"Unity Technologies weighs its options, including a possible sale of the company"

Maybe not a bad time to sell. Because in my eyes the future is not completely clear.
Nobody knows how the fight vs UE4 is going to turn out, and honestly I assumed UE4 was released that early not to fight Unity, but to be earlier then the next Source engine. If the new Source engine is cheap for indies too, the market gets crowded...

 

Well it did have an impact on CryEngine, so we'll see how things pan out. But you can only take rumours on face value, interesting for a chat and all that but that's about it.

 

That's exactly why MS would buy Unity.

 

If no one cares, than why did Facebook just invest 2 billion on VR?

What you were privileged enough to try on was only a dev kit, so ofcoarse its going to have some issues.

Also, google glass is pretty much the same concept as an android watch on a pair of glasses, its going no where. Augmented Reality is the future and Virtual Reality is paving the way for it.

 

LOL

 

No one knows why UE4 was released when it was, but the fact that it was released before Unity 5 may suggest Epic was trying to beat them to market.

 

They only paid $400 million in cash. The remainder was stock (23.1 million common shares valued at $1.6 billion).

As to potential sales, I wonder what a rollercoaster with a VR headset would be like.

 

I'm sure Amazon's 1 billion purchase of Twitch was not paid in cash either, like most acquisitions are done by evaluations and stock value, etc.

The fact of the matter is the company was valued at 2 billion, not to mention how many industry players (including David Helgason) endorsed Oculus Rift.

 

I can't help but wonder who you are in real life sometimes because I love every post you write. I hope you're a humble millionaire or something.

 

In which way would MS profit from Unity being shot down?

 

Mr. Helgason's response to UE4 in that article was not very encouraging, as Unity Pro is still too expensive upfront for indies. How long does he expect the asset store is going to solve all of Unity's lacking features? Pro is $1500 (not to mention; $5000 for android, ios, web gl, team, etc) but you also have to consider the cost of assets you will need to buy from the store (which are usually a licence per seat also).

Unity is a great engine, but the freemium revenue model does not make the engine as indie accessible as the company makes itself out to be.

 

What exactly is the problem with the freemium revenue? I don't think it's hard to invest 1.5K once you've earned 100K.

 

You're assuming a single developer with a single platform. A large advantage with Unity is mobile development, but you have to own the non-mobile license in order to even get Pro access for mobile.

So you're looking at $3,000 minimum for a single mobile platform. If you want both of the main mobile platforms, it becomes $4,500. Once again though this is for a single developer.

 

@Ricks and @Ryiah, for a one man team the price is pretty reasonable compared to other software design suites; however its not a very friendly model for growing teams. Not to mention Unity has lots of issues with larger teams collaborating on single projects, even when using professional version control software integration.

 

Deja Vu, I can see how this thread is about to get locked when the same stuff is starting over again and again

 

Considering it is a thread started over a rumor article, I think it has done pretty well.

 

Well its kind of hard to talk about anything to do with Unity lately without talking about other SDK's. If Unity would just address this topic already without shrugging off our concerns, then all of us can just get back to work on what ever engine we're using for our project. Mr. Helgason is just kind of ignoring the issue at the moment, so unless there really are some acquisition talks going on behind closed doors now, it seems like its going to be a topic of conversation for a while, even for next generation of developers looking for an SDK.

If they want to continue moderating the Unity vs UE4, CryEngine, etc discussions than why don't they just put a comparison chart on the main website to clarify the topic, and maybe make an official stance on the subject while they are at it.

 

Didn't the Unity devs state some time ago that most of their users are pretty much okay with how licensing is handled at the moment?

 

Don't devolve into a Unity Price bashing argument. That usually ends in a lock. "Stay on Target"
Gigi

 

Wouldn't surprise me. Royalties cost more once you hit a certain point, but whether or not you hit that point is the issue.

 

Exactly. MS would likely be the partner with the most benefit. We'd certianly get .net compliance much faster. And for MS this isn't about killing IOS/Andriod, they couldn't do that by killing Unity. It's about making the world C#.

They are trailing in the moble space, especially when it comes to apps. They aren't going to kill the best product in the market that allows for cross platform development. Especially when that platform use c# as its primary scripting language. Forcing all those devs to non-c# solutions.

