How do you justify the cost of this "Live Plugin" ?


https://forum.reallusion.com/Topic422794.aspx
Print Topic | Close Window

By davev - 5 Years Ago
OK, I look at it like this: On one hand I have MotionBuilder, a high level professional character animation program and I can get a FREE unreal live link plugin that will do everything the "Reallusion LiveLink" will do between MB and and Unreal. Same For Maya, a FREE unreal Livelink plugin. Reallusion, a program that Yes, I own, but would never say it has anywhere near the tools available in MotionBuilder, wants me to buy a $700 Plugin that will do what the "Free" plugins from MotionBuilder and Maya will do? Personally I think if they made the plugin free or at least affordable for a hobbyist, they would likely sell alot more copies of Iclone and CC3 in order for people to use the plugin - But, NOT MY call.........
By toystorylab - 5 Years Ago
Yo, I fully agree with this...
By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
davev (9/16/2019)
OK, I look at it like this: On one hand I have MotionBuilder, a high level professional character animation program and I can get a FREE unreal live link plugin that will do everything the "Reallusion LiveLink" will do between MB and and Unreal. Same For Maya, a FREE unreal Livelink plugin. Reallusion, a program that Yes, I own, but would never say it has anywhere near the tools available in MotionBuilder, wants me to buy a $700 Plugin that will do what the "Free" plugins from MotionBuilder and Maya will do? Personally I think if they made the plugin free or at least affordable for a hobbyist, they would likely sell alot more copies of Iclone and CC3 in order for people to use the plugin - But, NOT MY call.........


Thanks for the feedback but just look at the cost of the software involved to find out why we sell the plug-in separately.

Motion Builder = $1765 (Yearly)
Maya = $1545 (Yearly)
iClone - $199 (One Off Payment)

So even with the cost of the Unreal Live Link plug-in it is still way cheaper than the two products you mention.

Of course, we could always up the price of iClone to say $1000 and include the Live Link plug-in for FREE but why make customers pay for something they might never use.
By davev - 5 Years Ago
Peter (RL) (9/16/2019)
davev (9/16/2019)
OK, I look at it like this: On one hand I have MotionBuilder, a high level professional character animation program and I can get a FREE unreal live link plugin that will do everything the "Reallusion LiveLink" will do between MB and and Unreal. Same For Maya, a FREE unreal Livelink plugin. Reallusion, a program that Yes, I own, but would never say it has anywhere near the tools available in MotionBuilder, wants me to buy a $700 Plugin that will do what the "Free" plugins from MotionBuilder and Maya will do? Personally I think if they made the plugin free or at least affordable for a hobbyist, they would likely sell alot more copies of Iclone and CC3 in order for people to use the plugin - But, NOT MY call.........


Thanks for the feedback but just look at the cost of the software involved to find out why we sell the plug-in separately.

Motion Builder = $1765 (Yearly)
Maya = $1545 (Yearly)
iClone - $199 (One Off Payment)

So even with the cost of the Unreal Live Link plug-in it is still way cheaper than the two products you mention.

Of course, we could always up the price of iClone to say $1000 and include the Live Link plug-in for FREE but why make customers pay for something they might never use.


Nice try for a general justification - except both my ( and likely many others ) subscriptions to Maya and MotionBuilder cost me nothing - I have a "Startup" license subscription, which means as long as i earn less than 100K from the business generated using the software, my subscription cost is ZERO. These license are not that difficult to get and maintain. Does IClone have a free student/Indie/Startup Program?
The other part of this equation that makes no sense: OK, Iclone cost $199.00, but you are charging $700.00 for that $199.00 program to plugin to another program that is 100% FREE'
THAT makes no sense ( at least to me, and I think alot of others as well )
For interested individuals:  ( Note it says will end in 1 year but I have had mine for 3 years and renew it yearly. )

Startup

To qualify as a "Startup," You must be (a) a company, a startup or home-based business, that generates less than $100,000 (or equivalent in other currency) per year from the total sale of goods or services or (b) an individual using the service for personal non-commercial projects, hobbies or personal learning.The term of Your Startup subscription will start on the date access is granted and will end one (1) year thereafter. Autodesk reserves the right at any time during the Startup subscription term to revoke Your right to access the Offering by providing notice to You. 


