Upgrade costs for Vray 5 / increase in the last 6 years

[Joelaff]

Sorry to say this: but this is just utter rubbish. You find the Collections or Bundles insulting? You find Black Friday insulting?

Sorry to say, but it is not at all rubbish.

Those are volume discounts and sale prices, which makes them irrelevant. They are applied the same to every customer, as they should be.

We are talking about charging different people different amounts. This is like charging people in EU one price and the US another price. That is wrong (even though it happens a lot). Or charging people who look one way one price and people who look another way a different price. Again, this is a wrong thing to do.

It punishes you for success. What kind of motivation is this?

Obviously, some people disagree with this sentiment. But I am not going to charge them more because of that.

[JezUK]

Let’s face it, the indie pricing of 3DS Max was introduced because of Blender (I believe v2.80 which at that time was quite significant).

Blender is here to stay and gaining traction by the minute, many are going that route and I can’t blame them.

Given a choice between a groaning piece of software which many moan about (and costs a lot), versus an exciting new kid on the block that’s going places, being developed at a white hot pace, (and is free)..... I think I too (were I young and fresh enough) would give the latter a very good look and try...

Much as though we all know what Autodesk are and have been historically, in this instance, i.e. Indie pricing of 3DS Max, their move *has* to be applauded. Hopefully it won’t be pulled by surprise once enough sardines have been netted....

Joelaff, I feel you hold an insular view that’s bereft of empathy of others. Being able to afford a piece of software does not imply you’re a talented 3D artist. I could argue it makes you talented in other areas.

And your credibility (10x what the heck, 6x.... semantics.... actually it’s 5x in my country) Is suspect.

Unlike yourself, I wouldn’t have any problem with those in less prosperous countries paying less for the same software as others - I’m sure there is plenty of awesome talent in those regions. Furthermore, Indie Pricing, I am *sure* would also go a long way in reducing the number of people downloading software illegally because they can’t afford it and have little choice - and that applies to all countries (once available, hopefully).

[PIXELBOX_SRO]

Sorry to say this: but this is just utter rubbish. You find the Collections or Bundles insulting? You find Black Friday insulting? If your business model wants to reach as many users as possible to penetrate the market for whatever price and makes you a profitable company than that is a good thing. If you miss the Indie pricing with 101K, well: either skip a bill or spend the 1K extra on a full subscription. The indie price is for a SINGLE person, not for a multi user company. With over 100K earnings I certainly won't mind to pay full price! I am from Europe: historically the pricing for Max over here has been far more expensive than US, as are many other products. Taling about fair business.

The existence of INDIE is unfair. Lets say youre a freelancer and you hit 95K revenue. You shoudl have enough money to cover the price of regular licence. Even if you hit 50K you should be able to pay it. Imagine a company or a studio during a bad year with earnings sub 100K...still having to pay full icence. Things just dont add up. Its all playing in favor of one group of customers the indie license. And totally unfair to studios.

So my conclusion is:
Indie should go.
Subscriptions shoudl be same for all and priced fairly and fair amounts. (unlike the different prices for US and EU)
Vray workstation licence price? fairt as it can be.
Vray render node price? this one is questionable. It seems high ATM.

[kosso_olli]

This thread got derailed. Anyway, this is the quintessence of this:

Vray render node price? this one is questionable. It seems high ATM.

Could not agree more.

[trick]

...It punishes you for success. What kind of motivation is this?...

NO: then you pay the normal price. You really think that by INDIE pricing succesful people stop earning more, when they reach the 100K barrier ?????? As it is now, freelancers are already "punished" with the new pricing and by being forced to upgrade within 2 release cycles, at least compared to how things went in the past. And that is really what this thread is about: if I did not read the forums I wouldn't have known that there was a new v5 and I need to upgrade my v3 license to be able to upgrade at all....within 2 weeks!!! ... and that in times when people have their heads in lots of different directions. THAT is not what CHAOS has been standing for in all these years...at least in my book!!! I did not upgrade because I current;y don't need v5 features at the offered price and I really like the collection pricing/options way more. This means my current perpetual license has come to an end, which on itself is a weird thing....but ala...so be it! Then I see a lot of competition coming from the EPIC front; compared to 3dsMax they ARE developing the modern way and FAST and it has resulted in more joy for work lately....So my head is turning in new directions too! Let's see how many people feel punished by an almost free app!