Even if they changed nothing and gave away pro for free (don't get excited that's still a pipe dream), it would still be in their best interests to purchase Unity for bucketloads. The platform support that has the most to fear from a MS acquisition would be PS3. But even int that case were I them I would simply make Unity charge for PS3 targets and give Xbox targeting away for free.

 

@Taschenschieber, well clearly there is a segment of the community that is no longer content with the current pricing scheme because now there are more powerful tools which are easier to access for less risk. The other segment of the community is either too deeply invested in a project to migrate, or are over-looking the financial aspect of their project. The later is most likely due to the fact that Unity has mislead them to believe that Unity can provide all the tools necessary to create a AAA game for only $1500 (+$5000).

 

Microsoft would probably benefit Unity the most in terms of performance, however it would most likely hurt it in terms of "democracy" and platform independence. Atleast Amazon or Facebook could provide some benefit without crippling the engine.

Anyway, from it what it seems like, Unity is going to stubbornly keep its existing revenue model, closing its doors to the next generation of developers while stunting its current growth. Unreal Engine will capitalize on this share of the market and once again become the top SDK while Unity becomes smaller and likely more expensive.

If Unity was going to sell, they would have done it when they were on fire and Microsoft/Amazon approached them, now the have entered a sad decline, which is really unfortunate because Unity has the potential to compete with the bigger engines.

 

You're conflating "indie" with "hobbyist". Indie just means you're not a big publisher; it doesn't mean you have no money. Unity Pro is for professionals, i.e., you're making money. If you have no money then you can use Unity, which is 100% free with no publishing restrictions.

WebGL is free.

Based on what? The evidence I have is that they're continuing to grow. This is just another in a long, long line of "Unity has to do what I want or they are doooooomed" complaints that I've seen over the years, exactly none of which actually panned out in the real world. That's not to say they should become complacent, certainly, but just because they don't do what you personally want doesn't mean they are ignoring the user base. It's physically impossible for them to please everybody.

--Eric

 

Unity's CEO already confirmed they have seen no change on their end. I believe him. I think there is room in the market for multiple engine solutions.

I am curious who the buyers might be and how things will turn out for the community. Will it be business as usual? etc...

 

Or those who want modern engine features.

If you're talking about the Venturebeat article, that was only two months after UE4 went live. Too soon to truly know if it will affect them or not. Especially when members of the community have already stated they are waiting for Unity 5 to make their decisions.

We'll see if the situation remains the same a year after Unity 5 is released.

 

Ok, I had a recheck on the license and agree it's weird and kinda restrictive. It doesn't allow to intermix content made in Unity Free with content made in Unity Pro. This effectively prevents sharing assets between team members. It's more of the type where everyone has a specific task to do (Sound, 3D Modelling, 2D Artist, Programming) and all of these assets are copied and integrated into the 1 single Unity Pro Environment. Once they need to actively develop and share assets configured within Unity itself all of them would need Pro licenses.

 

In that case perhaps team size is a better reference; either way UE4 is offering a more affordable solution for studios of any size. As we all know, games do not make money in the development phase which can take anywhere from 6 months to 6 years depending on the size of the project, and teams can grow and shrink along with a project so UE4's pricing model seems much for flexible for development teams of any size with or without publishers.

LOL. The start of a decline doesn't always necessarily show in the numbers right away, however it is still a speculative statement which still seems very likely based on the fact there are many other members of the community saying the same thing.

 

The size of the market is relative, of which Unity will eventually become a niche for certain types of projects and UE4 will dominate.

The fact of the matter is Epic is a multi billion dollar company while Unity is well under a billion, which Mr.Helgason seems to be ignoring.

And surely bigger does not always mean better; as Unity definitely has features that outshine UE4, however in terms of pricing UE4 is just the better deal at the present time. Unity can only compete with its promises at this point, none of which mention some kind of competitive pricing solution.

 

UE4 is now free for education:
http://www.playstationlifestyle.net...s-unreal-engine-4-now-free-teachers-students/

As a current Unity developer I am eagerly awaiting Unity's response to this, which seems like an acquisition is the best solution for them to stay on top of the market.

