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

New products and prices coming soon

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by SaraCecilia, May 31, 2016.

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

    neoshaman

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Posts:
    6,492
    I still think they need a new version, like the shift from adobe incremental number to adobe just CC. They need to end unity 5 and start "Unity macromedia flash" no number, nothing, to signal the long journey to ...
     
  2. spacefrog

    spacefrog

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Posts:
    734

    This is exactly true for me too. And i can't think of Unity getting away with NOT giving all of the 5.x updates to people like me.This would be a totally shady move ...
     
    Shaolin-Dave and Adam-Sowinski like this.
  3. Adam-Sowinski

    Adam-Sowinski

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Posts:
    129
    They should release Unity 6 on March 2017 to not create any confusion with the old FAQ.
     
    mdrotar likes this.
  4. Ostwind

    Ostwind

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Posts:
    2,804
    Yeah I also pre-ordered Unity 5 in June 2014 and there were no fixed dates listed anywhere for months and it was probably added several months later, maybe at official launch/release.

    However I realistically estimated the license would be valid for around 2-3 years (until Unity 6) so the date itself not too bothering for me personally but more like the fact there was no announcement or mail that they added one after I had paid. If there would be Unity 6 around that time then there is really no other problem than the jacked up price for those who expected the upgrade route to remain around the same for existing customers.
     
  5. Cygon4

    Cygon4

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Posts:
    382
    Since I definitely will not enter a subscription, the big worry for me is what happens in March 3, 2017.

    If Unity switches to a semi-rolling release model, there will be no stable major releases anymore. Thus, the solution to fix a bug is "download the latest release." Which only subscribers can.

    Even with their pay-to-own idea, after 24 months you're stuck with one single release that gets no bugfixes. Since people will be entering those 24 month commitments at any month of the year, they can't keep delivering patches to the dozens of releases people completed their 24 months at and neither can Asset Store developers aim for anything but compatibility with the latest Unity release. So pay-to-own means Unity without bugfixes and without asset store support.

    I wish they would at least maintain Unity 5.x as a stable version like they did with all versions before, i.e. the same way we had reason to expect when we purchased our license.
     
    Adam-Sowinski and elias_t like this.
  6. the_motionblur

    the_motionblur

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Posts:
    1,774
    How do you get the idea that you can't download the latest release any more?
    You can download the latest stable release or the latest Beta. No matter if you are a subscriber or a Free user.
     
  7. Rod-Galvao

    Rod-Galvao

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2008
    Posts:
    210
    As Mark Maratea (Principle Gameplay Engineer: Zynga, Ubisoft, EA) said on Quora about big companies not using Unity:

    “Frankly that is all bullshit and unaccpetable for a professional project. I’d estimate we burn around 20% of our week on 'unity issues.'”

    (https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-big-...or-their-game-development/answer/Mark-Maratea)

    It seems Unity Technologies is in trouble. It can’t even produce a stable version anymore.

    It is trying to embrace the whole world of platforms while there is little focus on what matters to its indie customers. Theres *too much* focus on graphics. It's a “shinning graphics fetish” that's not the only selling point for indies. There are old problems with nested prefabs, scene serialization, lost configurations, slow and buggy asset store and lots of glitches, bugs and crashes. We're losing the right to the whole Unity 5.x updates and there won't be the old Unity Pro "major-version-perpertual" anymore.

    And now Unity is asking for more money. Way more money. That looks like a joke. A tragedy-comedy.

    Maybe that’s the main problem.

    When someone bought Unity Pro “Perpetual” he didn’t (or shouldn’t) expect more platforms. It’s great you have more platforms to sell Unity, but don’t expect someone to fund (by this new pricing model) the 20+ newly introduced platforms that one didn't expect and doesn’t need anyway.


    You’re spinning too many plates at the expense of old loyal customers.

    Yesterday I installed Lumberyard, Cryengine and Xenko. I didn’t knew about this Xenko until yesterday. All of them are free alternatives. For desktop developers Lumberyard is promising (a fixed Cryengine). I suppose people are at least having a look at future alternatives. We won’t change now. We'll finish the current game because it would be worst to give up now. But if things stay like this proposition we won't use Unity again. Now things aren't predictable anymore. When will be the next huge price increase bullshit?

