Zugg Software :: View topic

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 1:46 pm

Here is a question to ask your friends...

Would anyone be interested in a "Lite" version of zMUD (no mapper, no elicense) that only cost $20 like the old days?

In other words, it would have all of the features of 7.13 but without any mapper. And instead of the eLicense copy protection, it would use simply encrypted registration codes like the old days.

This version would not be an upgrade (it's a downgrade really) and since it wouldn't handle eLicense, it would be a completely separate product from the full zMUD. There wouldn't be any way to "upgrade" the Lite version to the Full version...you'd have to buy the full reg code if you wanted the full version with the mapper.

I'm not promising anything here, I'm just asking a hypothetical question. Post your feedback on this. If it is something that a lot of people might be interested in, I might consider it.

Wizard Joined: 03 Mar 2001 Posts: 1127 Location: London

Sounds like a good idea. If I hadn't had the full version for 5 years or so I'd be tempted by the Lite version.

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 3:27 pm

Same version minus one feature that I dont use, only cheaper and without elicense spyware quietly installed? Hellz yeah, where do I sign up? Well I'm sure it is mentioned there will be extra third-party service installed buried somewhere in the 20 pages of license agreement legalese along with giving Zugg the rights to your first born, but who reads these things anyway.

Sorcerer Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 706 Location: USA

I would say NOT A GOOD IDEA. The reason is you would have people try and hack the registration code. Then you would have a major problem with people giving it away. If it was me I would remove the map, keep eLicense and change it to only have 2 licenses available. That would be the only way I would do a $20 version.

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:11 pm

It is likely that the registration code for the Lite version would be "time sensitive" and only unlock the program within a period of time after the reg code was purchased. So posting the reg code to the net wouldn't harm anything. And it would be extremely difficult to create a key generator for it. Then, when you need to install the program again in the future, you use a web page to get a new reg code emailed to your original address, and we keep track of how many times a particular purchase is reissued. Sure, this isn't as secure as eLicense, but that's the whole point. It's really an experiement in less restrictive copy protection, since as you can see from the replies already there are people who don't want to deal with eLicense but might be still willing to buy the product without it. But with this method, you don't need to "activate" the product using the Internet, like eLicense does...you just need to enter a valid reg code before that reg code expires, and have us send you new reg codes (for free) as you need them in the future.

So, assume that the replacement for eLicense is still pretty secure, but without all of the eLicense headaches, control panel installed, and hardware ID tracking that is done now. No copy protection is perfect and eLicense is already hackable (as we know), and many people claim that a less intrusive copy protection still works just as well.

That was probably more detail that anyone needed, and I'm still undecided on *exactly* how this might work, but that's the reason for the poll.

If this experiment is successful (i.e., people still buy the Lite version), then it's possible the eLicense might be removed on the full version some time in the future, but I'm not promising anything. It really depends upon the outcome of this experiment.

Oh, and Chiara and I are not interested in your first born, but if you have a cool car or something, let me know Wink

Enchanter Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 698

Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:43 pm

Are you unhappy with elicense or something? It seems odd to completely revamp licensing for different versions of the same product. Certainly changing the number of licenses or renew time would be easy enough, right?

[Obviously I don't know... I've looked at eLicense for some of my company's licensing and never given them any significant attention since we couldn't evaluate the system or get any details on it w/out communicating with their sales dept.]

Anyway, I guess my opinion is that lacking a mapper, there are other very good free alternatives available which also work very well on non-windows platforms, so I would expect very few people being interested in a lite version.

Don't take that the wrong way. Whatever I spent on zMud years ago was well worth it.

Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:26 pm

Yes, I am unhappy with elicense, exactly how you put it. It is a matter of trust. If zmud software connects to server to check for license thats one thing, been using zmud since version 3 and I trust Zugg. If some third-party software installs a service without my consent, sets itself to start automatic, and then that service connects to some server, thats called spyware. You are so confident that along license information nothing else is passed, say your credit card information? Notice how runservice.exe eats 1.3Mb of RAM and stays resident after you close zmud. You are sure the lastest version doesnt log your keystrokes while at it? Notice there isnt a start menu entry for elicence. There isnt uninstall entry either. You've uninstalled zmud but whats this, elicense hasnt moved - congratulations, the spyware you just installed is here to stay. This evil spyware hides its entries well, unless you used some software that logs what went where during install, you'll find manual delete exceedingly difficult.

As for second part, I dont know about others, but I am demanding. I want the best. I want windows platform and all the zmuds features too many to name all. I disagree, Lite or not, there really arent good alternatives for windows client with graphics capabilities (buttons, gauges)

Novice Joined: 21 Feb 2002 Posts: 49 Location: USA

I would have bought a lite version, because the Mapper in my full version doesn't work worth a darn.

Apprentice Joined: 16 Dec 2002 Posts: 114 Location: USA

As much as I hate to say this... we have all heard about the recent cracks for zmud.. the newest one *I* know of is 7.04... If people are willing to go through length of writing a modify patch for zmud full.... and youre removing the difficulty of bypassing elicense... you are just making it easier for people to hack zmud again anyway.... So... I have to sadly say no, even though I myself even hate elicense...the other problem you are going to face as far as income from a mud client is that so many clients out there are going open source and free now. Some even have the full versions as unlimited trials, with a few extra features unlocked if you actually buy it... mud clients just arent the way to make money anymore with so many out there for free and with the advanced features.

Wizard Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 1551 Location: Australia

Something that runs on a USB key could be handy for some folks, but I would make it a little lighter than just no mapper... otherwise there's not much reason to upgrade to the full version... maybe you should take out regex triggers, COM interface, and the vbscript/javascript languages?

I myself won't buy a lite version, since I'm quite happy with the full :)

Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:38 pm

SubAdmin Joined: 18 Nov 2001 Posts: 5182

I replied a "No" to the poll of course. As has been the case for some many years, that I can't even find the records for when I first purchased zMud, I am totally pleased with whatever you, Zugg, feel is the best. I has been thoroughly impressed by your honesty and commitment to the quality of the products you seek to sell that I will support the actions you determine are best for those products. My only caution to you with releasing a zMud "Lite" is that it is still a zMud product, no matter how much you try to sell it as something different. It will reflect back to true zMud product. It is one of those instenses where the best of intentions may have the worst of consequences. I would caution that as your review the poll results you think through the paths of thought that are likely to be travelled by all your customers.

GURU Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 873 Location: USA

Just a thought- fundable.org might be a neat way to try out this or other proposals.

An example:
A developer promises to produce X product or new feature for $Y. Anyone can buy in (make a donation). If enough people chip in to meet the price, then the developer gets the money and delivers the feature. If there isn't enough interest by a set date, everybody gets their money back.

I have no affiliation and haven't tried them, but they got pretty wide press when they opened and the website seems pretty reasonable.

-Tarn

Wizard Joined: 14 Oct 2000 Posts: 1368

Tarn when I read your post I first thought it was a good idea but I quickly realized that it isn't. What it would do is to ruin the customer driven approach Zuggsoft uses. Want to propose a feature for MXP that makes sense to get added? Well then you would perhaps have to pay for it.

Some features Zugg has added to zMUD I remember wasn't really wished for by the users. The mapper comes to mind here I think. It is one of the most powerful features in zMUD but still never got much support in the surveys. Still Zugg improved the mapper and made it to the huge success it is today (I would not MUD without a mapper!).

I hope you see my reasoning. The majority might not be correct in how zMUD should evolve. Sometimes you have to dare to take some risks and hope for the best to make the MUD community move forward.

There are _a lot_ of MUDs that dislike bots and some even dislike zMUD for enabling the ability to create bots easily(see the forum discussion on the afk tag MXP support in dev forum). Would rich MUDs be able to pay to get features to make bots harder to write even if it would be disliked by most users?

Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:52 pm

Rorso, actually the mapper was a direct result of user suggestions. Not sure if it ever made it into the surveys, but the original mapper added back in v4.x was a result of a discussion about whether or not such a thing was even possible in a MUD client. Then, in response to customers asking for ways in which to customize the mapper with icons and graphics, zMapper was written. While it's true that many of the people asking for mapping enhancements were probably hoping to see them directly in zMUD rather than in a separate program, I had enough feedback from people who didn't use the mapper to know that it probably wasn't a good idea to bloat zMUD with mapping enhancements that only a few people would use.

Note the distinction here..."customer-driver" doesn't mean that I always listen to the majority and only do what they ask. Many of the valuable features in zMUD have come from the *minority*. I always try to weigh the feedback that I get with a combination of factors like: how easy is it to implement, are their business impacts (plus or minus) to implementing it, and if it's a minority asking for a feature then what will the rest of zMUD users think about it. And zMUD has always been *user* focused, rather than MUD-server focused. There are a *lot* of changes that MUD servers would probably like to see (and they have requested them in the past) that I've refused to do because of the negative impact on players.

So yes, Rorso is correct...it's not just a matter of "the majority" but really more about what makes good sense to evolve zMUD and keep it at the top as the best MUD client. And determining whether zMUD is "the best" isn't something I can do...it's something the customer decides.

Novice Joined: 16 Mar 2001 Posts: 38 Location: USA

I too have been using Zmud for what seems like forever. In fact its 1 of 2 "shareware" type product i have ever purchased (and was well worth every penny).
However i do agree with just the mapper gone from a "lite" version(which i never use) just wouldnt be enuff. At least to get new users to buy the "full" version. Something else that is very useful would have to go. (sound protocal, plugin support (although not alot of plugins out there) limit amount of scripting that can be installed)?
Of course you could always add a (cough, cough) nag screen. Shocked

Also, with all the programing you do, and your not exactly happy with eLicense, why not write your own license program? Im not a coder so i have no idea whats involved so its just a suggestion.

As for me, if i lost my registration code and couldnt get a copy, i would buy the full version again and again. Its well worth it Cool

Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 10:09 pm

I used to write my own copy protection. It took *way* too much of my time away from "useful" programming. And these days there are a number of very good alternatives to eLicense.

Remember that I'm not saying zMUDLite won't have copy protection...it will. It just won't be the "phone home" type that eLicense uses. There will still be a trial/nag screen. I'm also debating between removing more features, or just making zMUDLite $25 instead of $20. For removing features, it need to be something I can do easily with conditional compilation so that I don't have to maintain multiple source codes.

Magician Joined: 25 Oct 2000 Posts: 461 Location: USA

In all honesty, I'm surprised at the "hate" towards the mapper. I've been following the mapper since zugg first introduced it, and he's been gracious enough to honor most of my requests (>enter>n for mapping all the screwy directions on 3-kingdoms, for example). While I don't mud as much as I used to, I wouldn't _at all_ without the mapper.

Personally, the mapper is the reason to buy zmud. I fear that with the mapper removed, people won't buy zmud in favor of some free client. Not to say that all the other zmud features aren't superior to other clients - they likely are (haven't compared in a long while). But the mapper sets it apart from anything else by a mile.

Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 10:42 pm

I don't think it's "hate". I think it's just misunderstanding, or not enough patience to spend all of the time configuring it. Or, some people play MUDs that try really hard to mess up the mapper. So people have lots of reasons. I could never MUD without it either, but people are different.

Also, I'm not sure I understand your "fear that people won't buy zmud in favor of some free client". I'm not getting rid of the full version or anything. You'll always still be able to buy the full version with the mapper and everything for the same price it is now. So if the free versions are not impacting zMUD right now, then it won't be any worse with a zMUDLite. If anything, a zMUDLite might *increase* sales for those people who have avoided the full version. At least that's the idea.

