Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5280633" data-attributes="member: 22779">The difference being, when you have a VTT package, you HAVE to create the DM's version first.&nbsp; It's not that the DM is getting a value added Player version, the player's are getting a stripped down DM's version.Instead of 30 bucks and 10 bucks, why not 10 for everyone?&nbsp; Is it worth the extra 20 bucks from 1 user?&nbsp; How much profit is actually being seen here.With your Microsoft example, MS doesn't actually have to create a fully featured version first.&nbsp; They can create the basic version and then add to it.&nbsp; But, a player only version of a VTT is useless without a DM's version.&nbsp; In other words, you cannot use the VTT until someone ponies up the DM's version.&nbsp; Compared to Windows where everyone can run their programs to their hearts content.&nbsp; If I get the Pro version of Windows, I gets added benefits.&nbsp; The DM's version does not.And, again, it's not the money.&nbsp; It could be 3 cents and 1 cent.&nbsp; I wouldn't care.&nbsp; It's a principle thing.&nbsp; Why should one user be forced to pay extra without gaining anything?&nbsp; Without that one user, no game will be played at all.I just don't understand why the basic VTT isn't fully featured.&nbsp; EVERY license should be the DM's version.&nbsp; And, from an economic point of view, if the player license is 10 bucks, then the full version should likely be the same.&nbsp; You're not gaining anything by adding twenty bucks to the DM's version.&nbsp; Only a small fraction of your userbase actually pays that.&nbsp; The additional money is pretty much a drop in the bucket.Or, put it another way, 1 DM + 4 players is a minimum 50 bucks in FG currently.&nbsp; Would losing the twenty bucks from the one DM not be paid back by other people running their own games?Isn't the goal here to get as many people as absolutely possible running games?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5280633, member: 22779"] The difference being, when you have a VTT package, you HAVE to create the DM's version first. It's not that the DM is getting a value added Player version, the player's are getting a stripped down DM's version. Instead of 30 bucks and 10 bucks, why not 10 for everyone? Is it worth the extra 20 bucks from 1 user? How much profit is actually being seen here. With your Microsoft example, MS doesn't actually have to create a fully featured version first. They can create the basic version and then add to it. But, a player only version of a VTT is useless without a DM's version. In other words, you cannot use the VTT until someone ponies up the DM's version. Compared to Windows where everyone can run their programs to their hearts content. If I get the Pro version of Windows, I gets added benefits. The DM's version does not. And, again, it's not the money. It could be 3 cents and 1 cent. I wouldn't care. It's a principle thing. Why should one user be forced to pay extra without gaining anything? Without that one user, no game will be played at all. I just don't understand why the basic VTT isn't fully featured. EVERY license should be the DM's version. And, from an economic point of view, if the player license is 10 bucks, then the full version should likely be the same. You're not gaining anything by adding twenty bucks to the DM's version. Only a small fraction of your userbase actually pays that. The additional money is pretty much a drop in the bucket. Or, put it another way, 1 DM + 4 players is a minimum 50 bucks in FG currently. Would losing the twenty bucks from the one DM not be paid back by other people running their own games? Isn't the goal here to get as many people as absolutely possible running games? [/QUOTE]

Verification