Asset Store Rejection Feedback

Hi,

I've been working on a range of different assets for some time and no matter what I have improved them changed stuff polished added a variety of stuff and unity automatically reject and don't respond to emails and say:

We don't feel this package is a good fit for the store. We have chosen not to publish this asset. However, we greatly appreciate the time and effort spent in preparing your submission.

But then they sent me an email with what to imrpove:

However, the reason your package is being rejected is because it is not up to the standard of professional productions in the same gameplay genre. Additionally, a large amount of the art assets are third-party.

I then spent a while improving the asset just to be met with the same automated rejection message.

Is there anyone here who woukd be able to help me?

 

Nobody can help you unless you provide more detail.

 

It‘s what Unity says: not up to standards. In other words: low quality. Check what other (presumably game template) assets are doing that have similar gameplay. You will find they provide more and better art, sound and gameplay features.

 

If you really want feedback, here it is:

* i had a hard time figuring out what the player model actually is
* use sprite animation
* go either full-on 80s retro or amp the graphics up, find your game's style, now it's just a random mix
* eg the big turning blades are like from one of the first Atari consoles, rest is different
* what's that tail supposed to be?
* the red health bar has the visual focus while the player model should have it
* overall it doesn't look like the gfx style adds up. neither for retro nor otherwise

 

I see that you have a number of other starter or template kits on the asset store. Is this one a new kit or does it replace one of the existing ones? It could be that the asset store is refusing new "starter" assets from you since you have a handful already and your time could be better spent adding new capabilities into the existing templates that are already selling well.

Keep in mind that Unity makes money when you make money, so their policies should be tuned to helping you sell more copies of more assets on the asset store while keeping your support time down to a minimum. The more starter tools you have on the asset store, the more starter questions people will have eating up the time you could be better investing in making your templates and kits better which will then sell more and get promoted more by the unity asset store team.

With that said, take my thoughts with a grain of salt -- I don't and haven't ever worked directly with Unity, so I'm just trying to imagine what my motivation would be if I was the unity asset store and I was rejecting your submissions.

Best of luck on getting your assets out there!

 

Yeah I had the same reply, I don't know why, did you find any solution, if yes please tell me

 

We don't feel this package is a good fit for the store. We have chosen not to publish this asset. However, we greatly appreciate the time and effort spent in preparing your submission.

Why does Unity do this? What's the point of stopping us from distributing our assets?

 

In that case you submitted something that is ... unfit. In the sense that perhaps it simply doesn't belong there, for whatever reason (it is likely something obvious to anyone accustomed to the Unity ecosystem or the publisher guidelines).

Since you ask WHY the only way of knowing is by telling more about your asset.

 

They do not stop you distributing your asset. You can sell it or share it on your own web site, on other asset stores or even upload to GitHub or something. They only chose not to publish it themselves on the Asset Store.

 

Same reason why the iOS store and Steam have a higher reputation than Playstore and Itch.io respectively. (not meaning to say that the later aren't great services too).

 

I wrote a qualitative game framework, game project template and spent a lot of time.
And I would like to know why my project is not worthy of being published.
What is the reason?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rejected: Submission unfit
1. We don't feel this package is a good fit for the store. We have chosen not to publish this asset. However, we greatly appreciate the time and effort spent in preparing your submission.


Also I have the simple package which highlights folders in the project window.
And I also can not publish this because "it's too simple". But package is good and useful.
https://openupm.com/packages/com.denis535.colorful-project-window/

 

Few seconds into the first video of yours I started frame stepping, then quicker and quicker because it was boring and realized in the end there's no content in it. Meaning I guess the problem is your presentation.

 

Your video has no explanation of what it is, beyond the word "framework." Show big legible titles for each chunk of your video, not just endless scrolling code and a moving mouse pointer. What is it? What does it do? What time does it save? What best practices does it set up for the buyer? If I can't tell one benefit in the thumbnail or first ten seconds of the video, I will click away. I'm not going to zoom in and read your code. You're going to tell me why I want to buy it.

 

I showed all the most interesting things in my project.
And I'm a programmer, not a marketer. I did this for programmers.
In any case, the reason for refusal did not say “bad documentation” or anything like that.