 

After reading last interview with David I was under the impression that Unity is company that prefers to buy others rather than sell itself to others.
Anyway I hope they said "no". Privately held > Stock exchange listed.

 

Well unfortunately they are no longer that kind of position and it seems if they want to stay competitive they will need to sell, which will only mean more features and less promises.

 

What do you mean? What has changed?

 

Everyone has his price, as they say

 

I have the feeling this has somehow gone offtopic and evolved to a UE4 vs Unity thread. But hey, it's the only thread left that wasn't locked recently

 

I think people overestimate influence of 19$ UE4 on Unity income(key customer for UT are companies like EA). Sure that`s a big deal, but its not like Unity is going broke because of that.

 

@Ricks, Its kind of hard to discuss the possibility of Unity getting acquired without mentioning whats going on in the market, besides as developers we should assessing what tools are available to us anyway and how Unity stacks up, etc. In fact, Unity should be addressing this topic with a comparison chart on their website if they are so confident in their pricing model.

@Ness Unity will likely not go under because of UE4, but they will certainly loose much of the market to Epic if they don't offer some kind of competitive solution. The fact is Unreal Engine is a far more powerful toolset than Unity, without question, so one would expect to pay the premium that comes with it, so therefore Unity should be trying to undercut Epic, not the other way around, basically Unity has lost their competitive advantage.

 

Imo UE4 and Unity are made for two different markets. UE4 AAA, Unity web, mobile, and indie.

 

Funny. Dream on people. 'How to refuse $2-3 billion' (or more. In fact 3. One per co-founder) is the next challenge.

 

Topic is UT weighs it's options including a possible sale of the company, not UE4 blah. I've cleaned up some posts which went way too far off track and into familiar UE4 vs Unity which isn't happening here.

 

should be an easy decision...

remember Nacy Reagan

"Just Say No"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Say_No

and see how easy it is to say no

and if they have any trouble with saying no they can contact me and i'm happy to say no for them.

so remember when google, amazon, microsoft, ect calls just say no...

 

Well if they will be sold to MS, it can be good, considering the fact MS now makes great products for developers.

Maybe they will throw that Mono Develop thing and put VS fully integrated into.
Again, Pro could be significantly cheaper or free at all for Windows, because the main interest for MS is to fill their platform with applications and games as well as growing up the development community.

But it would be funnier if Unity will be bought by Autodesk.

 

looks like they only asked to user that already own a pro licence. but its pretty obvious that so many people wait they change it into one main licence instead of splitting it into different bundle like a dlc for each platform 1500 $ for every platform would be more fair.

 

I'm on the verge of purchasing Unity Pro and this rumor bothers my quite a lot. I have the cash, but I am questioning my commitment to actually complete a game (this is a hobby right now). And then this, which could mean my investment in Unity Pro could be wasted depending on if UT sells out and who buys it and what their intention is. What a mess.

 

If any company is interested in buying Unity then it must be Facebook. Buying the Oculus Rift shows that they are interested in 3D. So now they own the Oculus Rift but they are still dependent on external companies creating engines that work well with the OR.

Also Facebook and Unity have a good working relationship I believe. I'm sure I read that somewhere. And the Oculus Rift used to come with a Unity Pro trial.

In my opinion it would make sense for Facebook to want to buy Unity. Was there an offer? Is Unity considering the offer? Am I making things up as I write this?

It does seem likely though.

 

Sony,microsoft and Facebook may buy Unity.
Let's hope it won't kill Unity.

This also explain why Unity didn't lower the price.
If they did, this would have send the message they are suffering from the competition to the futur buyer... which is probably not something they want

 

The only reason hasn't gone bust (yet) is because of C#. It really is the only ace in the pack.

 

Selling Unity is something that will likely happen regardless of any competition, especially now in its growth phase its just making way to many promises it can't possibly keep within a reasonable time. Look at Unity 5 for example, they have already said most of the new features aren't even coming with the initial release, and if I'm not mistaken this was the case for 4.0 also.

Still, the recent market changes are having an effect, so now its time more than ever for Unity to step up and put its money where its mouth is.

 

I think the main reason is probably that Unity has the largest community.

 

I agree, one price for a complete package would definitely be alot more reasonable than the freemium pricing model they have now.