    I’m really frustrated right now to have chosen Unity as *the* game engine. I’m client since 2.x and already spent a lot of money on Pro and in the asset store. I decided to trust you in the long run and now I’m locked in, because 200+ assets like shaders, script editors, mecanim animations and the like are not portable. If weren’t that I would not fall for sunk cost fallacy and change right now.

    How long will development hell and horrible marketing take to reach a point of non-return crash?

    So, suggestions:

    • Never say "It’s democratization of development at it’s best" and raise the price this high again. This is called bullshit. Cut costs. And find the money somewhere else, not this way.
    • Focus on the 10 most used platforms
    • Release 2 versions of Unity. Personal would have everything Pro has, except, as the name says, "professionally" looking features like image effects and soft shadows. No dark skin limitation, that doesn't make someone professional and just makes you look bad
    • Unity Pro would still have a perpetual license model like before
    • The main difference here: Unity Pro would be mandatory for those with revenue above ten thousand dollars/year
    • Fix the incomplete Unity Networking
    • Fix the asset store problems. Including the organization mess. Create standards for assets locations, installs, uninstalls, package dependency and version management. The absence of standards creates all kinds of troubles like assets that crash because they have too much free access to hack Unity. Example: Fix things like having to chase duplicate imported classes (and fixing its consequences) because of third party assets have too much liberty to mess with a project. That all reflects on your engine anyway. Also, as I'm talking about it, create standards for menu creation by third parties (Extensions menu, maybe?).
    • The lack of organisational standards is such that we spend a lot of time tracking which assets were imported in a project. And worst than that, were them updated? To which version? Where are they located? When you have projects with a few dozens assets imported it is a pain to manage. Let alone 100+ assets. That's a lot of creativity time wasted.
    • Fix the script startup initialization problems. One hasn't a guarantee that they will be initialized in a specific order. There are exceptions that make the initialization quasi-random.
    • Fix the bugs, glitches and crashes
    • Fix issues that prevent a better workflow, like nested prefabs.
    • Forget about being better than big boys' graphics. You're already good enough.
    • Buy the Asset Store's most promising de facto standards and transform them into de jure standards. De jure standards help to give predictability to where the platform is going. And predictability means more money spent.
    • Change the name of MonoBehaviour to 'GameComponent' ;)

    What would differentiate you the most is if people says to a friend: "yeah, cryengine/unreal is great but I don't need all of that. Unity is very good and, what's best, it has a plug-and-play approach. It is very easy to create a game with it". So focus on asset integration, development collaboration and intelligent workflow. Better off-the-shelf assets would be great. That would require package dependency management. Suppose one wants to create a "FPS Template Project" using the best assets from the asset store. UFPS, Behavior Designer, AAA quality guns etc. S/he wants to publish it on the asset store also. So s/he would buy those best assets, integrate them and sell them on the asset store as a product that 'requires' UFPS etc to be installed correctly. Asset integration is the key to expand Unity's functionality at a lower cost while creating de facto standards that come included in your competition. For indies, better asset integration is the next big step after the great idea that was the asset store.

    My 2 cents.

    -- EDIT --
    There are better examples of asset integration, those involving script editors. Those would be tools asset creators could use to build upon. An example: a node-based graph editor targeted at asset store's publishers. On its own it has no purpose, but as a product targeted to other publishers it is interesting and saleable. The next step of Unity's ecosystem is to ease the creation of a new layer of fundamental tools. Again that would require standards, install/uninstall processes, package dependency etc. The main point is, although you don't have fuel to build so many editor extensions, you could give it a push with standards and organization.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2016
  8. JohnSmith1915

    JohnSmith1915

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Posts:
    143
    is weird but I hope that Microsoft buy Unity.
     
    elias_t, mdrotar and Rod-Galvao like this.
  9. mdrotar

    mdrotar

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2013
    Posts:
    377
    Not if you're in the >100k club. Even if you're <100k, technically you can download it, but can't use it to release a game/update.
     