By Am7add9 - 5 Years Ago
the free ccsetup plugin is all you need
it converts very fast, multiple avatars-multiple props and cameras
i dont really see any benefit to having a live setup with iclone

By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
davev (9/16/2019)


Nice try for a general justification - except both my ( and likely many others ) subscriptions to Maya and MotionBuilder cost me nothing - I have a "Startup" license subscription, which means as long as i earn less than 100K from the business generated using the software, my subscription cost is ZERO. These license are not that difficult to get and maintain. Does IClone have a free student/Indie/Startup Program?
The other part of this equation that makes no sense: OK, Iclone cost $199.00, but you are charging $700.00 for that $199.00 program to plugin to another program that is 100% FREE'
THAT makes no sense ( at least to me, and I think alot of others as well )
For interested individuals:  ( Note it says will end in 1 year but I have had mine for 3 years and renew it yearly. )

Startup

To qualify as a "Startup," You must be (a) a company, a startup or home-based business, that generates less than $100,000 (or equivalent in other currency) per year from the total sale of goods or services or (b) an individual using the service for personal non-commercial projects, hobbies or personal learning.The term of Your Startup subscription will start on the date access is granted and will end one (1) year thereafter. Autodesk reserves the right at any time during the Startup subscription term to revoke Your right to access the Offering by providing notice to You. 




The Startup offer is intended to be for one year so eventually you will need to pay or stop using the software. Just because you are temporarily using the software for free doesn't change the fact that both Maya and Motion Builder will cost way more than the cost of iClone + Unreal Live Link.
By charly Rama - 5 Years Ago
aeolian (9/16/2019)
the free ccsetup plugin is all you need
it converts very fast, multiple avatars-multiple props and cameras
i dont really see any benefit to having a live setup with iclone


Totally agree. I don't see for me (I say for me, may be not for others) a big interest on spending 700$ for live link when CC3 auto set up does everything well . Thanks RL to give us this free alternative
By vidi - 5 Years Ago
my  Problem  with the high prices Software by RL it is only reasonable for a few User, that means at the end it will the development canceled again.
It would not be the first time
Demand governs the supply.
By will.cowling.uk - 5 Years Ago

Thanks for the feedback but just look at the cost of the software involved to find out why we sell the plug-in separately.

Motion Builder = $1765 (Yearly)
Maya = $1545 (Yearly)
iClone - $199 (One Off Payment)

So even with the cost of the Unreal Live Link plug-in it is still way cheaper than the two products you mention.

Of course, we could always up the price of iClone to say $1000 and include the Live Link plug-in for FREE but why make customers pay for something they might never use.

In my view this is a completely delusional perception of your product.  iClone's strength is its simplicity, and I like it for that. As a game programmer it allows me to create great assets for my own personal projects and is even simple enough for me to introduce animation to my 6 year old son, but in my day job I work for a large multinational corporation where we use Maya as it's a solid AAA piece of professional software.  iClone is not in the same league IMHO so comparing their prices is ridiculous.

Unreal Live Link is literally free software.  The source code for it is included in the free Unreal source code releases (e.g. UnrealEngine\Engine\Source\Programs\MayaLiveLinkPlugin, UnrealEngine\Engine\Source\Runtime\LiveLinkInterface, UnrealEngine\Engine\Source\Runtime\LiveLinkMessageBusFramework) and is fully documented by Epic (https://docs.unrealengine.com/en-US/Engine/Animation/LiveLinkPlugin/index.html).  

All a developer such as yourselves has to do integrate it into an application like iClone is to just link in the Unreal Live link dlls that Epic provide and then per frame iterate over the joint/bone transforms and pass them to a function, that Epic provides, to send it to Unreal.  Here's that functionality in the Maya plugin...


   virtual void OnStream(double StreamTime, int32 FrameNumber)
   {
      TArray<FTransform> JointTransforms;
      JointTransforms.Reserve(JointsToStream.Num());

      TArray<MMatrix> InverseScales;
      InverseScales.Reserve(JointsToStream.Num());

      for (int32 Idx = 0; Idx < JointsToStream.Num(); ++Idx)
      {
         const FStreamHierarchy& H = JointsToStream[Idx];

         MTransformationMatrix::RotationOrder RotOrder = H.JointObject.rotationOrder();

         MMatrix JointScale = GetScale(H.JointObject);
         InverseScales.Add(JointScale.inverse());

         MMatrix ParentInverseScale = (H.ParentIndex == -1) ? MMatrix::identity : InverseScales[H.ParentIndex];

         MMatrix MayaSpaceJointMatrix = JointScale *
            GetRotationOrientation(H.JointObject, RotOrder) *
            GetRotation(H.JointObject, RotOrder) *
            GetJointOrientation(H.JointObject, RotOrder) *
            ParentInverseScale *
            GetTranslation(H.JointObject);

         JointTransforms.Add(BuildUETransformFromMayaTransform(MayaSpaceJointMatrix));
      }

      TArray<FLiveLinkCurveElement> Curves;

      LiveLinkProvider->UpdateSubjectFrame(SubjectName, JointTransforms, Curves, StreamTime);
   }


I imagine your code is very similar... and you're charging >$1000 per customer for copying that bit of code and changing it a bit?

If you can't see how ridiculous that is then there is no hope for you.

Not only that, but you haven't even created the plugin properly.  The way you've released it, without any source code, means that it will only work with Binary installs of Unreal that are Blueprint only.  It won't work in a UE4 project that builds from the Engine source, or one that includes C++ files in the project.

