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

Full Unreal Engine 4 Developer Kit $19/MO + 5% / Why can't Unity Offer the same!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by im, Mar 19, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tswalk

    tswalk

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Posts:
    1,109
    ^this^

    but, the consumer has far more platforms and content access then it did in the '80s... the industry is changing fast, but not going away anytime soon.
     
  2. VIC20

    VIC20

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,687
    Just kill the free version or drop a lot of the features features in free - people who are not willing to pay $20 a month won't pay anything anyway. Even most hobby developers can afford $20 a month but most of them can't/won't afford $1500-$4500 or $75-$225 a month.

    I've paid for 2.0 indie, I've paid for Unity iOS - they've made it all free within the years, but till they introduced the subscription last year I had no chance to buy Pro + iOS pro.
     
  3. VIC20

    VIC20

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,687
    Just to use hippocoder's estimated numbers:

    5000 Pro Users * $4500 / 2 years = 11,250,000
    11,250,000 / 20 * 12 = 46,875 Users who pay $20
     
  4. im

    im

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Posts:
    1,408
    unreal did not kill the free version... u need free version. but u need to do math on how to make money off the new opportunity / challenges / competition way of doing it..

    if unreal and crytek and even value can do it so can unity and so much unity...

    and i think the way to make more money is focus on rent/lease, ecosystem, asset store... other are...

    one thing tht i didnt mention about what went on but is actually more import and if not one of the most import of all we have read today is

    they get press time. u see unity 5 announcement came out lot of places did a page on it, a few people saying nice things about it brings it forward in people's mind

    but the thing is unity 5 is like many months away

    very well timed by the way by unity folks to sort of rain of unrealparade with what they had

    then came unreal and now it will get many days and months of press off of it cause of the big release, and its real u can get it now not many months from now and cause of the pricing

    so if someone today was going to make a decision they will have to do all the calculus again to make their decision and a lot of people will just pick it up for a month (and forget to cancel) but u know a lot of people getting it just to see. so they get money from people who dont even going to use it cause its $20 i go out to eat diner and i spend more i get lunch sometimes and i spend more... so u can see a lot of sales off of it

    its about creating buz, noise, free adverticement, leverage, ect.. so unreal and crytek for that matter have jump in the pool and having some party. big winnder is unreal right now

    so unity will not ride it out cause like everything things change. so they will have to respone to make their own pool party... hopefully sooner than later. unity has lots to win and lose cause of the unity store i think they doing well with if people use unity regardless of how much they pay unity makes money

    if the calculus goes the other way and they dont come to unity or they move away from unity then unity will lose regardless of price of unity cause i think this in the future is where the money is.. look at steam and daz, and others they basically give u the tools away cause they making their money off th store they want to attrack all the great devs to their ecosystem

    this is what unity can lose... unreal engine now has asset store. this is the thing to look at. if it takes off unity cnt just sit it out. think of all the great companies in the past that sat it out and they became dinosaurs and died. ok the name remains but the money took it over its just a hollow shell sold off carved up named brands or died

    so they have to compete its not by choice they have to response it is not by choice. they do it u do it or die.. look at microsoft and intel ect they compete other guy does it they do it. ok took microsoft forever for windows and then it sucked vs apple, but apple has/had apple tax to limited market size by excluding those who will not pay apple tax for old hardware, i rather use dos ;)

    still unreal does not have unreal tax, well unless u look at 5%... so to but a lot of people will say its only 5% especially young indie devs who dont have the money or people playing around. 20/m+5% is better than $1500 up front off their credit cards no doubt cause of all their student loans and such and if it dont work out its not that much n u paid it off $20/m better than $1500 + 15% or more interest off credit card. which is what i think a lot of indie will do. or perhaps even if they had money from other job its $20/m couple hours of work vs $1500 which is the cost of a new game box and more. worse $1500 takes money away from being able to buy things on asset store.

    so unity has to think of that asset store and ecosystem. its all sort of link. it cant just keep thinking of upfront i want to get paid for my developer tools. it has to invest / share risk with indies more like others. in the end unity has $$$$$ so they can invest in their ecosystem developers cause they will be actually making more off the 5% as people pointing out who's giving 5% interest right now. n its not just 5% its 30% off asset store purchases so unity will be making like bandits and that is how money is wise.. rent it dont sell it... also that is like all the rest i think going. the days of buying it are going going going gone. the days of perpectual renting it have been here sort of . even with current unity its like rent in chunks since if u using it u will be getting upgrades.. this is just microrentm monthly installments and a cut..

    anyways im going in circles, but i think business people should step back and look down at the planet and not get stuck looking at a tree...
     