    Rod-Galvao likes this.
  10. milagem

    milagem

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2016
    Posts:
    7
    Microsoft destroy everything they touch.
     
  11. MrEsquire

    MrEsquire

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Posts:
    2,712
    Why, there phone business is falling apart, end year windows mobile be finished.. So not sure why you would them to buy.. not going to go of topic now
     
  12. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    Every single company has had some form of failure. It's simply a fact of life that not every product will be successful. If you write off a company solely because they had a failure you should have written off Unity. They failed to make a successful game development company. That's why you're buying the engine now. It's the only way they could make it.
     
    Ony, ShilohGames, tango209 and 2 others like this.
  13. JohnSmith1915

    JohnSmith1915

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Posts:
    143
    Shaolin-Dave likes this.
  14. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Given the need for speed and MSAA, and in light of valve's renderer, perhaps Unity's forward renderer could use some work. A lot of work. And it should be available for non vr too.

    Honestly having more than 10-20 lights isn't necessary. I have a game with far view distance and time of day, and currently it only spawns around 8 lights, due to the fact I just cull them or fade them out to be replaced with a sprite.
     
  15. katoun

    katoun

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2012
    Posts:
    89
    Blender is free, it's a bit different, but if you give it some time you can do most of the things you can with 3dMax and Maya and definitely no "Maya edu" problems.
     
  16. Teila

    Teila

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Posts:
    6,932
    Yep, my daughter uses Blender now. I use Maya LT. :) Blender just was too hard for my brain. lol
     
    Ony likes this.
  17. AlanMattano

    AlanMattano

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Posts:
    1,501
    I try it but is not so simple as it looks like at first impression. Jut try it for yourself. Each engine has its particular problems that turns out to be the peculiarity. Something new is always kind of draft and not a mature product (I'm talking about new features).

    I'm new here, and I do not speck well English. I'm full of passion open minded free spirit like the open air making a game I dream since Commodore 64. I was not able to do it in UDK and UE4 but in Unity is much simpler. Is posible to achieve it with the same visual quality.


    Blue is my characteristic.
    But I will be dark for some of you that do not like my style. Probably in mobile do not works well.(Remember me blue)
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2016
    Teila and Ony like this.
  18. orb

    orb

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Posts:
    3,037
    This is the only part of your post that is readable to me.
     
    AlanMattano likes this.
  19. knr_

    knr_

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Posts:
    258
    From a business perspective, the whole thing makes sense if you want to be bought out - and I'm sure there is extensive interest from the tech heavyweights.

    - Amazon has already more or less bought Crytek and has their own branch of the tech (aka Lumberyard).
    - Facebook has bought Oculus but has yet to have their own engine.
    - Google also has invested into VR and heavily invested into AR, but has yet to have their own engine.
    - Apple... nothing needs to be said, they obviously are interested base on their long term business strategies.
    - Microsoft's XNA was basically a flop, they are heavily invested into interactive entertainment, not just games and already have a very friendly relationship with Unity. They bought out Xamarin and made it free, its very reasonable to assume they could and would do the same with Unity.

    Outside of the US you have Vivendi (after Vivendi purchases and dismantles both Gameloft and Ubisoft) and Tencent in China who would no doubt love to have ownership in both Epic and Unity (it would not be hard to own both and market one as the serious AAA game engine and the other as the casual and mobile engine) - and I'm sure I could find more, but those are just the ones off the top of my head. Koch Media in Germany, whose subsidiary Deep Silver bought Volition (Saints Row) as part of the THQ bankruptcy, could make an interesting case for buying out Unity, I think.

    The subscription model is going to turn a lot of people who were happy as hobbyists purchasing a perpetual license (and perpetual license upgrades) into non-paying customers using Unity free or not using Unity at all anymore (it looks more and more likely that we fall into that camp). There are some pretty impressive grassroots engines, some of which are even open source, that could compete for market share. We have seen this over and over in other markets, like statistical analysis software. SAS was king and could bully everyone around with subscription licensing until someone decided to come out with an open-source option called R and now SAS is fighting just to stay relevant. Unity is now on the same path that SAS has traveled and those open source game engines, while they may be a bit behind on tech at the moment, are improving rapidly and are coming for their market share.