If this was a $100 add on then these things might be excusable, but at the price you're asking it’s simply not acceptable, to me at least.

By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
will.cowling.uk (10/2/2019)

I imagine your code is very similar... and you're charging >$1000 per customer for copying that bit of code and changing it a bit?

If you can't see how ridiculous that is then there is no hope for you.



With all due respect if you think that bit of code is all that is needed then you are clearly misinformed on the subject. We didn't spend many months developing the Unreal Live Link plugin if all that was needed was to just tweak a bit of simple code. Blink
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
@Will.cowling.UK:
I would like to ask, why bother protesting the price?  Because I'm thinking if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.
And, if you have the knowledge and expertise to code an alternative yourself, you then have free reign to operate your own tool to suit your own productivity.
So what relevance does a transaction not involving you then play with regards to your workflow, which in theory anyway would be in competition with everyone else's.
Is this all because you really really like looking at it and wish you had it, but are on the fence with the cost? 
I would say get it, but for the fact that it hasn't been updated since release, so that is my own disappointment with the product thus far, as it does not work with UE 4.23.

But, you know, if I could code a free LiveLink-like tool, I would update it to work with 4.23, and CC3-direct. 
However, I would not worry about what anyone else is doing.
In fact, I would hope that RL would raise the price to $5,000, that way no one would buy it and I would be the only one to have such a tool!!!....

RL - I already bought it.  Please raise the price to $5,000 so that I am one of the lucky few who gets to use it, and everyone else can envy me.
THX!
By justaviking - 5 Years Ago
TonyDPrime (10/3/2019)
RL - I already bought it.  Please raise the price to $5,000 so that I am one of the lucky few who gets to use it, and everyone else can envy me.
THX!


Funny.   Smile
By Delerna - 5 Years Ago
Peter (RL) (9/16/2019)

Motion Builder = $1765 (Yearly)
Maya = $1545 (Yearly)
iClone - $199 (One Off Payment)

So even with the cost of the Unreal Live Link plug-in it is still way cheaper than the two products you mention.

Of course, we could always up the price of iClone to say $1000 and include the Live Link plug-in for FREE but why make customers pay for something they might never use.


I am one person here who mostly appreciates the way Reallusion sells their things in comparison to other companies. 
I see that you spend lots of time and effort to produce things in order to enable/assist other people to make video's and games depending on what it is they want to make.

I could get Maya or one of the others where I spend a small fortune every month or year just so I can have free extra's given to me that I have no use for.
Or I can buy iClone reasonably cheap and then only buy the extras that I want and ignore the ones I don't want. 
Gee I hope Reallusing sticks with that and I will be a user who will continues sticking with them.

No, I haven't bought several plugin's, but only because I have no need for them. 
So once again, I thank you Reallusion for selling your time and efforts the way you sell them, much appreciated. 




By Mystic360VR - 5 Years Ago
if I wanted to code my own plug in I would be a fricken coder but I am not so....i gotta buy shit. I am a 1 man band studio and I don't have time to waste.
My release window is very tight and looking at the time saving that $700 makes total perfect business sense 

I bought Live link last week at 699 so I've already saved $200 of it's price this week. That said, after 1 test I was solddddddd.
Before:
A 30-45 minute FBX import that didn't do what I wanted it to or look/do any thing like it did in iclone.
After:
Loaded perfectly identical from iclone into unreal in under 3 minutes.
I actually screamed out FUCK YAAA at 1 am when it "Just Worked" exactly how I wanted it to.

Less time working on the How, more time working on the What I am creating.

That $700 plug in erased 2 months of failure instantly. Anything that speeds up my pipeline is worth it even at the full price. Money = Time. 
The fastest path that gets me there just got easier. Yes it blows they make you pay at ever inch of the pipeline but this one is different.

Hobbyist vs Professional.... and I can't afford the time not having this plug in.

By vidi - 5 Years Ago
I'm curious how long the plugin remains compatible and got support.
I know of some expensive stuff by reallusion , a much ado  in the beginning and after that it is died.
By BOLPHUNGA - 5 Years Ago
vidi (10/6/2019)
I'm curious how long the plugin remains compatible and got support.
I know of some expensive stuff by reallusion , a much ado  in the beginning and after that it is died.

its currently incompatible with the latest version which has been out for a month now
so nobody can take advantage of all the new features in ue4.
why they would release this right before a major update was coming is beyond me

By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
vidi (10/6/2019)
I'm curious how long the plugin remains compatible and got support.
I know of some expensive stuff by reallusion , a much ado  in the beginning and after that it is died.


Which expensive stuff did you buy that no longer works with iClone? Ermm
By vidi - 5 Years Ago
iclone is not the only thing was made by Reallusion 
By raxel_67 - 5 Years Ago
Peter (RL) (10/7/2019)
vidi (10/6/2019)
I'm curious how long the plugin remains compatible and got support.
I know of some expensive stuff by reallusion , a much ado  in the beginning and after that it is died.