  5. Digitalfiends

    Digitalfiends

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Posts:
    17
    While I generally agree that there aren't that may indie devs who would pay for a 12-24 month subscription, I do think there is value in low-priced subscriptions. Just look at the App store: low prices and micro-transactions work and $19 for ONE month versus $75/month with a minimum purchase of 12 months is quite a difference in terms of commitment. It is similar to throwing away $0.99 on a game to check it out versus $14.99 for something that you may or may not enjoy. Hell, I've bought games for $0.99 on impulse thinking I'd play them more and I've maybe only used them once or twice; I'm much more thoughtful when spending $5+.

    Therefore, Epic might get a lot of one to three month subscriptions out of wannabe indie developers, artists, or designers that would otherwise have just stuck to UDK or Unity Free. A $19 entry fee to view source code for a AAA engine is nothing for an eager and enthusiastic developer. I've been on the fence for two years with Unity but have held off due to the slow release process and seemingly "greedy" pricing model. After reading about UE4 today, I just bought a subscription because the bang for the buck is too good to pass up. If I find I'm not doing much with my subscription over the next couple of months due to work or life, I can cancel without penalty AND keep the source/development kit and only be out $40; with Unity I'd be committed to paying $900. That is a no brainer for my situation and after viewing some of the UE4 tutorials, I can tell that I'll be keeping my subscription for quite some time. :) If Unity Tech had offered something similar, I can guarantee I'd have a subscription for Unity already.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  6. bitcrusher

    bitcrusher

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2013
    Posts:
    156
    uh.. i guess you haven't heard of rust on steam...
     
  7. makeshiftwings

    makeshiftwings

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Posts:
    3,350
    Yeah I agree some people will impulse buy a subscription (I might be one of them too) but I don't think there are 395,000 of us. The market for game engine impulse buyers is way, way smaller than game impulse buyers.
     
  8. Digitalfiends

    Digitalfiends

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Posts:
    17
    Of course (and I updated my post to clarify a bit) but what I was getting at is more people would be willing to subscribe at $19/mo than committing to $900 ($75/mo * 12.) A more aggressive pricing model would likely entice more developers who would otherwise still be sitting on the fence.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  9. makeshiftwings

    makeshiftwings

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Posts:
    3,350
    Yeah, but people always make the "make it cheaper and more people will buy" argument when they want someone to make something cheaper. Clearly there's a limit to that effect, since otherwise everything in the world would cost a penny. For Unity to drop their price to 10% of what it currently is, they would need to get 10 times as many people to buy in order to break even. I don't think there actually are ten times as many people who would pay anything for Unity Pro who don't already own it.
     
  10. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Except this is a case of: going for the cheaper option that's currently a lot better than Unity 4. When Unity 5 comes out there's a better feature parity.
     
  11. makeshiftwings

    makeshiftwings

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Posts:
    3,350
    As you yourself said, it's not necessarily cheaper because UE4 takes royalties. I mean, I like paying less for stuff as much as everyone else, but it's not fair to pretend that $20/month with no royalties is almost the same as $20/month with 5% royalties.
     
  12. im

    im

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Posts:
    1,408
    yes unity may be less expensive and w/o royalties is better than with royalties after a certain amount of sale, but there is like the initial cost, the resistance to that or barrier of entry i think its called which is big for indie / small where there maybe no or very little sales and lots of upfront risk on its on... established studio they already most likely have license if they are using it and just pay the upgrade cost. im thinking myself, and others getting in... so u dont want to kill your ability to grow / gain market share. cause in the end if you are losing market share your not doing good, if your not growing market share as the market grows you are also losing marketshare and even if if your growing market share, but not growing as fast as the growth your still losing market share and even if you doing all that if your not growing faster than your competition your losing market share to your competition! so lots to lose best to have the thruttle everyway possible that can be done... so if u can give it away but make your money on store then do so. if u have to do $10/m then so do, ect... the thing is to increase your share of market faster than everyone u can.. else u losing n wont get investors or as nice terms, or people will be choosing other guy before you, your leaving money on the table for someone else to take, ect...
     
  13. Voronoi

    Voronoi

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Posts:
    584
    This is what make this such a crazy ( and good deal ) for indies and Universities. Right now, say I want to make a 2D game. I could buy a few assets in the Asset store with Unity. With Unreal, I imagine in a few months, I could use so and so's 2D fork of Unreal geared towards 2D games. It's like an amazing combination of open source combined with a ' real ' company. This is quite appealing on many fronts.

