Using 'Empty' in hierarchy to organize GameObjects, bad practice?

Since I'm unable to directly create a folder in the scene hierarchy, i resorted to creating Empties, renaming, then using them as a method of organizing my GameObjects, i'm wondering if this is bad practice or not?

 

It is the best solution according to Unity Learn's John Lemon's Haunted Jaunt tutorial:

 

I'm sure Unity were suggesting it themselves when I first started a decade ago. I cannot find anything that far back, but one of Unity's own Learn tutorials has a section on using Empty objects to organise the Hierarchy. https://learn.unity.com/tutorial/3d...4897edbc2a001fd5bdd0#5c7f8528edbc2a002053b754

 

It is the best solution as long as you don't care about performance. Last time I checked, Unity transform-functions (moving, resizing, etc) are multi-threaded. They span a thread per root game objects in the hierarchy. If you put every stuff in a single root, then you are basically choking the engine, allowing to do the work on a single thread.
This does not matter in an average super mario-clone or in a flappy bird clone, obviously. It is just something good to know about. If you try to achieve anything performant, move out the neatly organized game objects from the common parent during run-time at least.

 

There are a couple of things you should be aware of, if you start to build deeper hierarchies. Unity blogged about it a while ago:
https://blogs.unity3d.com/2017/06/2...-the-spotlight-team-optimizing-the-hierarchy/

If you want to use game objects as categories with no run-time performance penalty, you could use the [PostProcessScene] attribute to basically remove those categories by moving out all of its children in a build.