Which expensive stuff did you buy that no longer works with iClone? Ermm



Indigo, though to be fair that belongs in the category of "it never worked properly to begin with"
By argus1000 - 5 Years Ago
I’m surprised Reallusion ever put Indigo on the market. It’s such a MESS.
By justaviking - 5 Years Ago
raxel_67 (10/7/2019)
Indigo, though to be fair that belongs in the category of "it never worked properly to begin with"


argus1000 (10/8/2019)
I’m surprised Reallusion ever put Indigo on the market. It’s such a MESS.


I feel like we're drifting off topic, but I agree the Indigo plug-in left many things unfinished and was largely unsuable.

The Iray plug-in is vastly superior in comparison.  You still have to deal with the long render times, but export speed and disk space usage are greatly improved, and the "material mapping" and lighting equivalency is very well done.  The "preview" capabilities are very nice too.  So it's still not a viable animation solution for most people, but at least the interface works well and it's not very difficult to use it for high-quality stills.
By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
vidi (10/7/2019)
iclone is not the only thing was made by Reallusion 


So my next question is which expensive Reallusion stuff did you buy that no longer works?
By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
raxel_67 (10/7/2019)
Peter (RL) (10/7/2019)
vidi (10/6/2019)
I'm curious how long the plugin remains compatible and got support.
I know of some expensive stuff by reallusion , a much ado  in the beginning and after that it is died.


Which expensive stuff did you buy that no longer works with iClone? Ermm


Indigo, though to be fair that belongs in the category of "it never worked properly to begin with"

 
Indigo still works with iClone. I asked which products no longer work, not which products you don't like. Blink
By 3dtester - 5 Years Ago
If i could chime in...

I wouldn't say that RL makes products that suddenly stop working.
Well, the Avatar TTS service dies, but that's not a product Wink

But: i can recall a few things that RL has stopped working on.
That means: they don't update them to work with the current iClone versions.

- Physics toolbox (and a lot of content associated with it)
- Director mode (i don't accept a 'too less demand')
- Heightmap terrains (they are made for the outdated Bullet Engine and never been replaced / upgraded)

By justaviking - 5 Years Ago
Remember the MIRROR we used to have?  Gone.
But that's not an expensive product which no longer works, just a sorely missed feature.

3DXchange?
Okay, it "works," but being a 32-bit application cripples it for handing the size and complexity of models which are common today.


Sure, it can be fun poking at Reallusion about some of our (at least my) favorite issues, but the bottom line is I'm mostly pleased that there is a fair amount of a la carte options in the Reallusion approach.  I might pay more for what I want, but the tradeoff is I don't have to pay for many things I don't want.
By 3dtester - 5 Years Ago
Well said @justaviking

In order to come back to topic, i want to add my 2 cents:

I think, the Live Link plugin is targeted at game developers.
Who could potentially make money with it.
How could or should RL distinguish between hobby and commercial users?


By will2power71 - 5 Years Ago
I'm not really put off by the price of the plugin. It's not really necessary to my workflow, so I just won't buy it. What causes me concern is this new focus on Unreal to the exclusion of all else. I see all these posts about SIGGRAPH and Unreal this and Unreal that. What concerns me about that is that it seems like to me they're concentrating all their attention on Unreal. I'm not really interested in working in Unreal. I'm not a game developer. I like Iclone because it's possible to minimize the applications that you work with and with a little creativity you can produce a lot of good content. If I'm going to spend my money, it's going to be on face motion capture for the iphone x, or motion capture for iclone itself. The things I'd like to see developed for Iclone are things that keep you working IN Iclone. I really don't like application hopping and Iclone offers a lot of compelling reasons to stay within the application. It's like it's 90% of the way to greatness, but they're snagged on that final 10%. Unreal Engine is a great game engine, but in my opinion, for a single hobby animator it can be cumbersome. If Iclone were to implement a few key things, then the need for Unreal would become a non-issue. I'm not above paying money for something of value to me, but it has to be of value to me. I hope Reallusion's push to draw game developers doesn't come at the cost of ignoring it's primary user base. Right now that's the part that doesn't seem certain. 
By justaviking - 5 Years Ago
@3dtester - Thanks.  And good comment about [possibly] targeting a more commercial audience with the plug-in.

@will2power71 - Agreed.  I also worry about RL losing focus on what I assume is their core base while chasing a new market.  I have no issue with them developing the Unreal plugin, but what about all the improvements we've been waiting for, often for years now?  If I was actually doing more animating, a motion capture suit would be very attractive (not talking about how I'd look while wearing it), but since I'm not working on any large animation projects at this time, I'm spending my money elsewhere for now.
By animagic - 5 Years Ago
What I find a concern is that third-party plugins are introduced but are then no longer kept up with to support newer versions of the external program.