    In turn revenues will drop - there is no way they are going to recoup the amount of revenue that they will be losing with the new subscription model, so revenue will fall and the value of the company will drop, making it a more attractive buy for any of the above (sans Amazon, as they are already heavily invested into one already).

    It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but we will most likely be doing so continuing our work in a different engine.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2016
    radimoto, Ryiah, Ghosthowl and 3 others like this.
  20. Cygon4

    Cygon4

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Posts:
    382
    A subscription is not palatable to me.

    Starting March 3, 2017, Unity Pro will only be available as a subscription. The concept of major releases will also be discontinued. So at that point, if I want to keep using Unity Pro I would need to buy a subscription.

    Thus, on March 3, 2017, I'll be stranded with whatever release of Unity 5.x was current.

    Positive outcome: UT starts rolling releases as Unity 6.x and keeps supporting the current 5.x versions like it did with Unity 4.6 in the past. I'm okay with that. I'll just use my Pro License until support is discontinued, then go find another engine.

    Negative outcome: UT just transitions to rolling releases. Since there won't be major releases with bugfixes anymore, the solution to any bug encountered will be: subscribe and download the latest version.

    See the problem? The "negative outcome" is also the definitive outcome for anyone subscribing after March 3, 2017. Keep paying or lose access to Unity Pro.

    This whole "pay-to-own" thing doesn't work out. People will start subscriptions year-round and complete their 24 months subscription time on any month of the year (after which they perpetually "own" the last Unity Pro release their subscription gave them access to).

    Unity can't keep patching and updating all the releases for the different months in which subscribers end their 24 month cycles. Neither can Asset Store sellers. So pay-to-own means after 24 months, if you stop paying, yes, you perpetually own a Unity Pro license on one rolling release, but you will be stranded there with no bug fixes or Asset Store support.

    That makes pay-to-own near worthless and is a problem current perpetual licenses don't have.
     
    elias_t likes this.
  21. AlanMattano

    AlanMattano

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Posts:
    1,501
    That happens a lot with other software too. Now you remind me to download and store outside Unity all the assets just in case they deprecate.
     
  22. the_motionblur

    the_motionblur

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Posts:
    1,774
    No. I don't see the problem. If you make more than 100.000$ per year turnover then paying for Pro shouldn't be a problem for you. If you don't then you can use the fully featured free version without paying anything to unity while still getting every release and now even access to the Betas.
    So please tell me again: except if you DO fall in the category of people who make more than 100k and had to pay for every major release anyways, already, where is your problem exactly?

    You do not need to pay in order to get the same Unity releases like the pro subscribers. period. Only exception is splashscreen and dark ui. otherwise Unity free and pro are now the exact same.
     
    Teila likes this.
  23. mdrotar

    mdrotar

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2013
    Posts:
    377
    Why would they want the value to drop before selling? Usually you want to sell high.
     
  24. knr_

    knr_

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Posts:
    258
    There are more reasons than just price as to why a company would want to be sold. It is possible that the company is looking for buyers but the buying price is overvalued in the eyes of potential buyers.
     
  25. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    A situation similar to the one you give was already possible with the perpetual licenses. Just as an example if you were developing web-based games with Unity Pro 4.x you would have had to upgrade to Unity Pro 5.x as the Web Player is no longer supported by the major browsers and as far as I'm aware 4.x does not support WebGL.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2016
  26. Cygon4

    Cygon4

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Posts:
    382
    Yes. I am aware that I paid $600 for a UI theme and splash screen removal (and I'm way below the $100,000 revenue limit).

    I do want that splash screen gone and not worry about an earnings limit. If you offered me a hammer that I'm allowed to use for free on less than 1000 nails a month and another hammer for $300 that I can do with as I please, I would hand you $300 (provided it's a good hammer, single mold, stainless steel and all that :D).

    Sorry for being a weird person. I like to be off the hook that much.


