作者：Tom Curtis

近期，Adobe在Flash 11.2中添加“预付费功能”的决定在游戏开发社区中引起轰动。随着公司计划针对其新的高端功能收取许可费用，有些开发者担心平台正朝危险的方向发展。

Gamasutra采访了《Canabalt》制作者Adam Saltsman、Spry Fox的Daniel Cook和《QWOP》制作者Bennett Foddy，他们在使用Flash方面都有丰富的经验，而且都很关心Adobe针对更多强大功能收取额外费用的决定。

adobe logo from famouslogos.org

目前，Adobe只计划向结合使用硬件加速渲染和域内存的开发者收取许可费用，而只有当开发者的盈利超过5万美元的时候才会产生这笔费用。Adobe表示，这些功能很可能将只适用于制作图像类游戏的开发者，但是Flash资深人士Daniel Cook并不这么认为。

他说道：“我认为，这种改变不会只影响制作3D游戏的高端开发者。‘预付费’的定义毫无疑问将随时间逐步拓宽，最终Stage3D等基础技术将成为你用Flash构建现代游戏的必要工具。”

Cook说道，如果开发者最终对这些预付费功能形成依赖，Adobe将成为另一个影响游戏制作者盈利的因素。

“影响盈利多寡的服务越多，我越无法维持自己的业务。这样的服务逐渐变得越来越多。Adobe分了9%，付费供应商抽成5%-40%，门户网站抽成30%-50%。每个服务商都说自己只获得了盈利的一小部分。但是每个抽成都会影响到我的盈利。”

Adam Saltsman对上述看法表示认同，他认为无论Adobe当前的计划如何，这些预付费功能都是Adobe试图从Flash开发者手中获得更多金钱的手段。

他说道：“即便这不是他们的计划和本意，但这是系统必然产生的结果。如果你的唯一付费用户是‘预付费用户’，而且你看重营收，那么你接下来就会不断取悦预付费用户并鼓励所有非预付费用户转型。这才是这个系统的本质所在。上述情况的发生只是时间而已。”

“我不会完全放弃这个平台，但是Flash作为Flixel开发游戏的平台，我觉得现在自己需要采取行动，在3年或更短的时间内去除对Flash的依赖。”

Bennett Foddy认为，从某种程度上，他能够理解Adobe的措施（游戏邦注：因为Adobe也是家公司，当然也需要盈利）。

Foddy说道：“Adobe并非一定要给开发者提供3D加速跨平台Flash客户端。Flash不是网页标准，它是个被用户广泛使用的闭源第三方插件，但是现在使用者数量逐渐减少。在这种背景下，Adobe就不能继续免费开发这个产品。”

除了从Adobe业务的角度来看待问题外，Foddy仍然还会以开发者的身份来关注这个问题，因为现在还不知道Adobe的业务模型会如何改变。

“我觉得，Adobe忽然将Flash播放器从免费产品变成付费应用是不合理的做法。但从另一个角度看，如果你将这个产品视为新3D平台，而不是对现有2D网页标准的修改，那么这个交易还是合理的。”

无论最终Adobe采取何种措施，Foddy认为公司可能会面临一场战斗。本地手机应用商店现在已逐渐流行，他认为这个市场最终会完全吞并Flash。

他说道：“这样的措施肯定会让许多开发者探索其他制作2D和3D游戏的方法。在未来1到2年内，最大的游戏市场将不会是安装Flash的电脑市场，很可能会是带有应用商店的平板电脑和手机市场。这种改变会使开发者更快地选择其他开发方式。”

Gamasutra还与Adobe有过交谈，公司表示增加预付费功能并不意味着Flash会完全发生改变（游戏邦注：和之前一样，Adobe仍然计划在每次发布时添加新的许可费用功能）。

Adobe发言人说道：“Adobe计划开发新的预付费功能和核心平台功能。但是，并非所有的开发者都需要依靠预付费功能制作出优秀的游戏和体验。”

Unity Technologies是Adobe近期的商业伙伴，他们认为Adobe的预付费功能是个有意义的商业决策。

公司首席执行官David Helgason解释道：“每个公司都需要为自己研发的产品收费，Adobe已经决定了这就是未来Flash平台的盈利方向。”

“Adobe选择了一种灵活的模型，多数Flash功能都不会用来盈利。我们都知道，对于任何一种商业模型，都会有不想加入的顾客，但是我认为Adobe Flash添加的预付费功能值得多数开发者付费购买。”

Helgason补充称，Unity自身没有参与到顾客盈利计划中，但是他怀疑开发者会需要更长时间才能适应Adobe的这项决策。

“尽管购买新功能对开发者来说是很有价值的行为，但事实在于，此前产品一直都是免费的，这意味着开发者想法的转变将较为困难，或许需要更多时间才能抛弃之前那种完全免费的想法。”（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Will Flash’s new ‘premium features’ drive game developers away?

