Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

3D-Coat 3.7 updates thread


Recommended Posts

  • Reputable Contributor

This is just not possible because 3DC has 1000nds of tools and options and it is absolutely impossible to check all combinations and workflows withis small staff. Community participation is ESSENTIAL part of 3DC development, growth and stabilization. It is useful for all - for peoples who are getting fresh featres and bugfixes and us - for feedback.

Just a friendly reminder, Once all New Features have been added for V4 RC, please give the community some time to test the V4 RC build for bugs before releasing. This way V4 will be released as bug free as possible... That is my request as a long time user of 3DCoat. (DEC 2007)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Time limitation is applied sice 3.7.14. There is relatively stable 3.7.08B that is widely used.

But of course if you feel it unfair, I may change policy. I don't want to force anyone.

I don't want anybody to lambast me for saying this, but I do think that this policy is unfair. The disabling of these features, afaik, wasn't publicly disclosed on the first page or at start up. That's why this message is catching a whole lot of people off guard. I think that the (logical) assumption was that we weren't just guinea pigs for v4.

The assumption was that these features, meant for v4, were in beta state here in v3.x, but would be in a stable, final state in v4. There was no mention that these beta state v4 features would just up and disappear for v3.x users. The assumption was that they'd simply remain in a beta state in v3.x and we wouldn't get the finalized versions unless we updated to v4.

There certainly was some ambiguity. I don't think that you were clear enough, Andrew.

Disabling certain features after December 10 is, I'm sorry to say, kind of a cheap trick to pull on paying customers. That's like somebody buying a car, enjoying the hell out of it, and then having the dealership remotely disabling the radio & air conditioner.

"But it still works. Those other features aren't necessary. If you want the A/C and radio again, just come back and pay us." Well, Mr. Dealer, you really didn't disclose that before I drove off the lot. You mumbled a few things kinda vaguely and NOW you expect me to see your point after the fact? Why couldn't you just continue to let me "beta test" my A/C and radio like you led me to believe I could? I certainly would have paid to trade in my old car for the new model once you had all of the "beta" kinks worked out. But now...

This should've been a full disclosure situation. I think that, with the way page 1 was phrased, a whole lot was left up to the imagination. The line of ambiguity was right along: "This is an update. This is a beta." Well, which one is it? Is it an update for us to download or is it something we're just beta testing for future generations?

Rolling testable beta features into a legitimate update was, imo, a mistake. You should've just kept those beta features in private testing. Now you've got a bunch of people pretty upset. They previously had (seemingly) unlimited access to those features and now... not. Even if the features weren't fully functioning, taking them away at this point seems.... I don't know.... wrong. That's like, "Okay. I got all of the reports and data I needed. Thanks for testing them. Let me disable those features now."

Consider this, Andrew. How much would it have cost you to pay people to beta test these new features? Instead, you got a free fleet of willing guinea pigs. Nobody is asking you to give out v4 for free. Nobody.I think that people are just saying, "Don't disable the beta features. Allowing us to keep them, even if they are misshapen and don't work 100% of the time, should be considered our payment for us doing a job you could've paid to have done. We'll buy v4 so that we can get them upgraded to full working status. Just don't take away what you already gave us."

It's a little disingenuous of a thing to do in a thread that's titled "3D-Coat 3.7 updates thread" Beta testing for v4 should've had its own thread. A v4 featured release should've been a separate thread and download.

Retroactive continuity stinks. Editing the first page to reflect what you really wanted to say doesn't change the facts about what you really did say or, in this case, failed to say.

I'm not telling you what to do. Don't get me wrong. I just think that, it's not something I would've done. Not when you've got people, paying customers no less, testing these feature for you for free.

Again, nobody's asking for v4 for free. They're just saying, "Don't cripple what you already gave us." It's you're right to do that. However, imo, it's just bad for the reputation. People will be VERY careful when downloading future updates. They'll also be very careful about recommending 3DC to their friends, especially when you hold the power to revoke released features - beta or otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
ok, updated build and re-written message on the first page. It has no time limitations but beta tools.

I saw that, but my post still stands.

Community participation is ESSENTIAL part of 3DC development, growth and stabilization.