[dean_dmoo]

Let’s face it, the indie pricing of 3DS Max was introduced because of Blender (I believe v2.80 which at that time was quite significant).

Blender is here to stay and gaining traction by the minute, many are going that route and I can’t blame them.

Given a choice between a groaning piece of software which many moan about (and costs a lot), versus an exciting new kid on the block that’s going places, being developed at a white hot pace, (and is free)..... I think I too (were I young and fresh enough) would give the latter a very good look and try...

Much as though we all know what Autodesk are and have been historically, in this instance, i.e. Indie pricing of 3DS Max, their move *has* to be applauded. Hopefully it won’t be pulled by surprise once enough sardines have been netted....

Joelaff, I feel you hold an insular view that’s bereft of empathy of others. Being able to afford a piece of software does not imply you’re a talented 3D artist. I could argue it makes you talented in other areas.

And your credibility (10x what the heck, 6x.... semantics.... actually it’s 5x in my country) Is suspect.

Unlike yourself, I wouldn’t have any problem with those in less prosperous countries paying less for the same software as others - I’m sure there is plenty of awesome talent in those regions. Furthermore, Indie Pricing, I am *sure* would also go a long way in reducing the number of people downloading software illegally because they can’t afford it and have little choice - and that applies to all countries (once available, hopefully).

Tbh I have a similar view as Joe. And I don't think it comes from a lack of sympathy for others who are less fortunate or in regions with less money. Although if you check the list of countries where you can get the indie license they seem to all be richer ones anyway.

It's to do with an arbitrary rule to determine whether you can or can't buy the same product at a significantly cheaper price. Especially a product that I think we all consider way overpriced for the non indie version. As for the 10x statement and his credibility, I actually typed that but then realised I was comparing it to the AEC suite instead of the individual license so didn't post a number. We have the aec suites so not interested in the indie option, but this 100k limit is everywhere and really doesn't allow for natural scaling. Quixel has the same, either 100k as individual or 2mil for unlimited users. But what if you are with 2 or 3 people? Does that equal paying 10x as much? When potentially you might be making less profit than an individual at 100k.

If you are going to use a financial componant to divide customers you better take everything into account rather than an arbitrary number. We often get price offers from abroad for services, it was interesting to see one that had a cost of living at 40% but an image price at 70%. But theoretically they would also have a 100k limit, ignoring taxes as we are in a high taxrate country anyway their 100k would be 250k here...

Going back to vray I think the main point is that pricing seems too high for the nodes, especially if you have a lot of nodes.

The indie suggestions just limits this to a certain group while leaving the rest to pay the higher prices while at the same time creating regional distortions if not done fairly. I had a similar reaction when someone suggested paying per core for a rendernode. Great suggestion for xeon users. Its looking for individual solutions to an issue a larger group has.

[Joelaff]

Joelaff, I feel you hold an insular view that’s bereft of empathy of others. Being able to afford a piece of software does not imply you’re a talented 3D artist. I could argue it makes you talented in other areas.

Bereft of empathy? Not sure why you believe that. I can't afford a yacht. If I want a yacht for $10k, and you paid $5mil for the same yacht, and then you tell me that isn't right, does that make you bereft of empathy? Whuh?

Please don't make assumptions about my personal feelings. That actually is kinda rude, but I don't get easily offended; so no offense taken.


I never said that being able to pay more made you talented. I even made it clear in a second post that making a lot of money doesn't mean you are talented. There are lots of factors. Not sure where you got this, but this conclusion does not follow from my posts, nor was it intended.

And your credibility (10x what the heck, 6x.... semantics.... actually it’s 5x in my country) Is suspect.