    I also worry about the influence this new indirect revenue model will have on UT business. The old system was very honest and open:
    • UT improves the engine and adds feature so people will pay for a license
    • People buy licenses to get engine improvements and new features.
    Summarily, UT had a direct business motivation to improve the engine. Now we have:
    • Everyone gets everything for free
    • New features do not translate to earnings. Maybe a small increase in market share. The same increase that could be obtained from an ad campaign.
    • To increases revenue, UT needs to encourage all those non-paying users to create ad-supported games and then siphon off from their ad revenue.
    • UT must now position itself as a F2P/Freemium middleware. And aim for mobile - since that's where the Ad money lies. Which is precisely what we're seeing with Unity Analytics, Unity Ads and the server farms they now have for cloud builds, analytics and to serve ads to players.
     
    elias_t and giorgos_gs like this.
  27. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    You are aware you can just upgrade when you hit the $100,000, right? Or is it that you just don't want to think about it?
     
    Teila likes this.
  28. Cygon4

    Cygon4

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Posts:
    382
    I am aware.

    You and @the_motionblur are making some good points.

    If Unity Free/Basic would have had all the Pro features for free back when I started, I might not have purchased any license. UT would also not have earned anything from me (besides the 30% on Asset Store purchases) because I'd never place Ads in my games.

    I guess my way of thinking and UT's core business model have just grown apart in the last 2 years.
     
    Ony likes this.
  29. the_motionblur

    the_motionblur

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Posts:
    1,774
    Look, I am a Pro customer myself. I started with Indie when I payed ~250,-€ for a version that did not have shadows, reflections, plugin support or post process pixel shaders. I bought a Mac for it because Windows wasn't available then. Android and iOS also were a long time to go and cost 250,-/each also for a drastically crippeled version.
    I then upgraded to Pro from version 4 on. Only desktop as mobile was free with splash and little restictions and I didn't want to create for mobile anyways. I've grown acustomed to my pro version but really with the new plan I don't need it any more. The Free version is missing only two things, Dark UI and Splash Screen. The rest is in there without restrictions. Even Beta access.

    Does it feel weird? Somehow, strangely - yes. But actually I don't mind it because the upgrade price I am not paying for my few little provate projects is money I can spend on Substance Designer/Painter and Modo Upgrades. The ones who do need to pay for Pro are my employers at work. Which again doesn't phase me directly.

    So yes: I am also agains subscription only plans. I really am and I said why several times but this is different as there IS a free option. The Pro subscription only concerns people above 100k turnover.

    As many others I am not fond of the plus subscription tier as it doesn't offer much value to many people in that margin. But for the Free version I seriously cannot see any problems. Full Unity. No restrictions. Commercial. Beta Access. All the upgrades. No need for Pro.
     
    Teila likes this.
  30. Ippokratis

    Ippokratis

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,521
    Many people, myself included, didn't get the message when Unity offered reimbursement for preordering Unity 5.
    There is a shift in UT business model that is evolving since Unity 5 release.

    Some people benefit, others not.
    Unfortunately, small indies who have purchased Unity Pro do not benefit by the new subscription model.

    Since the number of people and the estimated profit estimate potential of the second category are low, the chances to see a worthy deal are low.
    It is likely to see a slightly better deal but nothing substantial, for marketing - good PR reasons.

    On the other hand, chances are that small indies might benefit more by adhering to the Free model. If you are not doing a big deal of money anyway, why burn them in Pro licenses ? Especially with the new prices.

    CEO attacks are useless and out of reason, the board and the CEO will always decide what is best for the company, not for a minor portion of customers.

    The only possible way of reversing the situation is investing in negative publicity. That would mean posts in gamasutra, polygon and the like saying that Unity forces customers to jump from 600$ to 4000$. A vocal minority with a clear message has power. Unreal would surely sponsor this, as they (may or not) sponsor youtubers to throw mud on unity splash screen and (perhaps) users with 1-2 posts in the unity forums to praise the Unreal engine superiority.