Remember that. If we're an essential part of the process then you need to treat us like it. Again, nobody's asking for v4 for free. Just saying that there should be some quid pro quo for us doing a job you can't afford to pay for, namely testing. Free bug fixes is great and all, but not yanking those features (however misshapen) is great too. If v4 turns out to be as great as you hope then we'll come back and pay for the upgrade to get those beta features fully working. Yanking the beta tools? That's a sure fire way to lose customers. Not a lot, but some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Ok, please decide what is honest and tell me. I will do. I don't want do force anyone. Probably I will remove time limitations.

See? Now I feel bad for saying anything. I feel as if I'm guilting you or something. I feel bad for making YOU feel bad. :p:

You're free to do what you want. 100%. I support whatever decision you make. I just think that, if I were the one deciding, I'd probably leave the beta features working here without limitation, but NOT update them any further (publicly) until v4 comes out. No time restrictions, but no more public updates to those features until v4 goes live.

Take in all of the bug reports you can about these features while they're still in beta. Take in all of the little suggestions you get from the wish lists. Encourage people to use these tools as much as they can. Focus on making them more stable right now. Later, after v4 comes out, you can focus on making them more robust. If you feel that you want to more testers because your current in-house crew isn't big enough... Invite a few trusted users into a private testing.

This way, when v4 comes out, the beta features will be so much more kick-ass. We'll be massively tempted to upgrade to v4 then. Our half-working beta features will then look like crap compared the the glorious versions you release when V4 goes final.

That's what I would do. You're your own man. Do what you want though. 3DC is your baby not mine. If v4 turns out to be as good as you hope, I'll be the first in line to buy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Ok, please decide what is honest and tell me. I will do. I don't want do force anyone. Probably I will remove any time limitations.

Generally before V3 release there was same limits too. But it has not raised any problem because it was never mentioned...

;) I hate to say but general practice is not saying it... Anyway I can't help much here, to me disabling the 4.x feature is fair, we got plenty of time to judge what's in store for the next version, and free !. Letting user have bugfixes for 3.x is required, you honestly did the good thing with letting users use the beta but disabling 4x features when 4.x is out.

That's my position since you didn't advertise 4x feature in the 3.7 release.

I also support pre-order for the next version (maybe not 4.x since I don't know how far is the release) but the idea is nice, it helps support pilgway and this solve the beta feature preview, this could work with an activation code enabling said features (still with a time limitation though to avoid code sharing, or maybe linked to license ?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

My opinion...

I think Andrew you have already done what you can do...

The problem was created by not having that information about the features being disabled posted from the beginning. It is a common practice to have beta features disabled when a new version is released. When I read they would be disabled, I was not surprised. I was expecting that to be the case. Other's might not be as aware of how this is common in the software industry. There are not a lot of open betas in commercial software testing most being closed betas. Sometimes new software products will have open betas to test before releasing a commerical product but the beta software is disabled once the verison 1.0 of the software is released.

You corrected the statement to read that the bug fixes would stay in version 3, only the beta features listed and a couple of others that you were not specific about will be disabled.

If Andrew leaves the beta features in version 3 then those who pay for the update to version 4 could feel cheated as well, the other side of the coin, I'm speaking here. Why pay for an update when I got 95% of the features already there. I could certainly live with a few bugs.

Andrew does need to make money on his software. He spent quite a bit of development time to bring us version 4.

Remember I am speaking a personal opinion here and nothing is personally directed at anyone...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
hate to say but general practice is not saying it...

That much is true. However, assume nothing. That's what I say. Invariably, there will be people who DON'T know what is commonly accepted. Putting everything in black and white safeguards you from backlash.

Anyway I can't help much here, to me disabling the 4.x feature is fair.

I would've just had them as separate releases. Here are your v3.x fixes. Here's the time limited v4 beta. Black & white. This way, there's no confusion. Overlapping them into one build? It might be convenient, but I'm not quite sure that's so great of a practice. I know that other developers separate fix releases from public betas and that tends to work out just fine. It seems like a small distinction, but it's really not. Again, that's just my take.

you honestly did the good thing with letting users use the beta but disabling 4x features when 4.x is out.