The main example is PopcornFX, which was introduced with a lot of fanfare but which is not kept up-to-date. Also Indigo has been left behind (it would need a lot more work than support for Indigo 4). As to Iray, there is far less active development than I would like compared to DAZ (for example RTX support).

On the other hand, RL is on top of Unreal support, so to me it feels that the traditional users are less serviced currently.
By vidi - 5 Years Ago
 as Example the Crazytalk unity plugin also so overpriced and short-lived.
By TopOneTone - 5 Years Ago
Personally, I cannot see the live plugin being of any use to me as I’m not into game development and I don’t understand enough about it to know whether it can facilitate any other usage. What worries me about the current focus is that if RL rather than employing additional staff to work on this new direction has merely reallocated existing personnel, then this will slow down problem fixing and development work on iclone.

I think the failure to support further development of popcorn fx is not only a major disappointment but given its widespread popularity across the group is strategically a major blunder in letting down the core user base. It really smacks of yet another opportunistic quick sale and makes me wary of jumping on board with anything requiring a substantial investment until RL have demonstrated long term commitment. I would be much more interested in seeing popcorn fx, faceware and 3dxchange (including quadrupeds) developed, more realistic water/wave systems, faster and better rendering options, improved lip sync etc...all things that I can employ in my animation and thereby warrant further purchase.

Sorry, for the rant but I just wanted to lend support to the sentiments that are being expressed by a lot of core iclone devotees.
Cheers,
Tony
By Postfrosch - 5 Years Ago
Personally, I cannot see the live plugin being of any use to me as I’m not into game development and I don’t understand enough about it to know whether it can facilitate any other usage. What worries me about the current focus is that if RL rather than employing additional staff to work on this new direction has merely reallocated existing personnel, then this will slow down problem fixing and development work on iclone.

I think the failure to support further development of popcorn fx is not only a major disappointment but given its widespread popularity across the group is strategically a major blunder in letting down the core user base. It really smacks of yet another opportunistic quick sale and makes me wary of jumping on board with anything requiring a substantial investment until RL have demonstrated long term commitment. I would be much more interested in seeing popcorn fx, faceware and 3dxchange (including quadrupeds) developed, more realistic water/wave systems, faster and better rendering options, improved lip sync etc...all things that I can employ in my animation and thereby warrant further purchase.

Sorry, for the rant but I just wanted to lend support to the sentiments that are being expressed by a lot of core iclone devotees.
Cheers,
Tony                               

Hello Tony,
I can only agree with what you write here.
How long have we been waiting for better water options or a functinating mirror? We probably will never get it.
Popcorn FX PlugIn I suppose as already "died and written off" and disappear from Iclone again.
The Unity and Unreal disciples do not need it and the
Unfortunately, only Iclone users are no longer the primary audience.

It's just an assessment of mine - I can be wrong

regards from Postfrosch


By argus1000 - 5 Years Ago
Peter (RL) (10/8/2019)
vidi (10/7/2019)
iclone is not the only thing was made by Reallusion 


So my next question is which expensive Reallusion stuff did you buy that no longer works?


There's "mirror stages", which works in iClone 5, but doesn't work any more in iClone 7


https://forum.reallusion.com/uploads/images/a1ea1703-a813-49c6-b98b-470e.png

By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
RL makes plugins to make $.
If we already paid them $50-1000 for a plugin, it makes them no additional revenue for them to advance the plugin beyond ongoing compatibility.  
Which is why you will be more likely to see efforts going towards new products.
Why?  Because new products = new opportunity to charge you as the user $.

In the case of this one, though, I have to imagine there will still be quite an open market for the Unreal LiveLink plugin. 
I think we haven't seen an update for LiveLink because of the ongoing NVidia driver incompatibility delay.  They likely can't craft a new updated plugin based on schematic that is outdated and incompatible with new drivers.  Especially this is important since Unreal and Unity users who are not RL-app users yet will likely be using the newest drivers.
In that respect, development on all plugins will likely be halted until the driver issue is resolved.  It must be having a large domino effect on the timing of releases.

As far as PopcornFX and Indigo, they probably have likely reached their saturation point of market share where it literally wouldn't 'pay off' for RL to spend "X" dollars to update an older plugin when sales of said older plugin only will generate "Y" dollars.
Because, in the case of PopcornFX and Indigo, X (cost) > Y (profitability).

Thus the function is as follows:

START
X = cost of development
Y = profitability on plugin
If X > Y then cease updates.    
If Y > X then continue updates.  
END

By argus1000 - 5 Years Ago
animagic (10/8/2019)
What I find a concern is that third-party plugins are introduced but are then no longer kept up with to support newer versions of the external program.


There''s "Physics toolbox", which is truncated in iClone 7: it misses the "Objects physics settings", Big handicap.