    I do not find tempting this course of action though. Perhaps this business model shift is beneficial for small indies. It may end in a more robust product, more freelancing chances, less upfront costs ( by embracing the free license ), bigger diversity and lower prices in Asset Store.
    I also do not find tempting to attack a company I have followed and invested into for so much time, for 600$ or 50 cents per day over the last two years. The sum in terms of money and satisfaction is positive for my side.

    It is inconvenient, but adaptation is part of life.
     
  31. orb

    orb

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Posts:
    3,037
    "It's not you, Unity, honey. It's me. I've grown smarter."
     
    Teila and Waz like this.
  32. Cybexx

    Cybexx

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Posts:
    23
    The FAQs don't mention what is happening with the previous Team License features. Specifically I'm wondering what is happening with the Cache Server.
     
  33. Moonjump

    Moonjump

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Posts:
    2,572
    I don't like moaning, but I have done quite a bit this last week on two fronts. The other issues perhaps got me in the mood to react more strongly to this one than I should have done.

    The other was our council deciding to turn off the street lighting off away from main roads at 10pm or midnight. My house fell in an area that went off at 10. Walking home in darkness was bad enough, curtains twitching as fearful people watched out at this suspicious person out after curfew made it worse. Thankfully today the council have seen partial sense and the 10pm lights out has now also moved to midnight.

    Unity is full of much nicer people than our councillors. I hope they also amend their decision.

    Removing the Personal Edition wording from the free version is the positive piece of the change. Going free has brought in a lot of people who want to move to something higher, but the step to Pro is too far. Introducing the Plus tier is another positive move in that it showed Unity sees the demand, but it is not a desirable product as it stands. I can understand the reluctance to allow the splash screen as it narrows the gap to Pro, but it is a minor step compared to the feature parity introduced at the start of Unity 5. If they are to make it desirable, they might as well call it Pro and say you pay less below the revenue cap.

    At least I have become less fearful of the switch to another game engine as the alternatives I have tried this week are a lot better than the choices when I originally decided on Unity all those years ago. I was probably going to have to learn another game engine anyway for my educational role, as Unity's approach to that sector is the opposite of the rest of the software industry, and there are now perfectly suitable alternatives for free.

    I intend to stop posting now. Don't take that as acceptance of the situation. I will be quietly watching for any changes, but before long the silence will be because of absence.
     
    quantumsheep, Ryiah and milagem like this.
  34. arkon

    arkon

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Posts:
    1,122
    On a positive note I'm going to buy a new Macbook Pro when they come out with the money I save from not buying Unity Pro! I'd much rather spend the money on that than splash screen removal and Dark UI.
     
    Adam-Sowinski, Teila and Ryiah like this.
  35. tyoc213

    tyoc213

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    Posts:
    168
    Well, because the year in the consuntancy I work has just ended and unity didnt autorenew... Im wondering if they subscribe now for 225 per month, they will be able to change to the new $125 model? or they will continue paying 225 per month?


    If not, we need to know the date unity will put its new pricing model out, so that we can make the effort to wait or go with the $225 subscription.
     
  36. aliceingameland

    aliceingameland

    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2016
    Posts:
    142
    @tyoc213 If you're subscribing now, you'll be offered the chance to move onto the new plans when we reach out to you directly over the next few weeks. We should have more details later this month.

    Having said that... long thread is LONG ya'll. We're reading all the comments, page by page. :) We're a bit quiet on the replying front because we don't want to cause any more confusion or give out incorrect info while things are being discussed internally (quite vigorously, I must say).

    I've read some people in this thread who feel like everything has been set in stone--despite us saying we're looking at all the feedback--implying that we'll ultimately ignore it all, and that is just not true. Although I can't say for certain whether it will ultimately be to your liking or not (at least I don't think I'm psychic...), please give us a little time to actually re-evaluate the details internally before making judgements about actions we haven't taken yet. I know we ask a lot of patience from you all at times... so thank you for understanding. Stuff can move slower than we like sometimes, but I'm hopeful the wait will not be too long before we have something more to say.
     