Tom Curtis

Adobe’s recent decision to add “premium features” to Flash 11.2 has caused a bit of a stir within the game development community. With the company planning to charge royalty fees for its new high-end features, some developers are worried the platform is heading in a dangerous direction.

Gamasutra spoke to Canabalt creator Adam Saltsman, Spry Fox’s Daniel Cook, and QWOP creator Bennett Foddy, all of whom have plenty of experience working with Flash, and all of whom are concerned about Adobe’s decision to charge extra for its more powerful features.

Currently, Adobe only plans to collect royalties from developers who use hardware accelerated rendering in combination with domain memory, and these fees only come into effect after they make more than $50,000. Adobe says these features will likely apply only to developers working with graphically intense games, but Flash veteran Daniel Cook isn’t so sure.

“I think it would be a mistake to see this as a move that only affects the high-end developers that want to make 3D extravaganzas,” he said. “Platforms like to boil frogs. The definition of ‘premium’ will no doubt broaden over time and basic tech like Stage3D will end up being essential to how you build modern games in Flash.”

And if developers end up relying on these premium features, Cook says Adobe will become just one more revenue sink that funnels money away from the game’s creators.

“The more services that take a pieces of [my game's] revenue, the less I’m able to run a sustainable business. These pieces add up. Adobe takes 9 percent, payment providers take 5-40 percent, portals take 30-50 percent. Each middleman proclaims that they are only taking a tiny little sliver of a very big pie. But each slice decreases the value of someone playing my game.”

Adam Saltsman echoed the sentiment, noting that regardless of Adobe’s current plans, these premium features set a troubling precedent, and incentivize Adobe to seek even more money from Flash developers.

“Even if that is not their plan, that is what this system will do. If your only paying users are ‘premium users,’ and you like money, then you are going to both favor the premium users and encourage/coerce all non-premium users to switch. This is the natural effect of this system. It’s just a matter of how long it takes,” he said.

“I’m not about to jump ship or anything… but especially as a platform for [my Actionscript library] Flixel I definitely feel like I have a kind of timeline now; cut dependency on Flash within three years, or else.”

Bennett Foddy said that on a certain level, he understands the situation from Adobe’s point of view, as at the end of the day, Adobe is a business, and thus needs to make money.

“Adobe doesn’t owe anybody a 3D-accelerated, cross-platform Flash client,” said Foddy. “Flash isn’t a web standard, it’s a closed-source, third-party plugin that’s widely installed but now in decline. At some point, it won’t make sense for Adobe to keep on developing it for free.”

In spite of Adobe’s business sense, Foddy still has concerns as a developer, as there’s no telling how Adobe’s business model will evolve.

“I guess from one point of view, it seems unreasonable for Adobe to suddenly start pretending that the Flash player is an app store rather than a ubiquitous web standard. On the other hand, if you look at this as a new 3D platform, rather than as a change in the existing 2D web standard, it’s not a terrible deal; provided, that is, that they don’t alter the deal, Darth Vader style.”

Regardless of what Adobe ends up doing, Foddy suspects that the company might be facing a losing battle. Native mobile app stores are becoming more prevalent by the day, and he thinks that market could eventually eclipse Flash altogether.

“This development will almost certainly drive a lot of developers to seek other alternatives for delivering both 2D and 3D games,” he said. “In a year or two, the biggest gaming market won’t be computers with Flash installed anymore, it will presumably be tablets and phones which have their own vendor-owned app stores. And this may be the kind of change that nudges the migration process along a little faster.”

Gamasutra also spoke with Adobe for its take on the situation, and the company said that the addition of premium features doesn’t mean that Flash is changing altogether. Just like before, Adobe still plans to add new royalty-free features with every release.

“Adobe plans to develop new premium capabilities, as well as the core platform features,” said an Adobe spokesperson. “However, not all developers are expected to need premium capabilities to deliver great games and experiences on the web.”

Unity Technologies, Adobe’s most recent business partner, also offered its input, and said that Adobe’s premium offerings just make sense as a business decision.

Company CEO David Helgason explained, “Every company needs to charge for their work, and Adobe has decided that this is how they want to monetize the Flash platform going forward.”

“Adobe has picked a flexible model, where most of the Flash runtime won’t be monetized. We all know that for any business model, there are customers that can’t or won’t participate, but we think that the value add that Adobe Flash brings in terms of distribution power is worth it for most developers.”

Helgason added that Unity itself has no plans to dip into its customers’ revenue, but he suspects developers will warm up to Adobe’s decision the longer the new business model stays in place.

“While it’s been valuable to developers be able to use the Adobe Flash runtime, the fact that it’s always been free means that it’s hard to adjust one’s thinking and forget one’s previous ‘price anchor’ that it is (and therefore should be) free.” (Source: Gamasutra)