I was just repeating what somebody else said above with the "10x". Shame on me for not looking it up myself. Mea Culpa. However, 6.18x vs. 10x is not a massive difference. I only worry when things exceed an order of magnitude. You may feel differently. Sorry if I misled anyone with the wrong multiplier.

Also, one mis-calculation (or rather lack of doing the calculation) does not influence any other arguments I make (WHO makes an argument has ZERO bearing on the validity of the argument-- Logic Fallacies 101), which is indeed the whole point, not the semantics of the EXACT price difference. If someone thinks paying 10x more is wrong they are still going to think paying 6.18x more is wrong (or 5x where you live).

Unlike yourself, I wouldn’t have any problem with those in less prosperous countries paying less for the same software as others - I’m sure there is plenty of awesome talent in those regions. Furthermore, Indie Pricing, I am *sure* would also go a long way in reducing the number of people downloading software illegally because they can’t afford it and have little choice - and that applies to all countries (once available, hopefully).

So... the pro users should pay more to prevent other people from pirating the software? We all pay more when people pirate software.

Also, please don't put words in my mouth. I never mentioned less prosperous countries. I was talking about pricing structured on income level (or revenue as is the case with AD).



I don't want to argue or make enemies, JezUK. None of this is meant to be personal, and if any of it comes across that way (to anyone) I apologize in advance. I think we can agree that some people like Indie pricing and others do not. The whole reason I spoke up was to let anyone from Chaos reading know that many people do not like Indie pricing for the reasons I and others have given.

It is clear that many people DO like Indie pricing, and think it is an important way to expand the user base, or perhaps to develop new talent. I see the advantage of being able to hire more freelancers at lower rates. But that means that all of us have lower rates. Maybe we were over payed to begin with. Of course with expenses going up (software overhead, inflation, etc.) lower rates don't help any of us. It will come back around. It's all ebb and flow.

All I ask is for a flat, even price for every user, period. If that is old fashioned so be it.

[glorybound]

I wonder if the game plan is to push people off of local render farms onto the Chaos cloud? I don't know, just a thought.

[francomanko]

The rendernode price is pretty crazy...would be a poor move if it was.

[Joelaff]

I wonder if the game plan is to push people off of local render farms onto the Chaos cloud? I don't know, just a thought.

I am seeing a big push for this from many places. I know Deadline is pushing for this. Of course AWS bought Thinkbox for this very reason.

I for one hate cloud rendering.

You place your reliance on the internet

You place your reliance on and YOU assume liability for your ISP, EVERY router between you and the server, the remote service, etc.

You have to pay per render. This means you naturally do fewer test renders and creativity/tweaking suffers as a result of trying to balance cost with creativity.

You start to do things that are "good enough." That is never good enough for me. No such thing.

No thank you to cloud rendering. Maybe cloud overpsill for big jobs you need done fast, but relying on cloud rendering is not a sound business decision IMO, unless the cloud service and your ISP, etc. are willing to indemnify you against loss when they fail. (good luck)

[JezUK]

Bereft of empathy? Not sure why you believe that. I can't afford a yacht. If I want a yacht for $10k, and you paid $5mil for the same yacht, and then you tell me that isn't right, does that make you bereft of empathy? Whuh?

Please don't make assumptions about my personal feelings. That actually is kinda rude, but I don't get easily offended; so no offense taken.

I never said that being able to pay more made you talented. I even made it clear in a second post that making a lot of money doesn't mean you are talented. There are lots of factors. Not sure where you got this, but this conclusion does not follow from my posts, nor was it intended.

I was just repeating what somebody else said above with the "10x". Shame on me for not looking it up myself. Mea Culpa. However, 6.18x vs. 10x is not a massive difference. I only worry when things exceed an order of magnitude. You may feel differently. Sorry if I misled anyone with the wrong multiplier.

Also, one mis-calculation (or rather lack of doing the calculation) does not influence any other arguments I make (WHO makes an argument has ZERO bearing on the validity of the argument-- Logic Fallacies 101), which is indeed the whole point, not the semantics of the EXACT price difference. If someone thinks paying 10x more is wrong they are still going to think paying 6.18x more is wrong (or 5x where you live).

