Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Daikon Forge no longer being sold in the Asset Store

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by BrainMelter, Aug 6, 2014.

  1. eskimojoe

    eskimojoe

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Posts:
    1,440
    I'm lucky. I stopped recommended DF-GUI a long time ago and moved on before I did substantial work on DF-GUI. :(
     
  2. caitlyn

    caitlyn

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Posts:
    402
    Hi all,

    I'm so sorry for the trouble this has caused you!! The sudden request from the creators of Daikon Forge to take down the asset was both unexpected and unplanned.. we knew this would shake a lot of people up, and it isn't something we wanted to take lightly.

    We are legally required, legally bound, to honor takedown requests from publishers immediately, and blame for the consequences of a sudden takedown falls primarily on the shoulders of the publisher.

    That being said, we are looking for means to better protect existing customers' rights in situations like this. Of course, if you've already purchased the package, you should have a local copy on your own machine, which you may continue to use. Basically you don't lose your license to use the package... nothing can change the license under which you purchased the asset at that time.

    I hope that makes sense.

    We value and appreciate all of our customers and really want to make sure you're treated fairly and respectfully. Please bear with us while we sort this.

    My most sincere apologies for the trouble,

    Caitlyn Meeks
    Asset Store Manager
     
  3. VicToMeyeZR

    VicToMeyeZR

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    Posts:
    427
    You don't have to remove it completely though. Your agreement in the asset store specifically says that. You only have to quit selling it. That's all your "legally" obligated to do.

    What is someone didn't download it?
     
  4. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,954
    No, the blame falls on UT for not even understanding their own license agreement.
     
  5. imtrobin

    imtrobin

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1,548
    Why would you assume I would have it. And why would it be the latest version? With few hundred packages and how slow the AssetStore is, it's a full time job to update the assets
     
    Socrates, lmbarns, Parallaxe and 2 others like this.
  6. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    Buying an Asset does not mean that someone has downloaded it. They may have purchased it during a crazy sale to save money and will use it on their NEXT game, many months away. Asset Store needs to provide a way for people to get a copy, perpetually, whenever the heck they want, after they've paid the money. And it sounds like your agreement says as much.

    Or you can go ahead and refund everyone, all 5000+ copies :)

    Either one is acceptable to me.
     
    quantumsheep, Socrates, Xaron and 6 others like this.
  7. Ostwind

    Ostwind

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Posts:
    2,804
    Well this just proves that you can't trust asset store for your asset downloads. If anything can be taken down without a warning and you happen to miss the download of your recent purchase or just haven't downloaded latest versions due ongoing project/busy schedule your left with "sorry". Its also disturbing that DF was flashed as staff pick or daily deal several times past months and now probably canceled and left with all the bugs and "coming soon features".

    From DF team side I can't completely hate them either based on several asset store flaw/feature request threads. As far as I have understood it they would have had no chance to mail every asset purchaser about soon to happen removal cause Asset store lacks all CRM features, can't contact buyers in form of newsletters, upgrade news or anything. Another thing is that they probably wanted only to remove DF from sale due halted development but would have happily left it for users to still download but asset store does not support it as another flaw.
     
  8. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    They couldn't have let every user know, but they still should post something public about it somewhere. At least an explanation.
     
    Parallaxe likes this.
  9. Ostwind

    Ostwind

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Posts:
    2,804
    Yeah thats true however majority of asset store users won't or don't have time to browse around forums, fb posts or tweets when they are about to import or download the package weeks later. There has to be a notification about permanent removal from the asset author or least automated message from asset store. Now when I go to import the package I can't see it in the default list anymore, it's been moved to local tab. Same time I notice other assets now that have been removed and I have NO IDEA why. Replaced by newer version that has been created as new item? Removed due halted development? Copyright or other issues? very disturbing.

    Asset store needs some serious improvements or policy changes.
     
  10. tswalk

    tswalk

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Posts:
    1,109
    I was just going to say something along these lines... didn't we just see it up for sale not that long ago?
     
  11. Ostwind

    Ostwind

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Posts:
    2,804

    yeah I guess it was time to cash out...

    https://twitter.com/UnityAssetStore/status/486495583306547200

     
  12. Dustin-Horne

    Dustin-Horne

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Posts:
    4,568
    Wow this one is tough.... I place 99% of the blame on DF (and I'm glad I never purchased their asset). The takedown request is just flat out poor business practice. Sure, they could see that it was going to get replaced by the new GUI...but...

