Steinberg, please consider a token system for voting on feature requests


I am sure someone may have requested this before, but please consider setting up a token system for feature requests.

A token system would allow you to allot a certain number of tokens per cycle to registered Cubase owners that they can use to vote on feature requests that they really want. Users could use one or all of their tokens for features that you have marked as under consideration for development.

All forum users could still enter feature requests as often as they like but the tokens would be used for those requests that you have deemed worthy of your development time.

I think there are a few major advantages to this:

  1. We as users would be aware of the features that you are actually considering.

  2. We as users would be more aware of which features are truly gaining the most traction with other users. The post counts in a thread are
    sometimes misleading due to posts that are conversation related and not necessarily a +1 or vote for the request. Requests could be ranked by
    those with the most tokens making them always default to the top of the list.

  3. You as a developer can easily track which feature requests are the most wanted and needed by your existing / paying customers. Currently, we
    users can +1 100 different requests leaving you to have to sort through and guess about our true priorities. Users would have to carefully consider
    the requests that they vote for which would help you to focus in on the features that are most important to us. The surveys are nice, but I see this
    another tool that you could leverage.

  4. Any non-implemented requests that have over a certain number of tokens could be carried over to the next cycle so that the users don’t have to keep re-entering the same requests over and over. Any tokens used for feature requests that are not implemented could revert back to the user to be used on the same request or a different request in the next cycle. That way if their request didn’t make the final cut, they would feel that they had a better chance to get a feature they wanted added in the next cycle by virtue of their token count would be higher than someone that did get a feature added in the previous cycle.

  5. You could offer a certain number of additional tokens to customers when they upgrade to the newest version as an incentive to stay on the most current release.

I realize that you have to continue to develop to attract new customers as well, but this would allow a fairly low maintenance way to keep your finger on the pulse of your existing customer base. I think the users would appreciate this as well because it would make us feel like we are a bigger part of the development process.

Does anyone else have any comments on this idea?

A big +1

They pretty much need to just do %95 of what has been suggested in these 2 pages asap.

Hi Resonant,

Maybe you can get your hands on the Infinity Gauntlet and snap all of the features on the first two pages into existence. You could then use it to code all the hotfixes for the stuff you broke when adding the new features. You could follow up that miraculous feat by disintegrating all of the users that complain about the fact that their workflows were affected by the new features. Easy peasy!

Otherwise, it is never going to happen. There are many moving parts for the developers to consider when deciding to add a new feature let alone hundreds. With all your wonderful ideas and your insight into the needs of every other Cubase user on the planet, you should consider hiring a software development team to build your own DAW. Let me know when it is ready for pre-order so I can be first in line. You may have Steinberg so worried about the competition that they buy you out before you get too big and overtake them. They could turn your product into their new flagship “do everything that you could ever want and even those things that you haven’t thought of yet” product Resonance.

I appreciate all opinions in favor or not in favor, but how does your comment add anything to the conservation? Are you just trying to get your post count to the next level? If so, you already have a pretty robust thread going on so maybe you could post some more there or you could come back here and post a relevant comment.


No I’m saying Steinberg should get a move on %95 of the requests in this forum and that the first 2-3 pages so far are all mostly very worthy of attention suggestions… You disagree?

No need to make a token system, and too be honest, token systems don’t always work in this context - for instance, you might get a majority of garageband-esque users who use their tokens to push the program in a direction that is detrimental to professionals who are doing important work but use more obscure or niche features. You might get people who just want more included drum sample content because a lot of people like included sample content - that’s all they use.


Steinberg is not going to spend there valuable development time reducing the quality of their product. The tokens would only be able to be used on features that Steinberg has deemed worthy of the token vote (my very first benefit).

  1. We as users would be aware of the features that you are actually considering.

I have faith that they would factor in the audience that the different requests cater to and keep a mixture of features in play. Their could be different categories that they look at to ensure that there was something for everyone.

Would you feel differently if the number of tokens were based on how long you had been a user and how many upgrades you had purchased? If you were a PRO version owner? What if the deck was stacked in your favor? What if you knew that the PLE was a category that was going to be guaranteed to get one or more of the top requested features added from this category? Still feel the same?

Do you really think that a person that spends the money to purchase Cubase and keep it upgraded is going to want it to work like GarageBand (no offence to any GB users)? If they like the workflow of GarageBand, they would just buy and use GarageBand.

I think you are being unrealistic and elitist with your views of what features should be added. Steinberg is always going to side with the masses when deciding what features to add because if they don’t, they won’t make any money. Just me, THEY WANT TO MAKE MONEY!!!

As much as you love the PLE and shortcuts, you have to admit they are not wow features that are going to sell upgrades. At least with my suggestion, you may actually get some of the things that you have been waiting on for so long. I think your concern is the type of things that you really want won’t align with the majority of users. However, if done thoughtfully, all users (pro, beginner and everyone in between) would be able to get some of the features that matter to them.

I don’t disagree that there would be some hurdles to overcome to set up a system like I am describing, but I do think it is worthy of consideration.