If V4 is going to be that much more robust and stable, what's the threat of keeping the beta features in v3.x? People will just look at their crappy, buggy beta features in v3.x and say, "Well sh**! Now I have to upgrade. Andrew just made it so tempting. I can't keep on using beta features that don't always do what I want." Get what I'm saying?

If V4 is going to be so great, there is no threat. Just stop publicly testing further updates of those features in v3.x now. This way, the gap between the beta versions and the final versions will be that much greater. The temptation to upgrade to v4 will be that much greater too. Consider the beta versions as tasty samples. To yank them from the v3.x release, especially without prior warning, is like yanking a cookie from my mouth.

This is something that should've been explicitly stated on Day 1. Assume nothing, especially in business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- V3 estable version bug free, encourage V3 users to use Mantis.

- V4 final development stage need closed Beta List, devoted old users can test RC under their own responsibility. Add new V4 filter at Mantis.

- Disabling the 4.x feature after V4 release ok. You have given time to v3 users to take decision to upgrade or not.

- Pre-order cool

My POV.

V4 release isnt the final stage... is the begging of a new 3DC development until 3DC V5. Upgrade is the way to support it.

Like V3 development was a travel to arrive to V4...

regards ! :)

and WB RAUL !! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

- V4 final development stage need closed Beta List, devoted old users can test RC under their own responsibility. Add new V4 filter at Mantis.

And that right there is the key. Time limiting the features in a closed beta situation situation is fine. I've had to deal with that situation many times before. No big deal. Time limiting them on an open beta, to your entire customer base? Not so sure that isn't annoying. It's made even more annoying by mixing in that public beta with core fixes and releasing it as one release. They should be separate releases, imo. That's not such an uncommon practice. Still, what Andrew chooses to do is his own business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

If V4 is going to be that much more robust and stable, what's the threat of keeping the beta features in v3.x? People will just look at their crappy, buggy beta features in v3.x and say, "Well sh**! Now I have to upgrade. Andrew just made it so tempting. I can't keep on using beta features that don't always do what I want." Get what I'm saying?

This part of your statement can cause problems as well, leaving buggy beta features in the software can turn off people as well. They can accuse Andrew of leaving buggy beta features so they will be force to get the version 4 upgrade to get rid of the beta bugs...

Assume nothing in business with your customers is always a good idea and the reason we are having this discussion today. We both agreed it would have been better to have this information posted sooner. I did not even think about possible reactions as I had already assumed that would be the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

This part of your statement can cause problems as well, leaving buggy beta features in the software can turn off people as well. They can accuse Andrew of leaving buggy beta features so they will be force to get the version 4 upgrade to get rid of the beta bugs...

I agree with you 100%. That's why I don't personally like the idea of bundling the v4 beta and v3.x fixes as one release. They should be separate. This removes all of this confusion. A separate beta of V4 functionality removes that particular complaint.

You take a certain risk you by bundling them into one release. V3.x won't ever be V4. Some people will understand that. Some won't. The trick is to leave it (the beta features) stable-ish, but not as robust as what's to come in the v4 final. The beta functionality is just a sampling of what's to come, presumably. You don't want to give away the farm. These beta features should come with a clear disclaimer that these features are WIP. Accessing them is like getting a sneak peak. It might sound like trying to "squeeze" your customer base, but at least it's honest. It's either that or don't release these beta features as part of 3.x at all.

It's a balancing act.

Like I said, the ideal solution is to separate the two, v3.x fixes from v4 beta. Separate releases kills this whole debate. Mixing them together is what creates the problem.

BTW: Until this latest version, the V4 beta features were all turned on by default for me. Never once did I have to manually turn them on. Never once DID I actually turn them on. They just were on by default, prior to this version. I could easily have assumed, had I not read this ongoing thread, that these were just additions to v3.x. That they used to be on by default for me could've easily led me to that belief.

I did not even think about possible reactions as I had already assumed that would be the case.