 

Don't ask then if you can't work with what the answer is that people spent their time helping you.

 

Am a programmer too, but I have enough to do with understanding my own old code, so am not gonna do that with code from someone who wants to sell me something

It's well possible the reviewers didn't understand quickly enough either and thus declined...

Edit: Okay, from your written description in that link it'a way more clear.
Fear thatbis indeed too simple then. I mean how is that a framework? It's just highlighting/recoloring the folders, so it's just revisualizing Unity's framework...

 

This is framework: https://openupm.com/packages/com.denis535.clean-architecture-game-framework/

 

What I take from the video is that this asset intends to be a general purpose template for starting to write code in. It's mainly adding structure to project assets and scene, some premade GUI panels, and boilerplate code to extend.

A developer would first have to learn all these systems and places, as well as their intentions, and that's where documentation is important (can't assess as its not part of the video). Most of the organization and code structure seems more subjective than implementing best practices, or implementing them in a way with a specific target audience or game project in mind.

The settings screen with selectable resolutions strongly point to a desktop game template, therefore users targeting mobile, web, consoles or XR gear would not benefit nearly as much from this template. This is something the marketing material (description at least) needs to indicate.

The "open all scripts" (of a given type) menu items are a pointless feature. This does not serve anyone's workflow.

Overall, there is a lack of "exciting" features. Things that not everyone can easily create because it may be too challenging.
Same for "chore" features that nobody wishes to do, that aren't difficult but take a long time to do, so one might be inclined to buy either a tool that automates it or readymade results.


The folder coloring thing is soooo old. Tons of assets already in the store, and variations available for free on Github. Not surprised that this is deemed "too simple".

 

Yes, this is just generic project template and the example of using my framework..

Of course, “best practices” is very subjective, but it's still better than nothing.

Well then this is strongly for desktop projects.

I did it because I needed it.

This is simple example of good project, architecture and code. And it was very difficult to write this.

As a result, I could not understand why moderation did not allow my project to pass.
What's the point of having the "Templates/Tutorials" category and do not allow assets to be loaded there?

And my asset is really valuable because it shows an example of good UI architecture (Inspired by Uber Ribs) and the architecture of the entire application (Inspired by DDD). And nothing extra.

 

I think that's the main point here: "just architecture" is simply not enticing. The "extra" part is where it's at. If you had an actual example game, no matter how rudimentary, it would suddenly become way more valuable and put the architecture in context.

Ideally it would be an example game that fits the architecture and which taps into an underserved niche, like 4X strategy (idea taken from another recent thread).

 

How many projects with good architecture have you seen?

I spent 2 years and I've made:
- Clean Architecture Game Template
- Clean Architecture Game Framework
- Addressables Source Generator
- Colorful Project Window
- UIToolkit Theme Style Sheet (https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/tools/gui/uitoolkit-theme-style-sheet-273463)

And who will see it? Nobody.
It will take me another 2 years to make a simple game out of this.

 

Not many.

Which means on one hand that developers have no interest in and/or are not concerned with architecture. They won't go looking for your architecture template, nor will they know what it brings to the table.

Those that do care about architecture also want to own the architecture, build their own. This is why these (expert/master skill) developers stay away from templated projects or only use them to learn more of the game/genre/tech-specific implementations and considerations.

The kind of demo gameplay you see in store assets is maybe about 100-300 hours of work put into them, at most. Even at only 10 hours a week demo gameplay should be doable within 3 months.

 

I have a feeling that my project will bother someone if Unity allows me to publish it ((

 

Hey, you have the comparative advantage on everyone else, you have the shiny new framework which I'm sure is super-good architecture and allows you to build your game superfast, since you said that was the value you would have offered if you were allowed to publish on the store.

Simple: prove them wrong and build something with your tool. And just think about the hours you would have to spend on answering newbies' basic support questions instead of building something your own.

 

I had a bug open because hub didnt notice if you added a template. Today, i find they closed it.

why?

third party templates arent supported.

maybe this is why you're rejected.. cos apparently despite i swear templates being a thing was all about we could make our own............. apparently not.