    It's an amazing time for end users. I imagine it's quite different times for software development companies. They really need to nail down their business models. I just wish this same sort of competition would happen with Adobe!
     
  14. Digitalfiends

    Digitalfiends

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Posts:
    17
    Who are you replying to? I'm sort of confused what point you're trying to make.
     
  15. Pix10

    Pix10

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Posts:
    850
    I'm kind of ambivalent about the pricing in the respect that keeping perpetual licenses up to date (if you already have them) isn't so bad; bear in mind Unity doesn't release a new major version every year.

    But the subscription pricing is suddenly not so appealing. If we take on work for hire that requires us to up-and-down-scale a lot then we're obviously going to consider the option that has the lowest entry point and commitment. Paying $100 for five artists is a lot more attractive than paying $15k (assuming we need to enable the artists to see their work on one mobile target), and it's a lot easier to find good artists and level designers familiar with Unreal.

    I've been with Unity since 1.6 so I'm obviously well invested in it, in knowledge as well as hard cash. But things recently have been really p*****g me off, such as serious bugs in legacy/core features - major lightmapping issues that just wouldn't go away and couldn't be worked around, and I could get zero answers about from Support (and I only know why now: Unity 5), an Asset Server that's barely fit for purpose, and a scene system that turns "collaboration" a metaphor for pain. I don't have time to wait for answers that never come, and even though I can afford to keep the licenses up, I can't afford to pay for Premium support - these are not the cash-rich days of yesteryear. We have ship dates, we need to meet them. It's all a bit QED.

    So it's not just pricing Unity needs worry about, it's the business end, the support and transparency, and it's Core Features. All the lovely lighting is fabulous, it's great to see it, but I need to use the rest of the software too.

    I love Unity, so don't get me wrong. It changed software development for me personally, has opened avenues that just didn't exist before, and even today it's changing the landscape by pushing two of the previously most exclusive game engines into the hands of everyone - healthy market.
     
  16. XxSaiFxX

    XxSaiFxX

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    79
    Unity 5 license need to be improved.
     
  17. SVGK

    SVGK

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2014
    Posts:
    99
    I imagine Unity 5 will need to do some changes, at least lowered to $999.99 for the sake of making it at least feel a lot cheaper even if it isn't that excessive as Unreal, though that's at least, i'd say they should make it somewhere around $500 or something, with $30 per month subscription (and being able to cancel at any time, but reverting back to free version), even if they don't want tp lower themselves to the absurd levels Unreal and Cry have, at least make the gap smaller, i'm no expert on pricing or marketing, but it feels okay and like it would be far less extreme of a gap.
     
  18. tiggus

    tiggus

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    Posts:
    1,240
    The thing is, even if Unity announced Unity 5.0 is $19/mo the cat's out of the bag already as far as large amounts of their userbase evaluating another engine(s). If they match pricing, the best engine will attract the most people eventually. If they retain higher upfront pricing, they'll actively drive a lot who might like some of Unity's features(ease of use, C#, etc.) away regardless. So I see a pricing change as inevitable. It makes sense to me to announce it soon, before too many people try out UE4 or Cry and find that it might suit their needs with some investment in retraining.
     
  19. Alf203

    Alf203

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Posts:
    461
    I much prefer paying a set amount than paying royalties. I think Unity should stay the way they are. They have the free version which is the least expensive option.

    Unreal will have problems down the road and will most likely change their licensing :

    -The source code for Unreal is nice but it will be all over the internet which means it will be pirated a lot. How many people will really pay the 19$ then ?

    -How will they keep track of the profits someone makes…People lie and will get around that.

    -They can change the licensing deal at anytime and ask more royalties. Remember that the only reason they ever did this 19$+5% is because of Unity and meant as a response to them. Without Unity, Unreal would have still kept going the old way.
     
  20. UndeadButterKnife

    UndeadButterKnife

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2013
    Posts:
    115
    You won't go far if you want to release a game with a pirated engine. It is very easy to check if you are a legitimate user or not.

    You have to keep in mind though, Epic is a big company, and if you make big profits and report them less, you will get in serious trouble. It doesn't matter if smaller guys lie, they will use the engine, and increase the amount of available Unreal users.

    Then they will lose whatever foothold they have. The way this thing works, is that you don't modify the license agreement on the fly. Bait and switch tactics are not possible, because they are illegal.
     