Yeah. I don't want to come off as if I'm ranting. I just want to help present a balanced argument. Personally, I'm fine with whatever decision's made. Not my toys. Not my call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Wow. Seems like ingrates taking advantage. Here's my understanding. I demoed and tested V3 and purchased it. I was then given the opportunity to download and use the beta cycle for V4 which started a V3. version cycle. As they added new tools, there was response in the forum and fixes and feedback and changes. I didnt think this was "fixing my original purchase". I also never imagined any of this would be given to me. ALL betas I have ever done, are gone at the end.

I suppose I am reading confusion on "what was the release and where did that stop." Andrews Kindness and general good nature of his development is welcomed. I am unappreciative of anybody incinuating anything nefarious or even "poor managment" at the situation. It combats the community approach/involvement and produces/promotes discontinuity/disconnection from developer/user relationships. Maybe you prefer autodesk forums? The idea that anybody has been duped or taken here, is laughable.

Hows that!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think that what may be turned off is what essentially belongs to V4:

- iconic UI.

- Edit in photoshop with scaling

- beta tools

- retopo extrude

- vertex color painting

This looks fair. Turning these off now for v3 cycle would be good and release a rock stable v3 build.

Then the next builds from now on should be v4 beta, to avoid confusion, with these tools active.

Then close to v4 release just provide a trial version with these new stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

@BurrMan:

Actually, I think that the one being hostile is you. Nobody's being an "ingrate" - which is insulting btw. Personally, I do think that the situation wasn't particularly well managed or implemented. Separate releases for the v3.x fixes and a time limited v4 beta would've squashed this situation totally. Bundling the v4 beta functionality with the v3 fixes certainly wasn't ideal. Like I said, the v4 functionality was turned on for me by default - even after I had nuked my PC. These sorts of things create confusion. An unclear opening page creates confusion. Could things have been done more efficiently? Sure. Live and learn though.

This is not an indictment of Andrew. It's not to be taken personally. As Andrew himself said, the community's involvement is essential to what's going on. If people can't express their concerns then what's the point? I've seen many companies go down in flames for not taking constructive criticism. Although I've been quiet on this forum since joining, I've been a user for 3 years. Except for a bug or two here & there, I've usually kept my yap shut. Andrew's been more than great about listening to these dissenting views. Would he always agree? Probably not. Dismissing it as babble from a bunch of ingrates is something he wouldn't do though.

Honestly, he doesn't need you defending him. What he's hearing here is just par for the course. It's a consequence of doing business these days.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I've been a user for 3 years. Except for a bug or two here & there, I've usually kept my yap shut.

But your "So confused" about whats going on??? Hmmmmm.... I think I hit the nail on the head there.......... lol.

BTW: I dont speak for Andrew. I speak for myself. No one else.

Oh, and, you dont seem to be taking critisism well. Attacking me and all. I never mentioned your name in my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Yes, This is understandable. The community may be essential, but it is also a privilege to the community. How many creations have already been made with the use of the beta tools? Created free of charge? Yes!.

Just an idea, perhaps in future, you could have the option to pre - order for the next version at a certain stage of development of the next version. Pre - order customers are given a pre - determined price, which could be the tricky part, but pre - order customers & only pre - order customers are able to use beta builds. Many game dev companies do this for add-ons / extensions to games. Customers that originally purchased the game and like it, pretty much know they will like the add-on and are all the more keen to beta test it and have input to ensure that they will.

Really its not a whole lot different to how it is now. Not for me at least, I would have pre - ordered and will absolutely be purchasing V4. The pre - order thing is just a formality really but everyone knows where they stand straight up.

Keep up the Great work Andrew and thank you for the privilege.

+1. Sounds like a good idea.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I would've just had them as separate releases. Here are your v3.x fixes. Here's the time limited v4 beta. Black & white. This way, there's no confusion. Overlapping them into one build? It might be convenient, but I'm not quite sure that's so great of a practice. I know that other developers separate fix releases from public betas and that tends to work out just fine. It seems like a small distinction, but it's really not. Again, that's just my take.

I just want to react to that, the rest I leave to the others.

Andrew is almost alone on this development, maintaining two versions at once is not possible. That much I understand.