So don't worry...the mapper will still be part of zMUD. It's just zMUDLite we are talking about here.

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 3:22 pm

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 4:04 pm

True, an upgrade cost to full version would have to be at least doable.
if not the diff in price, then diff in price + $5.
That's the way I handled sales when i was selling stuff.

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:05 pm

I agree with you that an upgrade is important. But I won't know if it's possible for sure until I choose the new ecommerce and copy protection system. In order for an upgrade to work, the new ecommerce solution would need to recognize an existing customer (which should be easy enough), and then be able to generate a reg code that works with the eLicense system of the full version. That requires custom code on the ecommerce provider to interact with eLicense, which might be an issue.

Then again, if I'm really happy with the new ecommerce provider, it might also be possible to release a new "full" version of zMUD that uses them too. But I'm not willing to switch over all of the zMUD business to a new provider until they have "proven" themselves. ViaTech has done a lot for me over the past 5 years and I'm not just going to toss them away for promises from a new company. So I don't know how long it might take to get an "upgrade" system in place.

Also, an upgrade will always cost more than just the diff in price. It's good to reward people who just buy the full version to start with. The diff+$5 sounds about right.

And yes, I think I've decided that a zMUDLite product is a good idea. When I first created this discussion topic I honestly wasn't sure or not. It's truely been the feedback in this topic and the results of the poll that have convinced me to move forward with this idea. Just another example of how your input can really help drive the business.

Honestly, I still haven't decided if zMUDLite should be $20 or $25. Someone reminded me that if I plan to allow "affiliates" to sell zMUD and make a commission, that I need to build that into the price. And since a $5 commission seems about right, I might make zMUDLite $25, with the $5 commission to other sites that sell it, resulting in a net $20 to me. Also, at the $25 price, just removing the mapper is probably all I need to do to make it worthwhile...I don't have to worry about what other features to remove.

I know that doesn't match the original poll or topic, so if people think that the difference between $20 and $25 is a huge deal breaker, let me know. But I think most people who answered "yes" to the poll are more interested in getting rid of eLicense, and/or getting a lower price for removing the mapper that they can't/don't use.

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:47 pm

Bleh, this is getting to be a complicated mess. In order to handle upgrades, both zMUD and zMUDLite really need to use the same ecommerce and copy protection company. The new company I'm looking at does a really nice job handling upgrades and Lite->Full conversions.

The problem is that it's almost impossible to convert the full version of zMUD to a new copy protection company. Because I've promised "free upgrades for life", any new version of zMUD using a new copy protection company would need to be free for existing zMUD users. But that requires the new copy protection company to recognize all 60,000+ existing reg codes, which were created using a completely different algorithm (and multiple algorithms depending upon how zMUD was originally purchased). And in order to convert an "old" reg code into a "new" reg code, the new copy protection company charges their fee for the new reg code. But since upgrades are free, I'd end up paying that fee myself. That would cost me an enormous amount of money as customers upgraded to the new version.

Of course, having zMUDLite use the same copy protection as zMUD "full" (eLicense) defeats the whole purpose of having a version of zMUD that doesn't use eLicense.

I'm still talking with various people at the new ecommerce company to see what we can come up with to resolve this difficulty, but it sure is getting complicated.

Wizard Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 1551 Location: Australia

Isn't going back to a non-phone-home copy protection defeating the whole purpose of having gone elicense in the first place?

The ability to cancel people's reg codes when they ask for refunds, prevent keygens, etc

I think that there should be more than just the mapper as an incentive to get the full version, otherwise you'll have a bunch of people whining that they never use the mapper so they should be given a free version of lite so they don't have to 'bloat'. Perhaps no MXP, no sound, no vbscript, no database, no editor, no MCCP.

The price should be more significant than $5 difference between the 2 versions too. Maybe 25 lite, 35 full, shrug.

Maybe it's time to spin off a Pro version as well, add things like SSH, the full zMapper system, etc and let people upgrade from lite to pro for $30, and standard to pro for $15.