I get a doubt to use Unity for one reason:

If I use Unity free with splash Unity logo do I ever have a chance
to be noticed by Apple or Google in the top charts?
If you think it is possible let me know some examples.

 

Your chances of getting "noticed" are roughly the same, regardless of having or not having splash screen, meaning very very low.

In general people will be able to determine quality of your game before they get a chance to see the splashscreen.

 

Let me put it this way: No-one sees your splash screen until they've already bought the game, installed and run it. By the time they see it they're already passed the biggest hurdles in getting people to buy/download your game.
If your game doesn't get noticed, it's not your splash screen. What people see is the art you put in your store screenshots/trailer as well as video footage of people playing it on youtube etc.

 

Yep. Before people see the splash screen, they've already seen cover art, brief description from the store, several screenshots, likely a fragment of gameplay, and in sometimes already watched a streamer play it.

So it is not really a major factor.

 

The question is not about people, but about Apple's and maybe Google's inner rating rules.

I mean at least Apple does not like it if there is some visual hint that says the app was created not only for Apple Store. Unity logo is just such a hint. It is a very visible and very direct hint.
Therefore I guess chances to be noticed by Apple may go to completely zero.
Anyway, if somebody has the opposite experience/ (real data) would be interesting to know.

 

The question is not about Apple or Google but about your skill and ability. To get noticed, you'll need a decent product first, then you need to market it.

 

If it's easy to hide the thing hide it. If not, don't worry about it.

Personally I'd try to get rid of the blemish only when I've sold several commercial games and I can more accurately predict reception of the next. That is the point where I spend a little more money for tiny, may be advantages that can't be measured.

 

The splash screen has zero effect on sales, and if you make money you can remove it in the next update (to satisfy your own feelings).

 

What you're worrying about is a problem that you've made up entirely within your own head. If you're that worried about it subscribe to a year of Unity Plus but you're not going to magically be successful by removing it nor will the store treat you differently for doing so.

 

Only developers really care, and that is how it can be monetised by Unity.

 

All you say is perfectly 100% right. And I like Unity.
But you redefine my question and answer your question.
The core of my question is:
do you ever saw a game on Apple chart lists with Unity logo?

 

Your chances of getting into the top lists, with or without the logo are the same - virtually non existent. This industry (mobile specifically) requires a lot of investment in order to get to there. You as a beginner, shouldnt be deciding on an engine based on if you can get into the top lists - because you are creating a situation almost guaranteed to fail.

 

The reason you don't see this is because all the games at the top of the list are made by companies with far too much money to get away with the indie license.

 

Tons of games removes Unity logo. You may have been playing unity gems, without even realising.
But that often means, game studio, or indie already brings income above 100k$, 5o be able remove splash screen
Unless paid for licence before then.

 

What the point for Unity to put its logo on tons of crappy games?
Unreal is happy without it.
Maybe Unity may think about one more free plan similar to Unreal ??

In my opinion for Unity would be the best to find a way to put the logo onto the best games created with it ... but likely Apple could kill this idea.

 

There have been cases of games on Steam getting bad reviews because they are made with Unity, but that does not happen on mobile, so need to worry there. Apple often mention Unity in their keynote presentations, so they have a positive attitude to the game engine.

Apple changed the splash screen a few years ago and it is much nicer now. Work on the aspects you can control and it can look quite nice.

I have paid for Unity Plus as I am speaking to publishers about my free-to-play games, and a key KPI they test is retention. Every second spent loading reduces retention, so skipping the splash screen helps. I also feel better about having a more unified graphical introduction to the game, but don't know if it really makes much difference. Note that I didn't pay for Plus until I had to, it isn't needed for development.

My first Unity game (it was iOS only) about 10 years ago got lots of placements on category pages, but not main pages. The category pages are much less visible on the Apple now, but even then it only made a small difference. That game had the old style Unity splash screen, and it didn't seem to hold the game back from getting promoted.

 

This point has been made many times on the Unity Forums, and I agree with you, I think it harms the perception of Unity. But it also brings in revenue from those paying to remove it (Unity has removed most of the other benefits of Plus such as Asset Store discounts).

 

They pay because they generate 100k +.
His is the fair tax for using tools not for removing logo.
The tax can be charged in many different forms also.

 

Yes, many.

I do recall seeing logos that were later removed when they earned millions.

Some even put the Unity logo on themselves. Our older other brothers game did put the Unity logo on a blimp on the title screen to show our support.

 

The baldfaced IRONY of your last sentence (real data) after spouting a nonsense conspiracy just to promote Unused Engine.

 

We're not redefining your question. We've answered it. Google and Apple do not care whether you display a logo for the game engine or not. Your reasoning that it says you've developed for other platforms is nonsensical. All the logo says is that you've chosen Unity and that's it.