Also, "Ragdoll behavior". Unless you're willing to work in iClone 5, save it as a scene and transfer it to iClone 7, it doesn't work asnymore.

By justaviking - 5 Years Ago
About updating plug-ins to be compatible with newer versions of the 3rd-party software...

As Tony said, they've already sold the plug-ins, so what's the economic benefit to Reallusion?  Little or none?

On the other hand, there could be a lot of people who were "undecided" about the buying the plugin.  Why?  Due to missing features, maybe.  And maybe because they feared it would be a dead-end purchase.  So if RL demonstrated more commitment to a couple of their plugins by keeping them current, maybe they would inspire a second wave of people to buy the plugin(s).
By 3dtester - 5 Years Ago
The ultimate solution for this would be a subscription-based licensing model.

As an IT guy, i can't recall any bigger, profitable software company that can handle their business without regular income made by subscriptions.
Some also charge initial costs plus annual or monthly fees.

As hard as it sounds, i guess that RL simply cannot pay the employees needed to keep everything they ever produced up-to-date.

Daz3D don't take money for their software, but for content.
RL has different approach: they make software that people want to buy because they offer very nice features.
As a consequence, they have to keep on establishing new products / plug-ins with nice new features.

By animagic - 5 Years Ago
A subscription model is a bad idea especially if it means that older versions will become unusable.

Some people are quite content with iClone 5 or 6, and they should be able to continue using their software. Please don't promote the Adobe model.
By 3dtester - 5 Years Ago
The Adobe model has a downside: hobbyists usually don't buy subscriptions.
I can only say it for myself: i like Adobe (at least recently), but as long as i don't earn money, i don't pay for their products.
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
You know, in RL's defense - 
They do have a bit of tutorial info out there how to export content to UE4 without use of the paid plugin.
If they, say, never released the plugin, most would be content with the system, although most would hate how long Unreal Engine takes to import everything. 
And see, that's the thing - RL products export content out fast.  It is Unreal Engine that takes forever to import in. 

And so, now RL has on offer this Live Link plugin, making it faster and easier than waiting on that horrid Unreal Engine slow line. 
But, at no point does any user *need* to use to the plugin in order to get content into Unreal.

It's kind of a luxury item when you think about it. 
For fancy superstar experts like myself...

On the other hand, it is, I think, good to provide feedback to a product series we love so much. 
And when I say 'love', I don't just mean like, "I love you because you are my good friend"...
It is more like, " I hate that I love you so much...this is tearing me up inside...What are you doing to me!!!!...I can't stop thinking about you!!!!...I HATE YOU!!!!."
That kind of love Kiss.

By wendyluvscatz - 5 Years Ago
As an iC6 user I can attest UE4 and FBX import works well enough, it is indeed slow though
I use Carrara too and could easily add a root bone in fact I have no choice it just adds one regardless 
my only issue is for some reason the set pose to get the default A pose is not working, with my DAZ exports too, something changed in Unreal recently as it worked before
now my animations and Third person characters end up twisted, its an UE4 issue,
I most just import FBX animated figures for cinematics though so not a huge issue.
the plugin is no doubt useful for those who are in fact making commercial games and I don't begrudge them it
By mtakerkart - 5 Years Ago
The ultimate solution for this would be a subscription-based licensing model.


It will be the worst move that RL could do for me. I'll give up Iclone because If it is bought by another you got played.
I bought Plantfactory and they switch for subcription when it was redeemed (
a chance that the old perpetual version still works).
-Same for Substance (I paid a perpetual liscence)
-Same for Fuse and now Adobe no longer support it (I paid a perpetual liscence) :
https://theblog.adobe.com/an-update-on-adobe-fuse-as-adobe-moves-to-the-future-of-3d-ar-development/
-Same for Faceshift
_Today Ikenima was bought by Apple , all users got played again):
http://www.cgchannel.com/2019/10/apple-acquires-ikinema/

PopCornFX need only one thing : OPEN THE MARKETPLACE FOR PARTICLES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This plugin is tremendous and works very fine with Iclone , exept the DOF.. The problem is that it is a very  difficult approach but there's some Iclone users 
who can make everything but they can't sell particles . 
I spend 300$ to Persistant to build a specific template wich include variable vectorfield and variable velocity. I dug a little bit with the editor at the level of my knowledge
and I success to build very cool effect.

Back to the topic I understand that Reallusion want to reach the professional market .The professionnal market is video game for now and this plugin is optimized for Engine game.
Unity and UDK 4 are not for a single band otherwise you will always be late on time or you will be demotivated so much the process is long to achieve your project for movie.
By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
vidi (10/9/2019)
 as Example the Crazytalk unity plugin also so overpriced and short-lived.


