doesn’t forbit monetizing source code. Guess what the addons at the blender market are doing. Those addons are under GPL. It would be a simple decision to hide the source code from the public. And give it just away at request and at customers that paid money for the product before.

They could also start to sell addons instead of giving them away for free. And they do, with the cloud subscription. Here we are again at the pay to win business model.

[quote=]
Finally, please, can you name those addons that you think are completely fundamental to have a full toolset of production ready features inside
Blender[/quote]
The tree addon for example. Or the muscle system. Or … what about all of them ? :slight_smile:

Then let me repeat it: Blender is business nowadays, not longer non commercial. And i dislike this direction. That’s all. And i simply hope that Blender doesn’t walk too much into this direction.

Kind regards

Tiles

#22

@Tiles
You keep saying you “have to” buy into the cloud, and when you do not, to me it sounds as if you feel that it turns you into a second-grade Blender citizen somehow? What does the Blender Cloud offer that makes you think so?

As for your “BASE” version argument: a “BASE” version of Blender does not exist. Just ‘Blender’. Cinema4D’s business model, for example, is very different and Maxon does offer a ‘base’ version. There is no “limited” feature set in Blender, because commercial add-on developers have nothing to do with the Blender Foundation (also see below).
I would agree with you If ‘essential’ Add-ons or a different more capable version of Blender were developed by BF separately from Blender AND sold by BF through the Blender Cloud/shop - but that is simply not the case.

All add-ons on the Blender market are put there by individuals/small teams who do this independently from BF.

What is more, your “second paywall” argument in regards to the Blender Market falls flat on its face when we realize that CG Cookie is the company behind the Blender market, and they have, as far as I am aware, no official ties at all with the Blender Foundation. Only official BF sites may carry the Blender logo, and the Blender Market does not. CG Cookie, and therefore the Blender Market, is an INDEPENDENT commercial company.
It is stated at the bottom of the page: “The Blender Market is a project from the humans at CG Cookie.”
( Find out more about the people behind the company here: https://cgcookie.com/what-is-cgcookie )

CG Cookie is a company located in Geneva, and they have become a (NOT ‘the’) main sponsor of Blender’s development. The way this works is UP TO THE ADD-ON SELLERS: their sellers decide whether they want to sponsor the Blender Foundation with a contribution of up to 30%, or not. Products on the Blender market that do so are indicated with a heart. CG Cookie motivates their add-on sellers to sponsor Blender’s development. They even go as far as stating this:

“It is important to support and show love for the Blender Development Fund, and this is reflected in the sites layout and design”

You can’t define a commercial company’s add-on market place as a “paywall” to additional Blender functionality when that company has no official ties at all with the Blender Foundation. That makes little sense. Blender Market is run by a separate company that just happens to fund Blender development through its sellers. And that is all there is to that.

EDIT I do agree with you that Blender has matured, and is making good progress into studios and “mainstream” projects. That also means more professionalism, and yes, more paid-for add-ons. Blender is no longer the 2.46 lone rebel with a rebel community. Do I like this? Yes, I do. Things change - that is just how it is. Changes are just changes.

#23

Hey Hvandevegen,

What does the Blender Cloud offer that makes you think so?

The same things that are listed as an argument to rent the cloud when downloading Blender. +100s hours of tutorials,Textures & HDRIsCharacter RigsShot & Render Management, Image Sharing within Blender. All of that plus much more for only $9,99/month. Pay to win :slight_smile:

As for your “BASE” version argument: a “BASE” version of Blender does not exist. Just ‘Blender’.

Indeed. There is also no base version of Unity. Just the free version without any technical limits. But for both exists an asset store (plus the cloud in Blender) where you can extend the functionality a lot. Which makes the Unity Free version a base version for selling the functionality in the asset store. And makes Blender a base version for selling the functionality from the asset store. Well, maybe it’s really just me, and maybe i exxaggerate a bit here, but i can simply see no difference anymore.

What is more, your “second paywall” argument in regards to the Blender Market falls flat on its face when we realize that CG Cookie is the
company behind the Blender market, and they have, as far as I am aware,
no official ties at all with the Blender Foundation.

Again, they spend a fixed percent of the earned money from the addons to BF. And you name it, they are sponsors for the Blender development. And some of the folks are not only sponsors, but also Blender developers. That’s a fat connection i would say, and what i would call a conflict of interest.

Note that i don’t even think of it as a bad thing. It attracts users and developers the same time. But the Blender market is simply the asset store for Blender. That’s my opinion at it.

their sellers decide whether they want to sponsor the Blender Foundation with a contribution of up to 30%, or not.

So this one is opt in? I stand corrected. I thought this one is automatically. Thanks :slight_smile:

EDIT I do agree with you that Blender has matured, and is making good progress into studios and “mainstream” projects. That also means more professionalism, and yes, more paid-for add-ons. Blender is no longer the 2.46 lone rebel with a rebel community. Do I like this? Yes, I do. Things change - that is just how it is. Changes are just changes.

Yeah. Just that i dislike this change since it cuts me off from the commercial addons now ^^

Blender had one big selling point. It was free, including the whole periphery. And now this selling point starts to vanish. And Blender gets into the trouble that it needs to compete with the commercial solutions. It became a commercial solution.

Which raises the question, when i have to buy periphery to get Blender somehow production ready, why not spend a few more bucks to get one of the much more powerful industry solutions instead? We talk about business here. Blender has still a pipeline problem. There is still no useful particle simulation available. No substitute for addons like Forester. The bones system is aged. No PBR workflow yet (this one luckily arrives with Eevee, yay). And so on.

As much as i love Blender, it is crossing thin ice here. It is simply not nearly as powerful as their fans thinks it is. I have seen quite a few Autodesk users heavily and angrily moaning about Autodesk, trying alternatives like Blender with the will to even make big trade offs just to escape Autodesk, and then coming back to Autodesk since they did not get their things done.

It reminds me about the Linux story a bit. Where its fans also declares this year to the year where Linux will finally overtook the desktop. Since 30 years. I hear the same from Blender and the industry since 15 years now ^^

Kind regards

Reiner

#24

I was going to respond, but I feel we just have very different views. Let’s agree to disagree :slight_smile:

Cheers Tiles! Best of luck to your BforArtists branch.

#25

Heh, i thought the same, but did respond then. Sorry bout that ^^

All the best to you and your projects too :slight_smile:

#26

Same thing here XD

I think we just have very different ways of looking at the Blender ecosystem, so that si all, we agree to disagree and everybody is happy :slight_smile:

Cheers guys!