I want to pay more to good Asset Store plugin developers!

We are building games and non-game applications with many of the asset store plugins. It feels very good to see new asset pop up where developers are pushing great quality and keep updating and fixing bugs. New users pile up for the asset and life is great.

Then one day the market gets saturated. Pushing another "big release" with bloated crap on the asset is not anymore making the customer base re-buy their old assets. What happens? All those developers that are basing their development on those plugins suffer greatly. They start to get worse products. Lets say there is no total collapse of buyers for specific asset. But bad enough situation that those asset developers can not sustain their team from updating old things. They are pushed to invent yet another new asset and basically put the old great asset to sleep mode.

Suggestion: Unity please let me pay voluntary "support developer"-subscription in addition to asset price (recurring revenue to the team behind good plugin). So that I can buy an asset, keep using it, and not always be afraid to see the dev team vanish after 6 months. If my own product is dependent on asset updates and bug fixes, I would be more than happy to keep paying e.g. 5€ / month to the asset developer to make sure they can feed their family and keep doing good job (Even more if I really want to make sure or less if things go south).

This has to be voluntary and I would want to select how much I keep paying (Not fixed), lets say I pay 20€ to start using asset, then I realize how great it is and use it in production system. Then I go and activate my "support developer"-subscription from asset store, I select how much money I want to keep paying monthly, now I on my behalf make sure the team can be more sustainable and can keep up the good work.

I'm throwing money at my screen but nothing happens

 

Yup. IMO Asset Store should apply itchio-like policy where each asset has minimal price (even if it's $0), but then you can put voluntary "tip" on top of that if you so desire (AS store cut would apply to both price and "tip" though it'd be nice if unity would leave second part entirely for the dev).

 

yeah that would be great if a system like that was put in place.
Would definitely help a lot if there aren't many greedy people out there lol.

 

Email support for the asset with a request to pay them some money. I don't know any developers that would turn down extra cash.

 

Yes, I have tried that. That is the reason why I am here, asking for practical solution to the problem. Unity would also benefit as company, my feeling is they are also seeking alternatives with their business model, along the lines of darkhog. Everyone wins.

 

I guess more options wouldn't hurt. Do you see a benefit to Unity enabling an option to do this (which I assume would be optional) vs. tool creators setting up a Patreon or equivalent? I can't say I've thought before about setting up a patreon but I certainly could and let subscribers vote on tools I'd do next.

 

just some random thoughts

- When purchasing asset, could buy "VIP customer pack" (if the seller has enabled it. VIP customer could have faster support, or other extras like beta access, 1 feature request, skype support, private repository access.. etc. All different price levels, as in Kickstarter you can pay more to get more)

- Unity Asset Store Developer Support Tax (each purchase in store would take minimal % amount from the price into Unity Dev Funds, which would be given out to support good sellers/assets.. not yet sure what would be the criteria to select who gets funds though)

 

I think it should be just inbuilt and arranged by Unity. This way everything would be maintained by one entity.

 

Totally agree. Our World Political Map series has been selling quite well so far and we know that a large % of customers are from stablished companies and large organizations who see $70 a bargain for such kind of asset (ie. NATO, US ARMY, NASA....).
It's really a need to have the possibility to define services level packages that could be included along the purchase or after the purchase (eg. Premium support, custom development, ...)

 

Hmmm I'm sure there is something about taxes involved, but let's ping @Aurore and see what she says

 

(I'll preface this with a; I don't have the decision power on this stuff) My 2cents & I'll be honest, I don't really see the need. Asset developers choose to put their assets for sale to make money, the same effect would be achieved to raise what they charge for an Asset.

Alas, if such an initiative was put in place, there would no doubt be some tax thing for the Asset Seller. But I'll send this to the Asset Store team.

 

Not if the asset is no longer selling , but has a huge active installbase ( Dakion Forge GUI for example that got canned after unity released there own UI solution). But maybe they could just set up there own pateron for that.

 

If it were me, I would contact the asset developer and offer to pay for something added to the asset. For example, pay for extra tutorials or an extra feature, knowing that once it was added it would also be available to anyone on the asset store. I know some developers will do this. They simply offer to make "custom content" that is then non-exclusive. An example would be a special model that a developer needs for his game but not something that would be super popular. By paying extra money but giving up the exclusive rights, the developer can charge less than he might for an exclusive model/script/etc. The model can then be offered on the asset store and the developer gets more money even if the model doesn't sell as well as the generic models.