    1. Not everyone is going to jump to the new GUI...there will be some loyal to DF or not wanting to spend the time to learn a new GUI system right away.

    2. Not everyone is going to upgrade to Unity 4.6 right away...it may have other implications for a current project and not be a good option.

    Now, the takedown was a really crummy thing to do. I can tell you that as an asset store publisher it bothers the crap out of me because it shakes confidence in the store as a whole. I put my asset together to supplement functionality that people needed. If Unity came out with some awesome new wiz-bang serialization that replaced my asset, I sure as heck wouldn't run for the hills because I have existing customers to think about. What I would likely do instead is make my asset free...but even if I didn't I would leave it on the asset store so I could provide support for my customers and they could continue to use it in the future if they wanted to.

    On that note, I'm not sure that the Unity Asset Store is really legally obligated to take down the material because DF uploaded to the asset store and they agreed to those terms of use that explicitly absolve the asset store of that requirement. Edit: Though it is possible that they are depending on international copyright laws or local laws... because you can't contract away the law.

    Now, that being said I'm guessing it's actually more of a technical limitation. I almost bet that the Unity Asset Store software doesn't have the ability to provide downloads for assets that are not also active on the store and if this is the case it really should be addressed. Customers should be able to download previously purchased assets, and at a minimum but given a 30 day window and a notice when an asset has been delisted.
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2014
  13. Aiursrage2k

    Aiursrage2k

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Posts:
    4,835
    Wow unfricking believable I really liked DF as well, For a while i was toying with the idea of making some of my packs dependant on DF. I am going to guess that unity's new GUI is so good it made DF obsolete baby!

    I will be interested to see if NGUI still is the top grossing thing in the asset store once the new gui comes out. Maybe the sales were drying up and they couldnt really handle support any longer -- though there has to be more of a graceful way of handling this -- especially considering DF was such a huge money maker.
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2014
  14. OutSpoken_Gaming

    OutSpoken_Gaming

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Posts:
    90
    This is actually the second time he has pulled an asset I paid for from the asset store. First uSpeak and now DF. Never buying from him again.
     
    Ryiah and Parallaxe like this.
  15. Ostwind

    Ostwind

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Posts:
    2,804
    Well everyone knew that UGUI would probably make DF partly or completely obsolete at some point. I'm also sure that many or everyone were going to use the new UGUI in their new projects regardless what happened now but the thing is that there a lot of people using DFGUI in their existing near finish/released projects already which they will have to maintain for years and can't just quickly switch to UGUI without a cost. Some people were waiting for "promised" optimizations or coming soon features like proper 3d interaction (you can see their forums or thread in asset store section). This silent death is really unprofessional.
     
  16. Aiursrage2k

    Aiursrage2k

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Posts:
    4,835
    A mans got to eat right, the writing was on the wall, and i guess rather than spending a few months working for almost nothing just to appease there customers they decided to jump ship to the next big thing. With unity's asset store not having any way to support "paid updates" -- there was a huge thread about that a few months ago where i pretty much argued in favor of that -- there really wasn't any reason for them to keep going.
     
    AnomalusUndrdog likes this.
  17. BrainMelter

    BrainMelter

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Posts:
    572
    The problem is the new 2.X version (which was supposed to fix the mobile problems), would not be backwards compatible with 1.X. So people would have to rebuild their UIs anyway, making the 4.6 UI look a lot more attractive.

    My guess is that they felt aggravation from two sources:
    1. Reworking a project from scratch is a lot of tedious work. You have to refix lots of the bugs you had before.
    2. They were tired of getting complaints about bad performance on mobile.

    You can get through these things if you're assured of a reward, but with the new UI coming out, they aren't.
     
  18. Dustin-Horne

    Dustin-Horne

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Posts:
    4,568
    I would agree had they just decided to scrap the 2.x update... but to pull the 1.x version as well is pretty inexcusable and unprofessional.
     
  19. BrainMelter

    BrainMelter

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Posts:
    572
    My guess is that they were just receiving too many complaints about performance. Not doing anything about it also looks unprofessional.
     
  20. Doddler

    Doddler

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    Posts:
    269
    I'm curious, is there any way you can stop selling an asset without taking it down in this fashion? Or is it a limitation of the asset store, where you can't stop selling your product without screwing over previous purchasers?
     
