I basically mostly agree with this post... They want to please everyone, but this is impossible, since everyone has a feature wishlist. There are two sides of the story.cowpatmat wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:57 amYou're right Scott.Scott wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:22 pmAbout the Parametric EQ3 thing - It's on the to-do.
But let's get real here. The music industry got by for 30+ years with basic parametric EQ and still does. You do not need anything more than the stock FX EQ solutions.
You may think you do, but no, you don't. Too many of you are spending too much time thinking about your tools, rather than using what you have, which is already TOO MUCH, to make music.
And it it is that important to you, then please buy the 3rd party plugins that do what you want rather than ranting at the team we didn't give you something for free. VST is a wonderful thing, no?
You can technically make great music with very few limited tools. So there's not an intrinsic "need" for more features but rather "wants".
There seems to be a substantial and growing disconnect here between the developers and users regarding the wants.
User's need to understand the developers are prioritizing features to the best of their collective foresight and objectives. On the flip side developers need to understand that users complaints about features are coming from a place of passion and love for FLStudio. This sounds twisted, but it's true, users get frustrated when they've been here a while (or not long) and they see very few features being released; including confirmed features that have been on the to do list for donkies years. Most users are complaining simply because they want FLS to be so much more.
FLS does not need to be anything more to create great music, it's a matter of FLS's potential to have so much more interesting, advanced, playful features. It's been my personal grim with you guys that there is practically an infinite number of interesting, creative, and fun possibilities that would make FLS so awesome, yet we only seem to get trickles of more basic features now and then. In a sentence, it feels like FLS has become stagnant, whilst there's infinite potential for innovation in your hands. That just seems like the biggest waste.
It's totally cool that much of what IL release is free, along with free updates; but this should not be used as a defense against users complaints. Clearly users are willing to pay for more advanced plugins and features. If funding were a perceived obstruction towards innovation and development, then charge users for these new tools, we're happy to pay.
I purchased Transistor Bass a while back just to show a little love. I could've just sampled the plugin, but I chose to throw a little cash at you guys for an expensive 303 emulator, not because I really want it, but to show some support. Turns out I haven't even used Transistor Bass since, after discovering you cannot automate the patch while in piano roll mode, which just blows my mind, unless I'm missing something there? I've never raised it because I'm certain if I did, it wouldn't be upgraded to be made possible anyway. Hence desire for more functionality warps itself into dissatisfaction and complaining again.
So how can we bridge this disconnect a little, between awesome intelligent programmers and hungry musicians/composers...
Can we throw some monies at you to hire more developers?
Perhaps trial a plugin/feature donation funding section to the top of threads? If funding goal reached then developers are contracted to produce the feature.
Have ya'll considered making FLS open source? Probably not very viable right.. Disastrous in fact . Maybe in a parallel universe it could work with the right considerations and restrictions
Anyway, the FX chain plugin here looks really nice. Thanks for not drowning her in bright orange, she's actually looking kinda sexy! Sure, she's only doing basic effects in a serial chain, but it actually looks like a very useful, consolidated, easy, and quick to use plugin; so all thumbs up from me. This plugin, along with the rhythm generator from Dunny are great starts towards making FLS more compelling, interesting and fun to use, great work
I have so many ideas for this, but I won't
I'll shut up now.
The first is IL's perspective: I think people underestimate how much time it takes to make a fully-finished product. I'm no dev... but the process behind creating every plugin isn't that easy. On top of making a plugin that is even functional (some devs even fail at that), they've got to give it a UI that isn't hell to use (which there are plenty of). And this isn't even considering making sure it doesn't crash on the 20 years worth of code that is FL Studio 20. And you've got to test it, troubleshoot it, squash bugs, submit for beta testing, rinse repeat - and all this is essentially DOUBLED since FL is now on macOS... all of this TAKES TIME.
Now the second side of the story is the user's perspective: "we" have been requesting this feature for years now, but you seem more interested in creating plugins that "no-one" asked for. We, the extremely diverse group of FL users - the entitled brats, the freshly-installed newbies, the oldschool vetarans, casual users and true tinkerers alike... we all want our own individual voices to be heard.
Now, I can see both sides of the equation... FL has limited resources, and users have limited patience. How do we work this out...
I'd like to think that if they hosted some kind of poll every 6 months to vote on the most user-requested features (which are actually feasible)... but I have the feeling that just 'fulfilling a user requested feature' isn't as simple as 1,2,3 - mostly due to the steps mentioned above, and especially considering whether these features will even be used.
Also we've got to think about the future of FL itself. If I were IL, I would constantly be worried about the future of the company. Most companies can just rely on securing their old customers, since they have to pay to upgrade. FL have to be constantly on their toes, since almost their entire business model hinges on new customers. What do they do? Do they just pray to the free market Gods that they never hit market saturation, and if we ever do, how do we make money without going back on our lifetime free updates policy?
With that mindset, I can honestly understand them experimenting with the idea of FLEX being a sort of monetisation platform, to obtain a more stable source of revenue. But at the same time, they are working with a userbase which is extremely protective over their freebies. I remember when FL put a button on plugin demos that let takes you to the Image-Line purchase pack, and even when they found out that not all FLEX packs were free, the forum reacted kind of strongly against this, and accused IL of including """microtransactions"""...
Honestly, I don't really know what this post is... I just want to expand and deconstruct the whole argument that IL aren't listening to their customers. They are - it's just so difficult when there are so many of us. Scott and the devs are in the Forum every single day, and I don't understand how they put up with the sheer amount of dumbassery sometimes. I'm not targetting any one user with this statement, but the nonsense they have to deal with constantly, makes it sort of frustrating for devs to figure out which opinions are serious users who will take advantage of them, and who are just entitled brats who just whine no matter what...
I dunno guys... let's just try to be civil, and be gentle with dear IL. They do a lot for considering they are a team of just 14 devs.