    Elecman, wm-VR, salgado18 and 12 others like this.
  37. abar

    abar

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2014
    Posts:
    72
    That's great to know that you're still considering options and listening to feedback. I really hope you end up doing the right thing (which is to remove the splash screen in Plus btw).
    Whatever you ultimately choose to do, I think it's fair to say that you've managed to cause a huge amount of damage to the community and loss of trust over this change to a subscription model and associated price increases. It takes a long time to build up that trust, and it can all be lost very quickly by making some poor decisions. Ultimately I think it betrays a lack of understanding of what your customers actually care about.

    So, keep listening, and then please make some material changes to the new structure that show us that you've heard our concerns and complaints and are willing to do something to address them. Thank you.
     
    jcarpay, elias_t, chingwa and 2 others like this.
  38. orb

    orb

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Posts:
    3,037
    I hope it means you are designing a number of different options for the whole system, and we can pick it by popular vote/whine :)
     
    zenGarden likes this.
  39. knr_

    knr_

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Posts:
    258
    I'd rather let the team take the time necessary to talk and reason things out rather than respond in haste. Thanks for the update, those of us that are a bit nerve-wracked from the announcement appreciate it.
     
  40. xanday

    xanday

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2016
    Posts:
    2
    It's really nice that you take into account all this. If I may, I'd like to ask for something: whatever it is you decide, and once you tell us what it is, please allow us a bit of time to decide if we want to go straight to the new model or the old.
    For those of us working on Free but planning on moving to Pro/Plus soon that is. Please don't remove the current models at once after releasing the final/firm info on the new models. Much appreciate it!
     
  41. salgado18

    salgado18

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Posts:
    84
    I hope it doesn't mean wrestling :eek:
     
  42. lighting

    lighting

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Posts:
    42
    It doesn't matter. Final effect - that's what matters. (Joking ofc)
     
    salgado18 likes this.
  43. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    When can I get android /IOS pro in the free version? Mobile is the only reason I will be using the unity engine.. all other high-end stuff is going to be developed in unreal ,after 3 months with it, seems like a more stable engine.
    I was a huge Unity fan, this 5 cycle really turned me off..

    I would rather pay 5% of profits for a full working engine,and much more robust editor/ systems, lightmapping thats quick and easy.

    I don't want to pay $100 for a material editor(shaderforge) I just don't have the time to learn Shader code.

    Which Unreal includes, this whole 5 cycle has done one thing succsefully, forced me to explore other game engines, I can no longer be locked into unity... it also gives me a very valuable perspective regarding this conversation on the new pricing.

    I find it ridiculous !!
    Dark themes, Splash screens...oh my!

    P
     
    Adam-Sowinski and Rod-Galvao like this.
  44. Barkers-Crest

    Barkers-Crest

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Posts:
    159
    @aliceingameland Now that I've had a few days to sleep on this, here is my basic feedback.

    Purchase History
    Unity 3: 1 Pro License (Standalone only)
    Unity 4: 1 Pro Upgrade and 1 additional Pro License. (Standalone only)
    Unity 5: Console Only - Did not upgrade Pro from 4.
    Asset Store: Too many to count.

    Future Purchase History

    If conditions stay the same as presented.
    Begrudgingly stay on free version and live with splash if game revenue < 100,000.
    Roll my own matchmaking and avoid Unity Multiplayer Services.

    If splash screen is removed from 1 year subscription to Plus
    Gladly upgrade 2 licenses to Plus.
    Strongly consider Multiplayer services if stability is improved and is a reasonable cost (still to hard to project what it would cost).

    Conclusion

    So for me and my situation it really is so simple, if 1 year subscription to Plus removes splash, that means 2 Plus subscriptions. Otherwise we stay with free.

    The gap ($$$) between Free and Pro is just way too much to justify the differences in feature set. Plus gives us nothing compared to Free to justify spending anything.

    I hope this information helps the conversation. Feel free to reach out if you would like more feedback or context.
     
  45. _LoneWolf_

    _LoneWolf_

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2015
    Posts:
    2
    If I understood correctly, after 2 years of continuous subscription user is entitled to keep version available at that time regardless if he is plus or pro subscriber?