  21. Dustin-Horne

    Dustin-Horne

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Posts:
    4,568
    Sure, just make it free.
     
  22. Yukichu

    Yukichu

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2013
    Posts:
    420
    I don't understand why they just didn't leave the asset up on the asset store, for free, no longer do support for it, and let everyone use it and abuse it. Pulling it completely just seems like a #%@&* move.

    Also, all the times I've seen it on sale in the past few months makes it even worse, as others have noted. Pretty ridiculous.
     
    Parallaxe likes this.
  23. StarManta

    StarManta

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Posts:
    8,773
    Unity building in a GUI solution is no reason to pull it from the store. It's a decent reason to stop further development, sure, but just leave it there!
     
    Parallaxe likes this.
  24. Dustin-Horne

    Dustin-Horne

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Posts:
    4,568
    In fairness, I think you can verify via invoice number on their website and download if you purchased on the asset store, including a hotfix they developed.
     
  25. BrainMelter

    BrainMelter

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Posts:
    572
    Putting something up for free can look bad from a branding point of view. It's a constant reminder to people that your products just aren't worth much. As for it being a #$*%& move, perhaps it is. But people will forget about it in time ...
     
  26. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,614
    More passing the buck to the developer.

    Why is it only Unity that can't comprehend what their responsibilities are? You act like you have no choice at all in these situations, you have plenty.

    I think you forget that the people you're talking to here have a lot of experience with online stores and not just as a consumer.
     
    Ryiah and Parallaxe like this.
  27. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    Unity takes 30% of the sales. For that they shouldn't be allowed to not even let us download the version we purchased.
     
    quantumsheep, Socrates, movra and 2 others like this.
  28. movra

    movra

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2013
    Posts:
    566
    Although the EULA also says Unity can nuke the whole Asset Store with no obligations to customers whatsoever...:rolleyes:
     
    randomperson42 likes this.
  29. SteveJ

    SteveJ

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Posts:
    3,085
    I think Caitlyn made a pretty clear statement there that UT do understand their part in this. You need to remember that UT provide nothing but an interface.
     
    randomperson42 likes this.
  30. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    Yeah she said, "while we sort it out". So they're cooking something up I believe.
     
  31. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,614
    Sounds to me like they don't understand it if they think their responsibilities end at providing an interface(which is sub poor).
     
  32. SteveJ

    SteveJ

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Posts:
    3,085
    Unfortunately you can't simply assign responsibilities where you see fit. If I told you that from now on you're responsible for making my morning coffee, would you take that on simply because I demand it? In this case the developer pulled the product and UT did what they're supposed to do - they removed the product. Responsibility is 100% on the developer in this case and the way in which they handled things (which was poor).
     
    randomperson42 likes this.
  33. melkior

    melkior

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2013
    Posts:
    199
    As a somewhat new user to the Unity community what is most of concern to me is that Unity would make it so an asset that I had purchased and license to might one day no longer be available to download. I had not been downloading everything I purchased assuming Unity would content host it for current and future needs - even if it is no longer directly available for sale on the store.

    A developer that's pulling out of the Unity store might be doing so for various reasons such as shutting down their business and while DF appears to be offering previous paid customers a download service (at this time ...) they may not do so in 3 months for example when a user goes to start a new project.

    To be clear I did not purchase this add on ; its the issue of Unity's content network not being a reliable source of the assets I clearly have license to that is of concern as a customer to me.
     
  34. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    Sure it's mostly the publishers fault, but not 100%, how can you with a straight face actually say that? There have been other complaints of this sort of thing happening before, but never of a plugin so ridiculously popular as DF-GUI once was. It is Unity's responsibility to allow us to get the product if we paid for it. End of discussion on this point. And their Asset Store agreement pretty much says that. Apparently they haven't read it lately because they seem to have forgotten.
     
    Ryiah and Parallaxe like this.
  35. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,614
    I'm not arguing that they shouldn't have let them take the product down, no one is arguing that. We're arguing that they should be providing a mirror for people that purchased it and alert people it was taken it down at the very least. This is the third time(that I know of, I don't get emailed of removals) that this has happened to me.

    By the way, if you paid my wages, I'd probably make you a cup of coffee every morning. Unity are taking 30% here.
     
    Ryiah, AnomalusUndrdog and Parallaxe like this.
  36. SteveJ

    SteveJ

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Posts:
    3,085
    I don't agree, but happy to "agree to disagree". I think UT only provide a delivery mechanism as a by-product of the sales process. It would be silly for them to be expected to host products that they no longer sell.
     