So... the pro users should pay more to prevent other people from pirating the software? We all pay more when people pirate software.

Also, please don't put words in my mouth. I never mentioned less prosperous countries. I was talking about pricing structured on income level (or revenue as is the case with AD).

I don't want to argue or make enemies, JezUK. None of this is meant to be personal, and if any of it comes across that way (to anyone) I apologize in advance. I think we can agree that some people like Indie pricing and others do not. The whole reason I spoke up was to let anyone from Chaos reading know that many people do not like Indie pricing for the reasons I and others have given.

It is clear that many people DO like Indie pricing, and think it is an important way to expand the user base, or perhaps to develop new talent. I see the advantage of being able to hire more freelancers at lower rates. But that means that all of us have lower rates. Maybe we were over payed to begin with. Of course with expenses going up (software overhead, inflation, etc.) lower rates don't help any of us. It will come back around. It's all ebb and flow.

All I ask is for a flat, even price for every user, period. If that is old fashioned so be it.

You stated "Should people be penalized for success due to talent" - hence my comment.

We are all entitled to our own (differing) opinions and we all of course have our own points of view.

But you cannot compare this to a yacht. You are ignoring Blender, The Market Disrupter (which has a huge amount of energy and drive behind it, not to mention a solid following and money).

If you wanted to use a yacht analogy (not a good idea), add a new ship builder who is giving free $3m yachts called Slender (not quite the $5m yacht I have but it's still amazing plus they'll give you a new yacht every time a new, better one comes out....forever....)

Anyway, I think Autodesk have done a good thing, I applaud them (that's a first).

So Chaos now look out of kilter by comparison (wrt an Indie offering and render node costs imo)....

I really think this is the time Chaos doesn't let this get out of hand. We've been treated poorly by AD over the years (decades), Chaos MUST learn and NOT fall into the same old trap. Their users (followers who helped them get to where they are) hold them to a much higher standard and expect better.

My opinion;

1) reduce the cost of those render nodes (too expensive), even make them free (yippee!),

2) Offer a similar Indie type deal (that brings a smile to the faces of single man/woman freelancers, those just starting out in the industry, hobbyists etc),

3) For those on Perpetual, offer the ability to pay yearly, like a subscription or maintenance (thereby spreading the cost over 2 years and more palatable),

4) Never piss off your existing loyal customers by disallowing upgrades, always allow some path or route that rewards their continued investment

5) Look into making upgrades more reasonably priced (now that the cycle is just 1.5-2 years of which we, no doubt, play some part in 'beta' testing, bug finding and fixing during that period),

6) Don't make customers pay for upgrades they never had nor used - the flip argument of this is that those who DID pay for the upgrade, had the benefit of using the latest software, whilst those who chose not to upgrade did not. Yes, maybe pay something for those skipped years, say 25%, but come on, not full price.

Anyway, I've spoken enough about this and may well have got some facts wrong anyway - needless to say Chaos are no doubt observing, hopefully they'll come up with some great new changes that'll get us all back 'on-side' again

[roboxx]

1) reduce the cost of those render nodes (too expensive), even make them free (yippee!),

5) Don't make clients pay for upgrades they never had nor used - the flip argument of this is that those who DID pay for the upgrade, had the benefit of using the latest software, whilst those who chose not to upgrade did not. Yes, maybe pay something for those skipped years, say 25%, but come on, not full price.

As the initial thread starter i`m quite impressed how more and more users are participating in this thread and have similar concerns about the development of Chaos pricing policy.
I totally agree with JezUK on these two points. When someone thinks that a major upgrade isn`t worth to buy / he has no usage atm or is just short of money and he like to skip it, why is he later forced to buy the full price of two upgrades ?
As an example: I want to skip V5 and in 2022 would like to jump on V6. I then have to pay the upgrade from V4 > V5 and from V5 > V6, but i never used V5 in the last 2 years ! So why should i buy a full upgrade price for V5 and never had any advantage / usage for it ? This doesn`t make sense at all for me and is unfair in comparison to the users, who did upgrade to V5 and could use it for 2 years.
It might be ok to add some " development costs" to a jump of a 2 version upgrade, lets say 10-20 %, but 100 %...thats ridiculous. When looking to Itoo for example, i can pause my maintainance after one year and renew it any time i like without a penalty fee or whatever.