    As everybody already said, "plus" with splash screen/mandatory stats reporting make no sense for paying customer. I could suggest that you drop the "plus" ("minus" :) ) name from this tier, rename it to "Indie" to clearly communicate for who is it for, and drop the mandatory splash screen/statistics reporting. The only difference between "Indie" and "Pro" should be 100.000$ cap and additional value/online service tiers.

    For the "dark skin" nonsense I could only tell you a story about my first contact with Unreal, some (long) time ago. The experience, after initially installing the product, went something like this when I wanted to launch it. First thing that started up was (absolute nonsense) launcher app from where I could launch Unreal editor app (what was my intention in the first place after all). OK, that pissed me off a little and editor finally launched. First thing I could notice were huge screen space wasting icons and later events didn't even get them a chance to be evaluated if they are there for a reason (do they have an actual purpose to waste screen space at that time or not). Second thing, my laptop fans went into overdrive screaming they will eat my battery in no time if I unplug AC and that that thing that I started is simply wasting every bit of available resources for no reason. On a machine that ran Unity editor perfectly fine. Later I did find some posts about capping editor FPS rate and that Unreal was aware of this for some time (and obviously didn't care), but that initial contact and my fans screaming "garbage" were enough to say "you had your chance" and erase it for good. Not even giving it a chance to see the quality of final product (well, at that point, I already knew that Unity was good enough for me already so why even bother). Unreal was scratched from my list, well it was, until now when Unity MIGHT throw itself in the same garbage bin as Unreal and allow them to be evaluated once more.

    My point with this? Don't treat your free users as idiots who would be nudged to subscribe with that kind of dirty tricks. It is absolute nonsense to deny them something as trivial as dark skin and paint WTF?!? letters on top of their heads. Maybe you would want to offer them some sense and quality to encourage them to learn Unity, upgrade to "Indie" tier, be some more successful and finish on the "Pro" tier in the end or even straight away.

    Be the best tool for game development with quality and sense and listen to your users.
     
  46. chingwa

    chingwa

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Posts:
    3,789
    I think they like their "P"-names... Personal...Plus... Pro... Enterprise breaks the pattern unfortunately. It should have been named "Penultimate" :).
     
    Ryiah and Teila like this.
  47. bocs

    bocs

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Posts:
    412
    Guess I'll put my 2¢ in

    History:
    Unity 2 - Pro + iOS Pro - $3000
    Unity 3 - Upgrade - $1500
    Unity 4 - Upgrade - $1500
    Unity 5 - Personal
    Asset Store - ?? Thousands

    Stange fact - I never made a dime with Unity or published anything, it was just an hobby on the side.
    *This year I did start to put some stuff on the Asset Store

    Unity Plus could bring me back as a "paying" customer IF the custom splash screen is an option (NOT just customise)

    Unity has never done pricing right in my mind, even now you have to pay for desktop even if your mobile only.
    Now you have to pay for moblie if your doing desktop only...

    As for people saying "I'm switching to Unreal"...Why can't you just use both?
    I don't hammer a nail with a screw driver, I use a hammer which is the best TOOL for the job.
    Each engine has it's Pros and Cons, use the one that is right for the project.
    Added bonus, knowing both engines improves your marketability if your looking for a job.
     
  48. Adam-Sowinski

    Adam-Sowinski

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Posts:
    129
    I agree, an engine should be chosen based on the project. Every engine is good and bad at something. Depending on the project is better or worse fit.

    http://cryenginesecrets.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/which-game-engine-is-best.html

    This article is few years old but still valid.
     
    zenGarden likes this.
  49. AcidArrow

    AcidArrow

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Posts:
    11,631
    Not enough time generally (at least to be able to go as in-depth in their systems as I'd need to for real development).

    Also, money.
     
  50. orb

    orb

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Posts:
    3,037
    The thing I see more technical people being most baffled at is the cache server situation. Why does it take an extra licence and tool to be allowed a speedy way of switching between different platforms in a project? Why isn't it at least built into the editor itself? What's happening to this under the new price plans?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.