I see danger in paying more for support as support should be built into the asset store price. If one is providing too much support, they should raise the price, not ask people who purchased to spend more for support.

I agree with Aurore. I don't see the need to do this formally. I have plenty of developer friends who have contracted for non-exclusive work. I have offered this to a few developers who have added to the asset without taking my money...such cool people. But I would be very willing to pay extra for something that I want, even if it is then offered to everyone.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if something like this could be apart of the Level 11 reworking. I'd be on board for some kind of subscription that would actively support the assets I rely on.

 

I thoroughly disagree with the implication that there is no need for recurring revenue for asset store developers! I am startup entrepreneur and there is whole world of difference between the two.

If you try to extrapolate over time, the dependency and sustainability of my company is greatly endangered on buying asset from 3rd party for 50€ and expecting to use that product for many years ahead. It is absolutely impossible for Unity3D as a platform and asset store to function properly as foundation for _my_ business when every 1 year I have to find another new developer re-inventing the wheel hopefully at same quality as previous developer. With your solution of raising prices I would practically need to pay one time fee of hundreds or thousands of €, it is not feasible and far from practical as the lifetime is expected to be many years (This is the advantage of asset store that you can evaluate at low price point, then if I am happy with the quality, support and performance of the asset store developer and product, I would really like to start paying more over time to secure my business needs through helping the developer). It is even absurd for me to expect good service for so low price over time. Now only solution is to A: send money through outside of asset store mechanics or B: for the asset provider to re-sell the same asset again and again with artificial major releases.

Even Unity3D could not sustain that business model yourself! Don't you see the analogy?

This has already happened with multiple assets. I am a customer, a paying customer for Unity license. I am telling _you_ that there is a problem. I am not asking if you see the problem, I am telling you the problem is there. I'm sorry to be blunt, but for love of god do not diminish the concern by quick hand analytic. I want to build sustainable business dependent on 3rd party assets (One example: https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/10872). With current Asset Store business model it simply does not deliver the sustainability that our company would need.

One time payment is absolutely not the same as recurring revenue over time, I am afraid.

Best regards,
Sauli

 

I've had someone contact me directly and offer money for additional support. I also contacted someone directly to send them additional money out of sheer joy of their asset doing everything I needed. Not sure there has to be any sort of additional infrastructure for this?

I guess it could be nice as there wouldn't be:
"No, no, I don't need extra money."
"...but ...but I want to give you money."
"I'm fine, really."
"Here's money anyway!"
"Wow, thanks!"

 

In my opinion, it would be good. Completely optional, as saying thanks to the developer, speaking as a customer. Now speaking as a developer, some of you say that the developer can just the same increase the price of their asset, but that's not always the best way. We for once try to keep the prices low (sometimes too low, and realize after a long number of updates like our Cartoon Low Poly Pack lol), so more people can afford them, even if we value the asset more, and think it deserves to be slightly higher priced. But we don't because we want it available to more people, with not so high a budget. But recently realizing people get turned off by low prices, some even thinking its suspiciously low, but that's another matter.

Another reason is what @Yukichu said, I always react exactly like that, refusing a few times before finally giving in. Which sometimes leaves you feeling a bit embarrassed, also feeling good, contradictory to the pride you'd feel if you had Patreon-like supporters, or a tip jar. It probably sounds silly to some of you, but I both like and dislike when that happens.

Speaking of Patreon, if Unity didn't have such a thing on the asset store, I wish Patreon was more widely known and accepted among developers. I don't like shoving advertisement links in peoples faces telling them about our Patreon page, but if it was more widely known/done among developers, it would be common to see links to Patreon in asset description or thread.

 

I've occasionally had people buy another copy on my website to show support, so if the asset store would allow buying multiple copies for all assets, it seems like a simple way of solving the problem.

--Eric

 

Except I have a feeling some would do it unintentionally, leading to the evil chargebacks. D'x

 

I really think this is the best way to go. If you want to be a patron of the arts, then pay a commission to the asset author to make either an improvement to an existing product, or a new one, or something special for your own project. Or if you don't want to spend that much money, buy another one of their products. Or buy them a beer.