  21. TheDMan

    TheDMan

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Posts:
    205
    If they do, then in a years time they'll end up just like GarageGames.
     
  22. cynic

    cynic

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Posts:
    142
    Yep, but have a look at what you get with Unity free and what you get for subscribing for $19 once and cancelling with Unreal. Compare the engine features and the kind of quality you can produce. Unity free just doesn't stack up well to that.
     
  23. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    I wouldn't mind if Unity cost 5K per seat plus for Pro.. But they need to get more proficient at releasing actually needed improvements and generally improve on delivery and timing.. An engine can have the shiniest graphics on the planet, doesn't mean anything if it runs like a dog with no legs.
     
  24. Foam

    Foam

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Posts:
    322
    If a couple grand up front for Unity is a problem for you, then you have bigger issues than which engine you should use. Unity is dirt cheap.

    Besides, Unreal is more of an engine. Unity is more of an engine-framework. Unless you're a company of significant size, income, and technical chops, wasting your time screwing around implementing things in C++ in Unreal is a terrible idea.

    There is a long list of things that Unity provides that Unreal does not, things that make life much easier for a small or solo effort.

    This whole discussion is completely backwards.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
    ArnoC likes this.
  25. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    The issue arises when you can get an engine for $19.00 a month that's better than one costing a couple of grand. Don't get me wrong, I'm not hurting in the budget department. But I don't throw away money.. If Unity was work 50K I'd pay it, if it was worth 100K I'd pay it.

    The question someone has to ask, is it worth it?
     
  26. GiusCo

    GiusCo

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Posts:
    405
    You know, the man-time needed to become proficient will discourage many for sure... Unity is so noob-friendly and full of toys to mess with.
     
    ArnoC likes this.
  27. cynic

    cynic

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Posts:
    142
    That's exactly the point and it is always relative to the competition, which in this case has much more frequent update cycles.

    Anyway, another point to consider is that the whole money situation is mostly of importance for one man shops and small indie studios. Interestingly you'll find a lot of those in the mobile market and that's where the current subscription model is totally unattractive. Whereas you pay $75 for a PC license you have to pay triple that if you want to include the mobile licenses as well, even if you had no interest in PC deployment. That's quite a bit of money per seat.

    I don't think it really matters, if the subscription is $75, @50, $25 or @5. Including all the add ons would go a long way to appearing more attractive.
     
  28. Alf203

    Alf203

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Posts:
    461
    No not release it… I mean people will get the new version free because it will always be leaked on the internet. So they will always get the latest pirated version. When they need to release the game they pay 19$ once and unsubscribe. The engine just cost them 19$ and they get the updates too without paying.

    I condemn this type if thing but I am pretty sure something like this will happen. Then Unreal can change the licensing and just cite piracy as a reason for doing so.

    Not really, they can change the price anytime. Its just that you will be stuck with the version of UE you have before the price was changed. Nothing illegal there.

    They can and will change over time. Sure UE4 will most likely stay like this but UE5 they will most likely increase the royalties or price. They just have to state that the licensing changed because they weren't turning any profit with that licensing scheme or that it was too much pirated, or that people tried to get around paying, etc... Then people will be more forgiving and accept the changes.


    Its the opposite. If they don't they will become like GarageGames. Those cool features cost money because of the time of development. With no money, they can't develop the engine and then it will become like garage games.

    To me it looks like Unreal decided to have the community code their engine by giving the source, hence saving money by shifting a large part of the work to the community. That is kind of smart to be honest.

    Yes I did have a look. Quality depends on your skills not the engine skills is 80% and engine is maybe 20%. For a triple AAA team who know what they are doing, Unreal is probably best. For indies or small teams, Unity is just way better. Its easier, documented, the community is nice and the cool features keep coming. It will be better in the GUI area soon more easily manageable.( some people have described the advantages more in depth earlier so I wont go into detail).

    Also its not all about the price but the workflow. I have my own tools and framework to make games in Unity and it is huge ! I just don't see the point in porting this to UE. It will be wasted time I won't be spending working on my game.

    Often it feels as if the grass is greener on the other side when it is not really the case.

    Also, if you make games for a living, you cant fail to make the money to pay for a Unity pro licence. If you don't expect any revenue from your game and its just a hobby then either Unity free or Unreal would be better for those.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  29. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    IMO (having licensed torque etc) GG went under because they simply couldn't compete with Unity and they frankly didn't treat customers all that well (I wasn't treated that well, and that's all I can say).

