Background: I'm in beginner stages of learning full solo game development. That's all aspects: game programming, networking, design, modeling, rigging, 2D/3D, audio. My focus aside from this, and always ongoing, is web and system development using Go. Prior to this, it's been a mix of some C#/.NET, C++, and PHP unfortunately. I don't have much money. This means persisting as a struggling game maker till success or failure ensues. Choosing a heavyweight engine will be my priority soon. I've been biding time ever since Unreal decided to 'get real.' I'm waiting till after Unity's 2014 conference in late August. Countless game developers are facing this choice, surely. Honest sentiments from potential customers are the only way to improve, right? Unity Tech. seems willing to adapt to grow. Unity: Unity is good. Lots of things to appreciate relatively. Easy to see how it's been so successful. Unity supports Linux, despite the lack of a client. That originally made me consider choosing it, while previously not giving Unreal a second thought. Unity suffers from that Mono IDE with sometimes frustrating autocomplete/intellisense. Still tolerable. A capable free version is/was brilliant strategy. It paved the path for Unity. However, increasingly, the prospect of using a stripped down version -- free or not -- is hard to justify. It significantly impacts my learning and doesn't necessarily compel the upgrade. Instead it gives me doubt to the whole prospect/tactic. Unity is not open source. There's a basic ethos to me. This includes (when I can help it) not blindly trusting yet more closed/secretive software to produce native programs, which forces me to hope for the best and feel complacent and negligent in my duty to users. It's the case no matter how noble, mainstream, or friendly a company like Unity is. Closed software is increasingly an inconsiderate approach. It's Microsoft-era mentality. I definitely understand that most people just want to get their games into the most hands. I've got that desire too. Though I will note, Unity is one of the few platforms I've ever actually considered devoting a lot of time to, despite its closed nature. It goes to show Unity has a powerful draw. Still, with the Unreal announcement, it currently sits me right on the edge of not considering it. Supporting basic platforms on Unity Pro: $225/month. Unreal: Unreal didn't/doesn't support Linux. They're working on this and on a native client too. So that gets me interested. Unreal Tournament 2014: Free. It isn't mentioned much in the Unity vs. Unreal threads. This will have a profound impact in how it pulls subscribers into Unreal. The game will pull in millions of users at least by virtue of being a blockbuster and free. There will be countless mods, new games emerging based off UT2014, just as there was with UT '99. Of that base, arguably tens to hundreds of thousands of people considering moding UT (the usual game devs and artists), that will create an instant hook into being familiar with UE and becoming Unreal subscribers in due course. That sort of community suction is not to be underestimated over a couple years. Open source. Negative: no Linux currently. How long? Not sure. Negative: C++ isn't as friendly. Not necessarily negative though, as it's a valuable skill to learn. Supporting basic platforms on Unreal: $19/month. Strategy: Obviously, I can't speak for Unity's strategy and considerations as a company. Revenue keeps employees fed and development emerging, and all. But so does taking a long-term view before tides shift. Some things that I think would make Unity take the world by storm: Fully open source No separation of platforms Breakthrough pricing: If Unity were ~ $5/month, all access, for indies, how many users do you think currently using free would sign up in a heartbeat? It would be a huge number, I have to imagine. Hell, I would've subscribed over year+ ago despite only toying around with Unity. Would my measly $60 in that year have mattered to Unity? Well, making a subscriber out of me could've lead to my being a lifetime subscriber with time further invested, which could open doors in those other revenue streams and assets. At $5/month, how many people would choose Unity over Unreal -- and likely now choose Unity and Unreal (where they might've otherwise only done Unreal)? A lot... Breakthrough strategy: Unity should drop the "3D" branding, which it's starting to do, good... Cross platform GUI and gaming. Evolve Unity into the ultimate cross-platform, multifaceted engine for all types of software, not just games. There's only a trivial focus on non-games in one of your pages. And that's focused on heavy 3D tasks for obvious reasons. Branching out this way means having as much dev & branding focus on becoming an engine for cross-platform GUI desktop software as there is for gaming right now. It's 2014 and there are still no great multi-GUI solutions for linux/mac/win/ios/android/etc. that offer choice of both same-controls or native controls. Qt is a cumbersome. Gtk? ha, no. Xamarin? Costs too much, not open source (only mono is...). Did I mention Unity being fully open source? The dynamics/attitudes of Microsoft vs. Google come to mind as some platforms resist it. Better integration of payment gateways, ad networks, software building blocks/templates (once it's also focused on GUI)... Speed, speed, speed. It's one thing to be unified and another to have the overhead of a 3D engine where it isn't needed for normal apps/software. This process would be seamless with a cult-like devotion to giving us speed and concurrency. ...said with respect. Thanks for listening.