Someone in this thread compared the whole thing with a purchase of a car, brand Vray. I bought one a long time ago. Initially it had a reasonable consumption of gas / 100 km, inspection / technical service was necessary every 3-4 years for a fair price. In 2018 the car company increased the gas consumption of the engine by +75%,
in 2020 +37 % and did also shortened the interval for the necesary inspection, which raised the maintainance costs for the car additional......so is this reliable for me and should i buy a new Vray car anytime in the future again ?

I would have never thought about skipping a major upgrade. Still the pricing for the workstation upgrade of 570 $ is more then ok for me...would buy it instantly. But for my 10 rendernodes i`m not willing to pay 1710 $, so i have to stick with Vray4.

Again my question to the Chaos team....why are the render nodes so expensive ???

Ivan from the sales department wrote:.....a main reason for the price changes is our increased investment in the development of our products.
Thats exactly what i thought, but not only in the development of Vray, but in the development of all the other tools from Chaos which propably don`t bring in enough / or no profit at all as the standard Vray Renderer does.
I might be wrong but my assumption is, that a big part of the profit that Vray brings in gets in the maintainance / development of the less profitable side products like Chaos Cloud, Vray for Unreal, Project Lavian, Phoenix FD or PDPlayer.
But as a pure Vray Renderer user i don`t need these other apps and therefore ideally don`t want to pay for there development / maintainance.
Looks to me that the immense growth of the Chaos company in the last 10 years and developing several additional apps and services just massively increased the costs / reduced the profits, so price increase for Vray Render and Rendernodes was the easiest way of solving this problem.

I would bet, that the release cycle will be shortened in the next years to a yearly base. Ivan already mentioned having the next release in appr. 1,5-2 years. I`m quite convident, that Vray 6 will be released at the beginning of 2022 ( 1,5 year cycle ) and from then as a yearly maintainance upgrade / subscription like Autodesk does.

All this in total makes me really concerned.......

[Richard7666]

I wonder if the game plan is to push people off of local render farms onto the Chaos cloud? I don't know, just a thought.

If this ever happens with V-ray, I'm going to quit and get a qualification as an interior decorator and painter and make that my new career.

(Until someone brings out an Internet Of Things equipped paint brush that needs to phone home to a server, anyway.)

[sebbiej]

[FONT=Calibri]
I totally agree with JezUK on these two points. When someone thinks that a major upgrade isn`t worth to buy / he has no usage atm or is just short of money and he like to skip it, why is he later forced to buy the full price of two upgrades ?
As an example: I want to skip V5 and in 2022 would like to jump on V6. I then have to pay the upgrade from V4 > V5 and from V5 > V6, but i never used V5 in the last 2 years ! So why should i buy a full upgrade price for V5 and never had any advantage / usage for it ? This doesn`t make sense at all for me and is unfair in comparison to the users, who did upgrade to V5 and could use it for 2 years.
It might be ok to add some " development costs" to a jump of a 2 version upgrade, lets say 10-20 %, but 100 %...thats ridiculous. When looking to Itoo for example, i can pause my maintainance after one year and renew it any time i like without a penalty fee or whatever.

I'd love to know Chaos' thoughts on this. I feel like I'm getting stung by having to pay £640 to upgrade my 4 V-Ray 3 render nodes to Next, which will then instantly be outdated. I'm left in a position where I either upgrade my workstation licence to 5 for £455 (again leaving my nodes behind), or I upgrade my render nodes just so I don't lose them forever.

It's ridiculous. I should be able to upgrade my nodes to 5 from 3.

[PIXELBOX_SRO]

Its true that vray rendernode is something like service and it doesnt make sense if it needs to be upgraded twice. It shoudl be same price to buy regardless what version od vray youre migrating from.