    They did evolve their pricing but there were deeper problems than that. It looks like the industry winds are blowing towards subscription models. Everything from 3dsmax to photoshop, from Unity to Epic, seems to be leaning on subs.
     
  30. Darkoo

    Darkoo

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Posts:
    96
    I think people need to think as a new customer to be able to realize where the market will be leaning to. Just imagine what your choice would be if you are new to game development reading up on the engines most assuredly your choice will be going towards unreal or cryengine. Lots of info on how big this companies are, the amount of AAA games are just to many to ignore and now the price is so low, not really a hard choice!!

    Rest assured this price change decisions have not been made on a whim, these are probably a 5 to 10 year market plans whoever has the biggest wallet to account for bad yearly incomes will ride it out. There is a lot more to it than what I would be able to get my head around in a couple of sentences. Time will tell.
     
  31. UndeadButterKnife

    UndeadButterKnife

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2013
    Posts:
    115
    Doesn't matter to Epic, as long as people keep using their tech, big companies will keep licensing it for millions of dollars. They could use the subscription as a loss leader for all they care.

    There are laws that offer you protection for this sort of thing. If you release the game with 5% royalty deal, they cannot raise it. If they raise the subscription fee (very, very unlikely), you can cancel your subscription at that point. You will still be able to use the engine.

    Check the EULA for more info.
     
  32. Alf203

    Alf203

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Posts:
    461
    Yes but you cannot upgrade to the new version as it will have the new EULA and the new price with it.
     
  33. WillBellJr

    WillBellJr

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Posts:
    394

    I was going to say this as well - match the price and let the merits of the engines fight the fight.


    I absolutely LOVE C# so the thought of going back to C++ is not something I'd look forward to.

    Admittedly, I've been tainted by Microsoft's version of C++ back in the MFC days and all the ugly ass stuff they added to the language - never really got much chance to use "pure" C++ in my day.


    As far as losing users or doing something "now" to prevent users from trying out these other engines, that's gonna happen anyway at that price point; I'ma give UE a spin myself this weekend - can't resist all of that for the price of a Happy Meal at some restaurant.


    As mentioned by others, UT, is gonna have to get off its laurels now, I've been waiting for a better 2D GUI for lawd knows how long now; put off, delayed etc., when I saw the v5 announcement I first thought, yeah, figures I'd have to pay (yet again) for the new GUI, but then saw it was mentioned for v4.6 - I guess >we'll see< with that one...


    If UE's visual scripting can get me though a decent amount of level scripting and only require me to drop down to C++ for custom behaviors (which I can then call from the scripts), I'd be straight for the most part.



    I have to say this was a move that shook the world; totally unexpected and simple in both its simplicity (licensing terms) and awesomeness (price to value) - definitely a "Shock and Awe" move.


    I can't help but think of all the Asset Store developers; PlayMaker, NGUI, Dailkon, etc.; if a good percentage of the user base flies off, their times of "Miller Highlife" on this platform may end as well - only time will tell if we see a "PlayMaker for UE4" etc.


    As far as GUI, I'm thinking that's already covered by UE4 (thinking of the UE games I've played in my day) and exactly what I'm looking to find out this weekend.


    Yes, the ball is in UT's court - it'll be interesting to see how they play their hand in response to this.


    I have to say this is a good lesson on business and extinction; other companies should pay attention to this - price drop salvos for say your favorite 3D modeling/animation programs could shift the balance in that sector as well...


    Interesting time, for sure!


    -Will
     
  34. Aiursrage2k

    Aiursrage2k

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Posts:
    4,835
    Unity should start being more competeive otherwise devs will start leaving
     
  35. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    Imma put bread in da oven.
     
  36. lockbox

    lockbox

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Posts:
    519
    As I've stated in the past, Unity makes so much money from the Asset Store, they should be giving Unity Pro away for free. The only real Unity shortcoming I perceive is multiplayer support.

    I wish I knew how many people are paying for Unity Pro. That would give me a better perspective on what they would be giving up by giving it away for free.
     
  37. lmbarns

    lmbarns

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Posts:
    1,628
    Huh???? What shortcomings? If anything unity is one of the easiest engines to get multiplayer off the ground.
     
  38. Ocid

    Ocid

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Posts:
    476
    I don't think UT makes anywhere near enough from the Asset store to support 150 devs. Giving it away for free would be stupid from a business perspective.
     
  39. TheDMan

    TheDMan

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Posts:
    205
    GG did the same thing. They sold this add-on, that add-on, this license, that license, pricing was high, promises were broken, they backtracked, they began ignoring and not dealing with bug issues, they started falling behind their competition, and before you know it, they were in trouble, angry user base, better competing options and products, then poof, they became irrelevant.

