Thanks for confirming this — and this is exactly why I believe this goes beyond a simple “feature change”.
When a paid Suite upgrade is sold without clearly communicating that previously included, Suite-level workflows have been removed, that creates a misleading purchasing situation for customers.
In my case, MAGIX accepted payment for a Suite upgrade in November, while a core workflow that justified the Suite price became unavailable shortly after, without any prominent notice at the time of purchase.
With most professional software vendors, situations like this are typically handled by offering a downgrade, refund of the price difference, or another corrective solution. Here, no such option was provided.
This is not about resisting product evolution — it is about fair value exchange.
Payment was accepted for a tier that no longer delivered the value it was reasonably expected to provide.Acknowledging the lack of communication is a start, but without a corrective action, the customer impact remains unaddressed.
I would like to share an upgrade experience and ask for clarification regarding Suite feature continuity.
I upgraded to VEGAS Pro 23 Suite in November (during a promotional period).
My upgrade decision was based on workflows I had used in previous VEGAS Pro Suite versions, including Mocha-based tracking, which was an important reason for choosing the Suite tier over Pro.By January, this workflow was no longer available or usable in VEGAS Pro Suite 23. During the upgrade process, I did not encounter any clear or prominent communication indicating that a previously available Suite-level workflow would no longer be accessible shortly after upgrading.
Support later confirmed that MochaVEGAS was part of earlier Suite versions but is not included in Suite 23.
While I understand product changes between versions, the short timeframe between upgrade and loss of this workflow raised concerns regarding value continuity for Suite upgrades.I contacted MAGIX support to request clarification or a possible downgrade/refund of the Suite price difference, but unfortunately I was unable to reach a resolution.
My goal with this post is not to criticize, but to better understand:
how Suite feature changes are communicated between major versions, and
how users are expected to evaluate feature continuity when upgrading.
I believe clearer communication around Suite-level feature changes would help users make more informed upgrade decisions in the future.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Unfortunately, it's been a recurring theme with several other posts in the community. Mocha VEGAS, legacy AVI encoding (even though it's still listed in settings), and stereoscopic 3D were all removed in 23 with no communication unfortunately. The only real 'solution' I've seen so far is that we should be downloading the trials for new versions of VEGAS Pro to see if our workflow is still supported. Not a great solution, but it is what it is. The lack of communication has already been acknowledged by a dev but so far nothing has come of it.
I don't know the problem with this vegas pro 23,I don't like the way it handles alpha videos.can anybody help me fix this.
any ETA for next update?
No, no statements as to timing.
There was plenty of discussion in this forum about Mocha Vegas not being included in VP23 Suite, which was released August/September last year. Plenty.
Not sure I'd agree that this counts as any sort of announcement. Indeed mucxh of the conversation was "where the heck has Mocha Vegas gone", and the Vegas Team only (grudgingly ) admitted it had been removed, which then generated some further conversation. But they have never formerly announced its removal. Is it really the expectation that users check the forums for feature information?
It might be useful if vegas published one or more of the following on product launch:
“Removed Features” list
“Breaking Changes” list
“Suite Component Changes” list
“Major Version Changelog”
“Deprecation Notices”
I've not yet seen anything like "we've removed this or that" from any software that I use. I usually will try a trial version first, then ask the appropriate questions as to what happened with "x". As you wrote, the Vegas team did comment on it.
Mocha VEGAS was at least not listed under the included software and that does change from year to year.
The removed features like 3D should have been disclosed to potential purchasers.
To say that we grudgingly admitted Mocha Vegas was removed is pretty inaccurate? When asked, we immediately said the Mocha Vegas was not included as any part of Vegas Pro 23. It was a very unfortunate situation and the engineering team really hoped to still have this as part of Vegas Pro. I would like to think that situations could change in the future where we would be able to revive this feature/bundle.
As far as the removal of some features (such as 3D)...I have admitted previously that we should have done a better job of informing users about when we do this and we will keep that in mind in the future. It should be noted that any feature listed in the deprecated features tab of the preferences can, and likely will, be completely removed from the product at some point in the future. 3D should have been moved to deprecated status in VP 22 (also something I stated in the past) to prepare users for its eventual removed. It was an error on our part to not do that.
@VEGASDerek It concerns me that Smart Upscale & Zoom might be removed from Vegas completely. Granted it duplicates the functionality of AI versions which yield better results. But the AI versions are incredibly processor intensive. I normally use the deprecated versions during edit and switch to AI for final overnight renders. And that's with the highest performance gpus I can afford. With more common gpus, the AI versions might take days to complete and be impractical for many users. I would suggest keeping the functionality of both, perhaps in a unified version with a checkbox to enable/disable AI operation.
I've not yet seen anything like "we've removed this or that" from any software that I use.
Microsoft do, eg https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/office/ltsc/2024/overview
And so do Adobe
I don't know anyone who uses Office LTSC 2024. First hearing about it. I'm still on Office 2003. But yet, M$ doesn't list things no longer "supported" natively in Win 11.
Adobe? I haven't used anything from them since Premiere 6 many years ago. What did they remove?
It is still not the norm to say what has been removed. Notice the caveat that I wrote, "from any software that I use".
Office LTSC 2024 is just the official designation of the perpetual licence version of Office 2024 as opposed to Microsoft 365. I know people using it.
>But yet, M$ doesn't list things no longer "supported" natively in Win 11.
They did and do, e.g https://learn.microsoft.com/windows/whats-new/removed-features
They provide additional lists of deprecated Windows OS apps, deprecated APIs and developer features, deprecated Group Policies, and deprecated security features
And indeed there are plenty of other big name companies that do similar. Not sure that arguing that just because you use products where this is not the case justifies Vegas not doing it. I'm just suggesting they consider doing it going forward (as Derek, for example, has said); it would avoid some of the online griping (and questions)
To say that we grudgingly admitted Mocha Vegas was removed is pretty inaccurate?
Agreed, and I apologies for using the wrong word. I think what I was really getting at was that it took users asking the question to get any formal information from Vegas about feature removal.
Office LTSC 2024 is just the official designation of the perpetual licence version of Office 2024 as opposed to Microsoft 365. I know people using it.
>But yet, M$ doesn't list things no longer "supported" natively in Win 11.
They did and do, e.g https://learn.microsoft.com/windows/whats-new/removed-features
They provide additional lists of deprecated Windows OS apps, deprecated APIs and developer features, deprecated Group Policies, and deprecated security features
And indeed there are plenty of other big name companies that do similar. Not sure that arguing that just because you use products where this is not the case justifies Vegas not doing it. I'm just suggesting they consider doing it going forward (as Derek, for example, has said); it would avoid some of the online griping (and questions)
You have to go on a search to find the information about M$ what they remove, what they are going to remove, etc.. Thanks for the link. And again, I wasn't arguing. I stated from my experience with the software I've used. It wasn't a blanket coverage of everything.
As for Vegas? I see nothing wrong with doing this. Listing what is going deprecated, what will be soon gone, etc..