The CrazyTalk Unity Plugin is a fair example but the removal of that product was forced upon us because browser support for the Unity Web Player was dropped. For the most part we continue to support products for as long as possible. I think it's fair to say there a very few plugins or add-on packs that we have released over the years that no longer work at all. They may have not received further updates but they still work.
By 3dtester - 5 Years Ago
Thank you for that information and the links @mtakerkart Exclamation Mark

In fact, i would like to see game developers using the Live Link plug-in.
It may sound selfish, but if they all buy the plugin, RL has more motivation to update & fix 'legacy' products Wink

By animagic - 5 Years Ago
Acquisitions may be great for the original founders but are usually bad for customers.

For example, Apple has a tendency to drop all existing Windows support, including access to the license server of the software. In other cases the product is just "shelved". I lost several innovative products that way.

That's one reason I hope RL can continue to make it on its own. If that requires selling expensive plugins to game developers, why not? Tongue
By vidi - 5 Years Ago
Peter (RL) (10/10/2019)
vidi (10/9/2019)
 as Example the Crazytalk unity plugin also so overpriced and short-lived.


The CrazyTalk Unity Plugin is a fair example but the removal of that product was forced upon us because browser support for the Unity Web Player was dropped. For the most part we continue to support products for as long as possible. I think it's fair to say there a very few plugins or add-on packs that we have released over the years that no longer work at all. They may have not received further updates but they still work.

That have noting  to do with Browser Support or Web Player Support 

do you remember ?
The pipeline from CrazyTalk 7 to Unity is not affected by the changes. You can continue to use the Unity plugin just as you have been doing

By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
vidi (10/10/2019)

That have noting  to do with Browser Support or Web Player Support 

do you remember ?
The pipeline from CrazyTalk 7 to Unity is not affected by the changes. You can continue to use the Unity plugin just as you have been doing



The CrazyTalk 7 Unity Plugin required the CrazyTalk Interactive Plugin. The Interactive Plugin was discontinued for the reasons I provided previously. While existing customers could continue to use the Unity Plugin at the time, there was obviously no future for the product as we no longer could sell the Interactive Plugin. This meant that sadly the Unity Plugin also became redundant.
By vidi - 5 Years Ago
https://forum.reallusion.com/242719/UnityBased-CrazyTalk-Interactive-Web-Solutions-To-Be-Discontinued

Actually it has nothing to do with web browser 
True is, The Unity plugin was broken with  the new Unity updates and RL has lost interest to fix it , 
Because this plugin was high pricly and  therefore only few User.

I see the same trend for this  plugin.  
By 4413Media - 5 Years Ago
I had the same concerns about this plug in, but I was fortunate enough to be at Siggraph this past August to see firsthand. After experimenting with the plug-in, I can offer my two cents now on this. 

I think, the Live Link plugin is targeted at game developers.


Surprisingly, not really. Unreal is quickly moving towards into previz and eventually production with the power of real time raytracing. There was an event that epic had with Jon Favreau explaining what he was using the unreal engine for  at Siggraph. I attended the blender conference so I missed this one but it's worth looking into. 



Now for the plug in itself. Keep in mind, this is clearly not aimed for hobbyists. If you're wondering what might justify the price. It's time. 

This plug in offers instant feedback. It took me a few minutes to bring in a character, set it up, and link. When I animate the character in iclone,  it does it instantly in unreal. Compared to importing the fbx, setting materials to the nodes, and tweaking. It takes time. It's fine for a hobbyist, but think if you are a previz production company, time is money. Would you pay 1000 for a plug that takes your character in like that...  saving precious production time. Or go through the tedious process yourself spending production time. It tends to pay itself off in the long term. 

So looking at where unreal is headed, I can see it being used more and more in this area. 

By Peter (RL) - 5 Years Ago
vidi (10/11/2019)
https://forum.reallusion.com/242719/UnityBased-CrazyTalk-Interactive-Web-Solutions-To-Be-Discontinued

Actually it has nothing to do with web browser 
True is, The Unity plugin was broken with  the new Unity updates and RL has lost interest to fix it , 
Because this plugin was high pricly and  therefore only few User.

I see the same trend for this  plugin.  


I have explained our position and the reasons for it. Sadly it seems you refuse to believe me so I'll leave it at that. Ermm
By AutoDidact - 5 Years Ago
This Market is very competitive today.
The gaming industry is huge.
I understand why Reallusion wants a foot hold in that industry.
They can not survive only selling to hobbyists & tinkerers.
The problem with the live link program is the same problem with CC3. ,,,
AAA game companies will not Buy this plugin because they are by and large NOT using Iclone or CC3 /Daz figures etc. in production
they are using Maya& Motionbuilder.
OH....and "Indie game devs" dont buy $1000+ plugins and have many less expensive Character animation options than Iclone pipeline such as the Umotion pro system for unity and Many others.
By animagic - 5 Years Ago
I assume RL has done some market analysis before they ventured into this. They seldom need our advice in that area...Tongue
By AutoDidact - 5 Years Ago
I have to wonder what analysis led them to beleive there was a demand in the core iclone>>realtime animation<<< community for a brute force,Arch vis path tracer like IRay??...or Indigo???
UE4 is truly awesome!!!..
 however I can not see why any serious Game dev team would pay Reallusion over $1000 USD (on top of the cost of  iclone pipeline),
when The Autodesk indie licensed products have become affordable , and their live link to UE4 is  FREE.
Additionally there is no comparison between the  industry tested 64 BIT  Autodesk motionbuilder and the 32 bit 3DXchange in terms of parsing HUGE mocap Data sets from multiple performers..
Hopefully  RL  does seek our opinions on the product line... if not then why have the pretense of  a "feedback tracker". 