Again if you are not happy with this answer the only solutions available to you are to pay the "tax" for Plus, or use a completely different game engine. You've already said Unreal doesn't force it. If you care this much why aren't you using Unreal?

 

I haven't seen any unity logo games on the apple store. I think Apple hates unity.
That's just facts people.
Anybody who disagrees I challenge to a duel.

Also a lot of people are saying - I mean I am hearing from many, many people... good people - that Tim Apple hates Roger Unity because of an old blood feud.

 

Unity forcing the logo on personal users is stupid and weird and petty.

But, on the list of things wrong with Unity, it's pretty low.

Just release your game, if you make a bit of money get plus and get rid of the splash screen.

There have been top charting games that have the Unity splash screen at the start, yes.

 

Or just (I know, it's unpopular opinion nowadays)... pay for the software you're using and you can choose when and how you're displaying their logo. I know, blasphemy and all.

 

Why just not say: Unity does not care about small developers.
100k per Year is so rare case for indy developers.
By Analytics Unity have data who get any amount of cash.
If Unity would take some fair % from any amount it would be forced to take care of all developers.

 

Why are you expecting a mega corporation to care about small developers? None of them do.

If you make half decent game, you can make enough to buy a year of plus and then get rid of the splash screen, it is not that big an issue.

 

Just listen to yourself: you want Unity to give you a free engine AND remove their logo, what exactly are you offering them in return?

Just buy the subscription if you want to remove it. If your game won't make enough to cover the subscription to Unity, why would you even care about the impact of the logo?

 

We have unreal which does not force logo, but requests Royalties if you become successful.

On other hand, every unreal game used to display Unreal Logo in a splash screen, even a commercial one, and nobody really made a fuss about it.

If the OP really doesn't want to give anything back, then there are opensource engines. Ogre framework, for example...

 

Thats nonsense. I started on free and I am on the 100k per year band now in my own company (And have pro now despite that as I also work on even bigger projects), all through using unity.

Stop making things up and spouting nonsense. Its making it look more and more like you are here to build flames, not to create any real meaningful discussion.

 

If Unity splash screen is bad it's only because of bad developers. I mean the free version opened the flood gates and has resulted in piles and piles of horrible games. I think we need more good developers not the bad ones.

 

Nah, this one's on Unity.

 

The difference is that most people are proud to put Unreal Engine there, but yeah we all know why and it's already been said a million times.

It's the front-end store that needs to be the filter. Unity's a tool, there's nothing wrong with making a pile of junk with it if that's what someone wants to do. Nor is it necessary to have any skill with it to enjoy using it. But the fact that complete junk is sold alongside actual games to customers, as if they are one and the same, is where the issue is.

It's like burying a brand new BMW in the middle of:



.. and it's the only 'car shop' in town.

 

Except... it does have a filter. The biggest front-end store on PC, where everyone claims this is a problem? It does have a filter. How often do you actually see these bad games on Steam? Like, these real awful turds? Do you see them on the site itself, or do you happen upon them through social media posts and youtubers/streamers?

Because I don't see them on the site.

In fact, I haven't really seen these sorts of games on Steam without being linked to them externally for ages. Even when Greenlight was a thing and the floodgates opened, putting hundreds of games on Steam a day sometimes, the only time I ever saw the real awful stuff was when browsing Greenlight itself or being made aware through some sort of external factor.

And, honestly, the same has been the case on iOS for about the same time as well. The real S***ty stuff on iOS is languishing and quite often not even making a single sale or even racking up 10 unassisted downloads because stores have been deliberately burying this stuff for over half a decade now. We were able to see this pretty easily demonstrated when the arguably most notorious "asset flipper" company, Digital Homicide (company as in business entity, it was two dudes) was effectively bankrupted simply by having its games delisted on Steam before the lawsuit with Jim Sterling. If anything, it's very likely they saw more sales with the attention brought to them from that whole situation than they did any other way.

There is a big to-do made about various forms of shovelware on Steam and the App Store, but, genuinely, it has never been easier to avoid shovelware than it is now unless you're jumping in on bundles still, but none of those are handled by the storefronts themselves.

 

Unity letting the slobbering masses use their tool for free is good in the highest order.

Steam being full of games made by 6 year olds is steams problem. Personally I don't see what the issue is really, there is a thousand ways to filter. It's no trouble at all to find the good games.

And let's be real they are all kind of stupid. Sometimes its more entertaining to me to just browse through the junk to see what weirdness people are up to. Like going to a consignment shop except all the products somewhat reflect the hilarious fantasies and wild ideas people had at some point, then sat down and worked diligently for months/years to share with the world.