I think most of the store devs are looking for piece work, and their products are a way to show potential customers what they can do. So if you like their work, hit them up for more. But I don't think Unity should be a middleman in that.

 

I imagine it would be similar to the "Buy Additional Licenses" button.

 

Never clicked on that button in my 1 year of using the asset store so I wouldn't know. I'm just really scared of the evil chargebacks.

 

I agree. And I really don't like the idea of subscriptions on the asset store. I would MUCH rather the developer raises the price. I understand that they want to make the asset affordable, but subscriptions are just hidden costs. If you forget to cancel, you may end up paying much more. I don't want dozens of subscriptions for assets that I forget to cancel if I stop using them or no longer need an update for them. Seems like a hassle and a really good way to end up paying more than intended, sometimes just due to errors in the system. Unity doesn't need to deal with this too. It should be outside the asset store and the responsibility of the developer, not Unity to deal with such billing issues.

The asset store now has an upgrade ability on the asset store. If an asset developer feels the upgrade is such that it should cost more, then by all means, offer an upgrade to current users, raising the prices for new users. Will it keep some folks from buying it? Maybe..but lots of reasons not to buy an asset.

Optional subscriptions for support only would make me worry that as non-subscriber, I would not get the support I need. I would look for assets that did not offer subscriptions if made to choose between two. I already avoid assets that I really like because they don't have a forum post (can't see the support given) or no working demo (can't see if the asset works) or bad responses in the reviews (don't take responsibility). I also ask friends for opinions on the support given...best way to assure success. Honestly, I rarely use the support...but if I need it, I want to make sure I will be given the support I need to use the asset, not have to wait in a line behind those who are able or willing to pay more.

On the other hand, I would jump over backwards for good developers, with fair prices (and I don't mean cheap), who give great support and are honest about their products. I will review, promote, post pictures on their forums, and give them credit for their work. I am often, surprisingly, asked about assets in PM's by perfect strangers and I have no problem recommending good, well supported assets or to caution them about assets that are not worth the money or are not supported well. Word of mouth is a big deal.

 

Maybe Unity can just add a Donate button to the asset page template. So for each Asset at the top or whatever it has Donate. Clicking that takes them to a donation page that makes it clear this is a non-refundable non-recurring donation. This way it is all painless for the asset developers and users. Unity only needs to collect the funds and credit that seller's account. Devs don't need to set up a Paypal or whatever account. Users can do it all from the Asset store. No contact or discussion would be necessary. I suppose they could add a small comment box on that donation page as well.

 

I agree support should be given regardless, even for free assets. I was talking more along the line of (what I think OP meant) feeling super happy with the asset and wanting to throw more money at it.

But like you, I'd rather take word of mouth, and reviews/rating, over an extra donation. To me a review on the asset is worth way more than donations. Even if its a huge unreasonable 500$ donation, I'd take a review over it, because it means whoever comes to the page will see that people are happy with it, and will be more inclined to buy. In the end leading to more satisfaction on both ends.

 

I think its a piss poor idea that will a) not work on anything that isn't code and b) have people cancel subs after the initial $5.

Subs are a good idea if the thing is expensive. Last I checked, assets aren't. Generally subs do not work in your favour, they're a total red herring because people are incapable of managing their own finances.

Not sugar coating because I'm not interested in sugar coating the bitter truth.

 

I don't think that's the case at all?

If I decide to sell something for $5, and someone loves it so much that they want to give me another $5 after their project is a success, that is not the same as me charging $10 in the first place. They might not have paid $10 for it in the first place. Or they might have, but the increased price might have lost me sales from other people who couldn't afford or didn't want to pay the difference.

Or, what about releasing a free asset, and someone decides it really helped them out so they want to chuck me $5 out of thanks, or to "buy me a beer" or whatever. That's not even remotely the same as me having decided to sell it for $5 in the first place.

Another example is, of course, restaurant tipping in cultures that use that system. It has its pros and cons, but it is definitely not the same as just including an average tip into the up front price.

Anyway, I'm not necessarily saying it should be done. It's a cool idea, but I question how many people would end up using it rather than spending the same money to buy more assets instead.