By justaviking - 5 Years Ago
I think sometimes companies add features because they'll look great in the marketing material.  Whistling

Every NLE package includes "500 Transition Effects" when in reality you use "CUT" 99% of the time, and "Dissolve/Fade" 0.9% of the time, and WIPE 0.09% of the time (at least for movies), so that leaves about 0.01% of the time for the 497 other transition effects.  Other than making a video of your 3-year-old kid's birthday party, what do you need fancy transitions for?  A newbie who sees the box (or online ad) looks at it and goes, "Oooo, that sounds really cool,"  but mo
stly they detract fom the video, the novice just doesn't realize that yet.

Iray looks really cool on the product page.  But you will actually use it to create a movie how often?  (At least it does offer some value for stills.)

The game-related plug-ins are not targeted at the traditional iClone user base (in my opinion), but they are trying to grow their user base.  I'm fine with that, as long as they don't forget about us and ignore the needs of us who've owned iClone 5+ years.  The LOD stuff benefits us normal iClone users if we have background characters, so in that case we benefited from something we might not use directly.
By TonyDPrime - 5 Years Ago
I am very sorry to say this, but my tolerance is low these days given I can move in and out of Octane render with little issue.
Between glitchy performance and lack of updates, I am feeling the color Indigo here on this plugin.

Part of the problem is that there is some instability on the UE4 side with 4.22, so crashes happen often when using this plugin...and these I can't really blame RL for.
But then, there has been only 1 update by RL since release. 
Thus, any UE4-side issues are now compiled by the limited extent of RL's involvement, and it's left a temperamental workflow. 
The tech potential is great, but the implementation and support is unfortunately not as stable or solid.  
By raxel_67 - 5 Years Ago
Have you tried downgrading UE4 to a previously working version? i hope you can, if not i would try to get/beg for a refund. in my case that is the average of my monthly income and would be beyond pissed if it didn't work properly
By Mystic360VR - 5 Years Ago
So now I am stuck. Epic releasing this megascans library that only works with UE 4.23 is something I can't ignore. But if Live Link wont be compatible with it anytime soon then I wasted a lot of money on a pipeline I can't use. We really, really need a Live Link update soon. 

By vidi - 5 Years Ago
I had predicted
Now it is still in early stage, and already problems. 
I'm sure in one or two years it will discontinued
By midix - 5 Years Ago
Yeah, historically RL target audience and marketing has been somewhat inconvenient - too expensive for hobbyists, too weak to appeal to AAA companies.

On one hand, it's slightly amusing to see a plugin costing more than a software that the plugin is "plugging" into.
On the other hand, it's their attempt at pushing higher. Maybe not for AAA but at least AA Smile

And the same goes for their planned attempts to release high definition texture support, subsurface scattering to get close to Unreal quality. 

If RL manage to integrate well with the existing "de facto standard" tools to create more convenient workflows than MotionBuilder does (at least for your typical humanoids) then they might even be able to convince some AAA companies to give it a try.

Who would want to model & texture multiple NPCs from scratch if you can grab an CC3 base mesh, tweak it a bit and get acceptable NPC character that looks unique and realistic (hopefully, with the next CC3 updates)  enough and indistinguishable from a character you would get when creating it from scratch?

On the other hand, solid AAA game studios already have their game-ready base meshes to use for NPCs (and also lead characters) in every game, so it would be very hard to sell RL products to them. Every game wants to be unique, and uniqueness is created by textures and assets. and CC3 cannot help much with these. Studios will have to create assets using industry-standard tools, and CC3/iClone can provide asset integration and animation only, which game studios already have in their current pipeline, anyway.

The best target audience seems to be startups that look for AAA quality (hopefully, the quality will come with next CC3 releases with HD textures and SSS) and convenient pipeline to kickstart their character creation. If RL manages to become a "de-facto" standard for starting 3D game studios, it already will mean some serious hooked customers and some income to use for development of other RL products. 

That's why I highly welcome their latest attempts at integrating with game engines and hugely improving that slightly plasticky dollish look of their current character textures. I keep fingers crossed for the upcoming releases with a hope they will make some serious noise in the industry.