  37. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,614
    I think it's silly that it's not expected for them to host products I purchased on their store.

    I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
     
    kenshin, Ostwind and Parallaxe like this.
  38. SteveJ

    SteveJ

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Posts:
    3,085
    Consider this - EVERY app store (iOS, Android, etc) works in exactly the same way. If I take one of my products off the App Store, it's gone. Apple don't host it any longer because they don't sell it. Simple. I guess it's whether or not that's "right or wrong" that's the argument. I personally think it's right. You guys may think it's wrong. Probably not an argument that's resolvable :)
     
  39. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    Where this particular argument falls extremely flat is that 90-something (very high 90's) percent of all those Android and iOS apps are FREE. So that's not comparing apple to apples. Nice try though.

    If Unity wants to not let us download a free plugin that got pulled off, no one would really care. That's not the issue here.
     
  40. SteveJ

    SteveJ

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Posts:
    3,085
    :p
     
  41. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,614
    These phones are incredibly easy to backup, they're providing the functionality for you to back up out of the box even(also, these apps are mostly free and are not big tickets unlike Unitys store). This is not the same for Unity.

    When you buy a game for PC from something like Steam or GOG etc you will get to download it for as long as you wish even after it's taken off the store.
     
    kenshin and UndeadButterKnife like this.
  42. opsive

    opsive

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2010
    Posts:
    5,122
    Is that really the case? I downloaded Flappy Bird when it first started to make the news and I don't have it on my phone anymore nor is it in the App Store, but I can still download it if I go to the "Purchased" page on the Updates page of the App Store.
     
    melkior likes this.
  43. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    Doesn't matter if it's true or not. Those are free apps over there mostly.
     
  44. opsive

    opsive

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2010
    Posts:
    5,122
    Even if the app wasn't free I bet you could still download it off of the App Store even if it was not being sold anymore. The point wasn't about the price, it was more about the fact that you can still download apps after they have been removed.
     
  45. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    I'm interested in the answer, but it shouldn't necessarily set precedence for what the Unity Asset Store should do. That's my point, because these aren't really the same animals.
     
  46. Nezabyte

    Nezabyte

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Posts:
    110
    At the minimum, Unity should be providing advance warning and allowing people an opportunity to download the latest available version. With that said, it's highly confusing that the license agreement says one thing, but Unity did something else entirely. I hope we can at least be provided an explanation of that... does the agreement need to be updated, or is management just unaware of that writing?
     
    Ryiah, Ostwind and Parallaxe like this.
  47. jerotas

    jerotas

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Posts:
    5,572
    I'm aware of one other agreement discrepancy, so I wouldn't be surprised.

    It's that you aren't allowed to put "sale" or "50% off" type words onto your main Asset Store plugin icon. Mentioned absolutely nowhere in the agreement except that they say they're unlikely to feature your plugin if you do that. But then they sent us emails saying it's against their policy period.

    Oh really? Then please update your policy so it actually says that.
     
    Ryiah and Dabeh like this.
  48. DanielQuick

    DanielQuick

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2010
    Posts:
    3,137
    No, that would be the asset publisher's responsibility to let people know in advance.
     
  49. Amon

    Amon

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Posts:
    1,384
    Well that's just great. Fuc&*%* great. my current project ( 80% complete ) uses DFGUI. I was waiting for an update and bug fixes and they go and do this instead.

    I'm panicking bad now. To replace the GUI in my game to something else is going to take a while and I can't even contemplate the headache and tedious time this will take.

    You know what? The Unity Asset store just got blacklisted. This is not the first time stuff like this has happened but it's the first time its happened to me when using an asset that is heavily intergrated in to my project.

    I'm pissed off to the extreme. I can't trust buying anything anymore from the Asset Store. Forget this crap.

    Like I said, the Unity Asset Store is now blacklisted. When things like this happen it removes or makes me doubt and lowers my trust rating for the store.

    Unless significant efforts are made to address a lot of issues including serious issues like this then you can kiss my custom goodbye.

    BLACKLISTED
     
  50. Dabeh

    Dabeh

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,614
    How? They don't even give you access to information about who bought your asset unless they give you an invoice ID and even then it's extremely limited. It's just ridiculous.
     
    Ostwind and Parallaxe like this.