Recent content by Imaro

Eh... in the software world that's actually pretty quick turnaround for something they didn't originally plan to implement.

This seems like pure speculation... as well as being highly irregular in the art market... but hey anything is possible, I guess.

Yes but the way you phrased it was like DP would somehow be paying the artists more because of this deal... when in fact hat ship sailed when the contracts for the corebook were signed.

I'm pretty sure DP owns the art in their core rulebook.... so do you mean DP getting reimbursed for what they paid their artists originally? Or... they want to make a profit above and beyond what the normal HeroForge model can sustain. That seems like the simplest answer, but until a statement...

I'm curious... what IP is actually being used? Again, frog people, monkey people and even fungus people were all available before this partnership. It seems like all this partnership did was allow them to section of a chunk of assets in order to add extra cost to them...

What do you mean by company specific models... DP doesn't own the rights to frog-people, monkey-people or fungus-people... the older models for these were included in the subscription... I'm not sure what makes this a new type of product... it's the same type of assets they produce regularly...

Simplistic take is simplistic... and whether you agree with why your consumer base is mad or not it's probably something you should take a long hard look at. HF has created a community through it's sub service where builds, mods, different tricks, etc. are shared and used by the members with...

They are new versions... there were frog-men (DnD has them) and monkey-men (DnD has them) and fungus/plant-men (DnD has them) originally included in the sub, along with numerous other species. Lately HF has been updating the models offered in their sub for better prints, details, etc..., but...

Yeah I get that, but from @Reynard 's earlier posts... he didn't understand why people were irritated and/or against HF & DP using a sub + micro-transaction model... He then first presented Fortnite (Which is free to play but uses microtransactions) and then WoW as (positive??? or maybe...

Yep... you can't even use the assets to create a virtual mini and see if you like the way it looks without buying the pack first.

No imposing anything... hoping you weren't assuming something, but ok, I'll just ask... why bring WoW up in the discussion?

Yes and just like WoW the model isn't accepted and/or celebrated by all... what exactly is your point? EDIT: I hope it's not to claim Blizzard is somehow a paragon to hold up for being pro-consumer or even consumer neutral... because that is laughable.

Fortnite doesn't have you paying a subscription... it's the combination that people don't like... and chalking it up to "people just don't like change." is purposefully ignoring (belittling??) what the actual issue is.

I'd say sectioning off specific assets and adding a micro-transaction fee on top of the subscription fee (especially when both monkey and frogs were previously included in said subscription) qualifies as worse service to enrich investors at the expense of customers... I can also understand why...

What new features are you receiving for the payment? I was under the impression this was paying for assets... which is exactly what the sub is supposed to cover...