 

Taking everyone's posts into consideration, and entertaining the idea, maybe subscription is a bad idea, but a subtle "donate" button could work? Something along the lines Nexus has for mods. If decided on, its definitely something that needs to be given a lot of thought, because it can affect the asset store ecosystem big time.

 

Hmm, I don't know. If someone's willing to throw their money at the developer, why not let them do that?

On other hand, if developers start begging for tips, that'll be bad. Then again, most devs probably won't do that.

Might make sense to allow people to pay extra but forbid begging for that extra.

So, makes sense to allow tips and donations, but I don't quite like the "subscription" idea. It isn't patreon, after all.

 

Throw money at a developer because they are good with support and make fabulous assets, not to get them to pay more attention to you. If they deserve the money, they are doing everything they need to do to be successful already and you just want to give them something extra.

 

That doesn't sound right to me, although I can't quite put my finger on the reason.

It is better to keep things simple. Someone bought asset and liked it so much that they decided to pay extra. IMO, they should be allowed to do so. IMO, it makes sense to have convenient way to do it.

"Deserve" or "don't deserve" is just making things needlessly complicated.

However, I don't like the idea of subscriptions to support someone. There's patreon for that. Donate button or ability to give a tip makes sense. Subscription - not so much.

 

And making it anonymous would give the "no strings attached" feeling.

 

I think a more pay what you want thing is better, I bet the majority would pay the minimum but some guys might pay more.

 

Fully agree on this one. Thus it should be optional. When it comes to forgetting subscriptions it seems to me as little worry, as it is just me or you being a bit lazy loosing few bucks for a good cause

 

If we're going to bring laziness into the discussion then we need to consider one of the biggest examples. Why does Unity have to implement this for you? What is stopping you from contacting the developer and paying them directly yourself? You said it was for a good cause after all.

Laziness though has nothing to do with it. Some of us, especially those like @Teila who is raising a family, have a great deal to manage in our lives. We can't be expected to remember every little thing. Last thing we need is yet another thing to track when there are far more important things to remember.

 

Because they are the service provider of the Asset Store

I'm talking from a company point of view when asking for such a feature. For indie / individuals managing such things may be just additional challenges. But as said, if it is optional thing, you don't exactly have to increase your life complexity by paying such fees in the first place.

Interesting point in any case!

 

if it's such a problem too add an extra bit to it of your choosing, why don't Unity make a Patreon kinda thing, they of course keep a percentage of it, but it will bring a different group of things, however it might isolate who buys what because of popularity, etc. But still nevertheless, it may be an idea to offer down the road.

I'd rather deal with one website that deals with it all rather than 20 different websites for 20 different things.

Just my 2 cents.

 

Additional challenges that equate to a larger cut for the indie. Patreon only takes 5% plus any credit card fees.

Or you could set up a merchant account and receive payments through Amazon or PayPal. How many people won't have at least one of those? They take an even smaller cut for themselves.

https://payments.amazon.com/merchant#pricing
https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/merchant-fees

 

I thought pateron took 30% well that makes pateron an even better option

 

No, they only take 5%. The only stores that seem to still take 30% are app stores.

https://patreon.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/204606125-How-do-you-calculate-fees-

 

@Ryiah - that is true...

 

Note that Unity Asset Store provides a valuable service taking care of VAT. Paypal is not an option for *legal* EU sellers unless you want to handle invoicing for yourself, although there're other options of course. Also, as @N1warhead says, I agree it's more convenient if the same Asset Store provides choice from a single site (and because perhaps it also concentrates +90% of potential customers traffic?)

Whatever additional marketing/selling options brings Asset Store in the future, the better:
- Selling cheap is never a sustainable business and I think this is no good for anyone, but again, how do you tackle the long tail if not selling cheap...?
- Also I find it slow to change price and align it with a marketing campaign for a determined period. Apple AppStore allows you to define periods of time and price. Perhaps Unity could include this feature?

 

Was just glancing at paypal merchant, but it seemed very official, like for actual businesses, not individuals. And I still didn't get around filling that W-8BEN form for Patreon since I'm from EU. lol

@Thrawn75 makes a valid point about traffic. From all the places I advertised our packs, almost all of the traffic comes from the asset store itself.