Everytime he fixes a bug in 3.x cycle he must copy and paste it into 4.x trunk, and everytime he makes larger changes to 4.x codebase he needs to adapt bug fixes coming from 3.x. It's a real time waster. This is why so far beta have been both a bug fixing stage and an experimentation field for upcoming features of 4.x, not two separated builds. Of course I agree it would be better to have both separated, much less code interaction between old clean code and new feature and bug introduction, but you can't ask a man to do a team's job.

Especially after going this far into unknown territory (voxels were almost only used by sensable before he went there !, look at the price of their software just to laugh a bit !)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

2 versions is a no go... Myself and other members brought this up before but Andrew does not have the time to maintain two versions. That is a major reason, I desire a very polished and bug free version 4. That will be your main working 3DCoat version.

Betas always break things, not only in the new features but across the entire application. So it is impossible to have a clean entirely stable beta version as long as development is continuing, again the nature of development. Andrew rolls all the bug fixes into the betas. I do not know if that will change with future development hence we need Version 4 to be the most stable ever. Maybe if version 4 is really clean, he could squash the few bugs that are found in it and have two versions. One can always hope... :D

A second version of 3DCoat can be run on the same computer. You could test the development features for 3DCoat version 4.5 or 5 using that version. I would suggest if possible that the beta versions after version 4 has been released have their own separate folder for settings etc. Right now all the versions share the same folder( not the install folder) which at times has created some problems...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

2 versions is a no go...

Actually it could be the same version, but pre-ordering the next version would give a special serial number that would activate the beta tools instead of ticking "show beta tools".

So people that didn't pre-order the next version won't have the beta tools but would be able to benefit the bugfix.

Hope it makes sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

pre-ordering the next version would give a special serial number that would activate the beta tools instead of ticking "show beta tools".

So people that didn't pre-order the next version won't have the beta tools but would be able to benefit the bugfix.

Hope it makes sense.

hey!... sounds good ! B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Actually it could be the same version, but pre-ordering the next version would give a special serial number that would activate the beta tools instead of ticking "show beta tools".

So people that didn't pre-order the next version won't have the beta tools but would be able to benefit the bugfix.

Hope it makes sense.

I agree but as stated the betas break things across the entire application, not only the beta features. This would mean internally that Andrew will have to have two versions. He would need to fix bugs for version 4.0 (no beta features) and also fixed bugs and broken things that got created when he added a new feature for the betas. So we are back to two versions which for a long time I have been suggesting... If version 4 is really clean with few bugs, I would hope Andrew could maintain two versions. There would be only a small amount of bugs in version 4 as it was released as bug free and stable as possible. After a few months they would be squashed and no more work would be needed on version 4.0..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I agree but as stated the betas break things across the entire application, not only the beta features.

Yes , this is why the v4 should be stable as possible, then people will just download a new version when they need it ,cause of a blocking bug.

And if a basic function is broken,then they just need to report it.

Actually this is what happen for maya ,nuke and so many.You just need to read the the users support tickets,you will be able to read a lot of title that's look like "broken blabla".

The good thing is,the general software evolution will be good at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

fixed bugs and broken things that got created when he added a new feature for the beta

By the way it happens that when fixing a bug you create another one.At least the 3DC users will help to make 3DC stronger.

Cheers :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

I think the major difference between this V4 Release and the V3...if memory serves me correctly...is the whole Beta cycle then was LABELED V3 BETA. So, if it was clearly communicated that the official 3.7 release was the final version of the V3 cycle, and that all subsequent builds would be V4 BETA builds...then all of this would make sense and we would not be having this conversation. But is was not clearly communicated and the average user will expect all builds with a 3.X nomenclature are property of all who purchased V3. So, communication, or lack thereof, is the problem at hand.

The best way to rectify this problem, in my opinion, would be to temporarily freeze current feature additions and focus on bug-fixing for a short period. Release a final 3.7.xx Stable Build...which will also serve as a stable foundation for V4. Thereafter label all subsequent builds as V4 RC (Release Candidate) 1.x. The idea of a Pre-Release makes the most sense to me. Helps Andrew generate new development revenue...especially with Raul no back on-board. I'm sure that between now and the official release, there will be plenty enough "goodies" to make it a powerful new release.

By the way...welcome back, Raul. :good:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...