It's beautiful, and if nothing else having some contrast helps prevent people from getting too spoiled on the latest "wonder of the world" AAA games made possible by slave labor.

 

There is a genuine disrespect for the Unity logo among many gamers, especially in Steam I think. I'm sure bad games has something to do with it. Not a huge problem but it does affect the perception of quality for some people, which means more devs buy the pro/plus I guess.

 

To be fair really good games struggle to get seen on Steam, you'd know if you made a really good game and tried to sell on steam. It's dominated by the 10% like any other store is. That's the reality of steam, and that's the reality of why so many devs including Wolfire Games feel that 30% cut is no longer cutting it.

Because of Steams hyperbad skewed storefront, that benefits steam. I get what you are saying about bad titles - that is also true... bad stuff just drops out of sight instantly, but it's still a very, very rough place even for great titles, to do business in.

Ultimately like you are also saying: store and selling is a much bigger problem for devs than a silly logo.

 

I'm not talking about just Jim Sterling comedy material. I mean low quality games, stuff that isn't made with much skill. We're nearly at 30 games a day now for Steam, maybe a small percentage of it is so bad it's funny, but there's a lot of stuff that's just not good. And it takes a lot of sifting around to sort that out.

The problem is at the point of entry into Steam, and as we all know, the first week or so of a game's release are usually life and death for it.

Because of this, lack of ANY curation is a problem. Even if games end up sorting themselves into virtual categories by way of reviews and popularity, it still might take quite a while for any given game to reach it's stable 'true' position in search lists etc, and the sheer volume of stuff raining down slows that down more every day. So it seems to me that even if a crap game gets relegated to the bottom of the pile eventually, it still plays a part in pushing the initial curve down for other games.

I think everyone knows at this point that either you create a community for your game or don't even bother. That reflects the simple fact that store visibility is completely trashed and worthless at the most critical time in a game's life.

Anyway, it doesn't bother me a whole lot, but I certainly find particular satisfaction in seeing other stores do what they need to do to start clearing this mess.

 

You didn't address anything in my post.

 

Let's stick to the point though. How much value does Steam really provide, if I have to build a community?

If I was going to give 30% to a publisher, I'd be expecting some real differentiating value.

 

They make it convenient for consumers to find and buy your game.
I wouldn't expect to sell a single copy of my game without some sort of global distributor. Last time I worked with steam it seemed they provided all the tools necessary for success. But certainly they aren't doing extra work for anybody without real skin in the game (money).

For my current and future projects though I am definitely gunning for epic store though. Steam is fat and rotting. Epic is lean and hungry. Out with the old, in with the new.

 

Steam discovery queue fairly regularly offers plenty of trash. However...

1. It is unknown which engine is used by the trash (you can spot RPGmaker game reliably, but you can't spot a unity game reliably). To see the logo, you have to buy it first, and if it is an obvious trash, then you won't be buying it.
2. To get to that point you'll need to view a LOT of products in discovery queue. As in "thousands".

 

If someone is actually thinking this way, then it is kinda ridiculous, don't you think?

I mean, what is there to be proud of?

Plenty.

if you try to sell the game on your site and you're a nobody, then you'll have a small number of sales.
If it shows up on steam, due to sheer number of people you'll get more sales.

In my opinion, the "disrespect" is usually voiced by a vocal minority. People from said minority are not necessarily your customers.

 

Yes, recently I was playing Minion Masters.
I did not know it was made with unity until I have seen pink rectangles instead of particles.

 

I look at it the same way.

It's very easy to let Steam off the hook by saying it provides this and that, and compare it to doing it all yourself. But that's not the reality of pricing. The value of a car in a car shop is not the cost of building it yourself from scratch, neither is the value of a place on Steam the same as the cost of selling it yourself.

Well, it looks cool during the intro, at least.

Not a valid comparison, as I pointed out above. Competition is the only thing that helps define the true value of something, otherwise a loaf of bread is worth the same as life itself, if there's only one place to get it.

 

What does this have to do with anything?

For all I know, "true value" ain't a thing.

 

Indeed, it doesn't exist. Except that one might expect that in a mature market, the difference between the cost of running the store and the price of being on the store would not be wildly divergent.

Since Steam aren't going to let the cat out of the bag, the only way to know for sure whether that's the case, is to introduce competition.

 

true value = current perceptions

 

At this point I'm unsure what are you talking about.

If you have a game to sell, it makes sense to put it onto every available big store. Because large stores have large audience.

If you instead want to compete with steam, then that has very little to do with game development.

 

Newsflash:
according to the rules of capitalism we live in, if Steam's 30% were that outrageous as some people try to paint, Steam wouldn't be overflowing with games.

 

Thing is Steam gives you a lot of free advertising for that 30%. You have instant access to millions of gamers who buy games on their platform.