I sort of admire and aspire towards sellers such as Manufactura K4, Quantum Theory, 3DForge, and alike (don't know any from scripting categories, I only recently got into scripting assets), that don't sell "cheap". They obviously have more experience and confidence, and maybe don't depend on the asset store as much. I for one am not gonna find any job that pays as much as the asset store where I live, so I'm more dependent on the asset store, and tend to price things lower to not turn off anyone. I don't think that's a good thing anymore though.

 

Exactly. As Ryiah said, you can contact the developer and give him a donation or contract with him for extra services. You don't need to do this through Unity.

Honestly, if buying stuff on the asset store becomes more complicated..subscriptions to manage, service costs to add on (hate that when I buy electronics), support that costs extra, the asset store will lose some of it's appeal. Right now, it is easy.

Already, I can buy stuff off the asset store and while I prefer to do it on the asset store, that always isn't the best choice. Speedtree, for example, gives me a discount through their store because I own the modeler. Foolish not to take advantage of that. Other developers offered things on their store that they do not on the asset store and it is easier for record keeping to have everything from one developer on one site. Also, I have purchased things from developers well before using Unity, that do supply Unity packages now. Dexsoft is one of those so again, I just keep everything on their store.

So do I and that is mostly what I buy now. I started with the cheap stuff but over time have dome to realize that you get what you pay for. Getting stuff on sale is nice, but I know if I buy something for $60 from Opsive, or spend $35 on JustB's clothing, or $45 on Gaia, that I am not only getting a good product, but I am getting the support. They charge what they need to make so they can provide the support.

I don't get this "I can't raise my price because no one will buy it" and then say they need to have a subscription to provide better support. If your support is good, you have a proven track record, and you don't disappear periodically into the netherlands, you will be able to sell your products at a higher price as they are upgraded. Provide a Lite Version for newcomers and allow them to upgrade.

Also, why should Unity deal with the hassles of all this without raising the 30% they take? I mean really, they are the ones who will suddenly be dealing with support issues, such as developers promising updates with subscriptions and not following through (not always their fault), or problems when cancelling subscriptions, dealing with cancelled credit cards, fraud, etc.

They provided a great upgrade route for upgrades. My guess is most people will pay a higher price for an updated product. Like a subscription, you can pay as the product updates. Unlike subscriptions, you only pay for the update when it is updated. Seems like a win-win for both consumer and developer.

 

A few bucks? Could be a lot more than that with multiple subscriptions. Then add in bank fees if you accidentally overdraw.

Sorry, but my "few bucks" are tied up in the three kids I have at home. If I am not using a product anymore, I don't want to pay for it. Usually, when I stop using an asset, it is because it is not good, the developer disappeared, upgrades are not happening, or I found something better. I don't consider that a "good cause" when I could be giving that money to other equally deserving developers.

 

Why are you apologising? By which I mean, it could just be the way I read it but it seems to be pretty defensive. Nobody's asking you to pay for extra stuff if you don't want to. I agree that the idea of a voluntary subscription is odd and unlikely to work, but some of the other ideas raised from it seem alright.

For the same reason that other online stores do it for IAPs and such: because they'd be getting a 30% cut out of more payments. The question is, would there actually be more payments?

That depends what "better support" means, right? If "better" means "the support that should come with a product purchase anyway" then clearly something isn't right. If "better" means that they can offer clients project-specific advice or customisation or consulting then that's potentially worth quite a lot to the right people. (And I think that some vendors already offer it via their websites.)

 

What if asset costed like few hundred $$$, but customer still thought it was worth more, but not double the price?

Frankly, I think "tip" system where you can additionally pay something on top of what is price of the asset, even if it's $0 (but not multiple of the price like it would had to be with multiple copies) like itchio has for games would be the best.

 

So go and tip him. Unity Asset store is a store. If I go into a supermarket and I like baked beans, and demanded the supermarket give me a method to tip heinz, then they'd probably reply with "you'll have to contact them" or "you could buy more beans!"

 

If you must give away money, don't forget the friendly community members on the forums. PM me for a PayPal address.

 

I would like some way to help developers with a system for additional donations that requires no work on the part of the asset seller. When I buy a code asset, I am investing in its longevity. In some cases, I would like to help assure that the asset creator can continue to sell their asset by providing them with extra funds. It should be possible for an asset store vendor to have a small but loyal user base who can continue supporting the asset if necessary. Currently, all asset store vendors rely on growing their user base in order to simply maintain steady income.