    Sounds familiar to me. Unity is in the first stages of GG's footsteps. Now the question is will they adapt to the new realities, or will they be stubborn like GG and end up going poof like them when their competition stomps them out.
     
  40. LaneFox

    LaneFox

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Posts:
    7,462
    Torque has like a dozen or so games under its belt.
     
  41. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Posts:
    2,981
    My business survives on cashflow - money in > money out = win. I like the idea of a subscription model, as it is helps cashflow. And, as you, me, and everyone else has observed, Unity's $150-$225/mo is VASTLY more expensive than the now standard $20/mo or $10/mo. Cry and Unreal are AAA engines, at 1/10 the cost of Unity's Indie solution.

    It's a paradigm shift - and whether they do it now, or 6 months from now, Unity must respond.

    Gigi
     
  42. cynic

    cynic

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Posts:
    142
    Hmm, in the light of this, perhaps UT could do something else to make this whole deal a bit more attractive. At the end of the day, I don't think this is so much about not being more expensive than $20/month, but rather perceived up front cost or running cost when including all mobile add-ons. A lot of people are quoting those 20 bucks but seem to forget about the 5%, which can be significant.

    What about adjusting the whole subscription model, in the sense of making it actually attractive as an alternative to perpetual licenses. The great thing about perpetual licenses is that they don't expire. You paid your share, you keep it and you can keep on releasing and updating games with it as long as you like. This is an inherent advantage over the subscription.

    Now, what is unattractive about the subscription is the fact that as soon as it expires you end up with nothing, which would be totally fine, if the subscription itself was a viable alternative to perpetual licenses for all those that care about cash-flow and flexibility, rather than just the ones that can't afford a perpetual license upfront and therefore subscribe. At the moment, a permanent subscription (over multiple years and Unity iterations) doesn't make sense because it would cost more than twice of what a perpetual license would cost. I believe if we could bring these two at least roughly in line and make the subscription model an actual long term alternative payment method, a lot of people would come around.

    I'm thinking in comparison to other software as a service offers here. If Adobe's creative cloud service thingy cost double the price of a boxed version (assuming there was one still), who would go for the subscription? Exactly...
     
  43. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Thing is, 5% is on top of Epic's sub. I like Unity's royalty free approach a lot though.

    If Unity updates every 2 years and the cost of upgrade is $600, this is $600/24 months, or $25 a month per platform. I think that makes sense.

    It's important that people understand that Unity's model is royalty free, and SHOULD carry a higher price tag (which it does by making it per platform license). Not necessarily much higher though, after all asset store requires large volumes of free users. I think free users will pay $19 to epic however, so Unity needs to focus on increasing it's pro audience.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
    ArnoC likes this.
  44. Darkoo

    Darkoo

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Posts:
    96
    I would not mind 5% royalty from unity if it was possible to pay ~20$ a month for all platforms. But this is still another thing to think about what would most new to this industry, having been thought Unreal, Cryengine is the top AAA game engines most new potential customers would most likely go to them.

    and also why do most here just compare against unreal am I misinformed that cryengine is 9.99$ with no royalty?
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  45. makeshiftwings

    makeshiftwings

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Posts:
    3,350
    ^ I think that's the only way to go. Everyone hoping that Unity will be $20/month for all the pro licenses and NO royalties is dreaming.
     
  46. islanddreamer

    islanddreamer

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Posts:
    473
    $600 every couple of years to update the Pro license is very reasonable. I think Unity needs to rethink the pricing on its iOS and Android Pro licenses.
     
  47. makeshiftwings

    makeshiftwings

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Posts:
    3,350
    Crytek has been very evasive on what this means exactly, having only released a small paragraph of text in a press release... most of us are suspicious that there's a catch, because that's how Crytek rolls.
     
  48. makeshiftwings

    makeshiftwings

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Posts:
    3,350
    A lot of you guys seem awfully sure about how hard and confusing UE4 is for an engine that's been out for a grand total of one day.
     
  49. Alf203

    Alf203

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2012
    Posts:
    461
    Some of us have had access for longer… just saying… and its not out as it is still a beta. They have nice things but its not complete yet, as to why its still a beta. They have time to catch up though, so Unity beware !
     
  50. makeshiftwings

    makeshiftwings

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Posts:
    3,350
    Much like the guy in the other thread, I don't think I trust that you actually had access to it, or even that you've downloaded it and tried it yet. ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.