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

What do you think about the last Jim Sterling video?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by JohnSmith1915, Jul 24, 2017.

  1. JohnSmith1915

    JohnSmith1915

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Posts:
    143
  2. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,084
    I think it's time to stop giving Jim Sterling an audience. As I mentioned in the thread about Asset Flipping irt this very video:

    [Unity] had a minor problem [with its image], mostly because of the splash screen popping up on some real beginner games. Jim definitely amplified the hell out of it, just as he did the asset flipping """crisis"""
     
  3. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    I don't know, I don't feel inclined to spend X amount of time watching it.

    Since you made the thread, perhaps you could give a synopsis?
     
    angrypenguin likes this.
  4. GarBenjamin

    GarBenjamin

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Posts:
    7,441
    I think it has some entertainment value at least showing some clips of games. Production values seem good overall for YT. Overall tone seems unoriginal (moaning & groaning as usual). Content focus is something that has been discussed a fair amount by many people here and basically resulted in the same conclusions about which games were branded Unity and which were not.

    It's not Unity's fault or anyone elses. It is the developers dream to strike it rich combined with a free market. I'm thinking if he focused on mobile he may well have a heart attack so probably is good he sticks to Steam.
     
  5. JohnSmith1915

    JohnSmith1915

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Posts:
    143
    Well, is a old topic, in resume he talk about that many bad games are made with Unity and this show a bad image of the engine.
     
  6. Socrates

    Socrates

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Posts:
    787
    My short version of the video: Jim Sterling talks about how Unity has an image problem because their splash screen is associated with so many terrible games. There are also the things like multiple flips of UnitZ. Developers making high quality games in Unity rarely have the splash screen, so the people buying games do not know these are great games. Jim Sterling cited Hearthstone as one example; a game that is extremely popular and which most people have no idea it was made in Unity. Jim Sterling also talked about how the Unity CEO admitted there is an image problem, but does not have an answer.

    In my opinion, Unity does have an image problem, and for exactly the reasons that Jim Sterling cited. I know there are some great games made in Unity. I own some great games in Unity. Yet I cannot think of one game that I would cite as being both famous and well known as being part of Unity. "7 Days to Die" comes closest, and if you're not a regular forum reader, I doubt you'd know it's Unity.

    This topic is also one of those "religious wars" that come up. People argue today about using Unity vs other engines the same way I remember people arguing about games coded in a flavor of C vs. a flavor of Java, claiming that you cannot possibly code a good game in one vs. the other.

    I'll also point out that Jim Sterling is not the only one talking about the Unity image problem or the garbage games produced with Unity; he's just a popular figurehead to use because he likes to be over the top.
     
  7. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    Thanks.

    I'm inclined to agree with him to an extent. This isn't to say that gamers who go "Made in Unity? Pass." are anything but silly, but - it is in Unity's best interests that there be no consumer stigma against their engine (which may, at some level, impact sales of Unity-made games), which means that if they can (cost vs. benefit) they should strive to cultivate a perception of quality.
     
    Socrates and zyzyx like this.
  8. RichardKain

    RichardKain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Posts:
    1,261
    There are some decent points made in the episode. Sadly, Unity's policies regarding the presentation of their logo in the "personal" version of their engine has had some unforeseen consequences. I say "unforeseen," because I imagine they wouldn't have put those policies in place if they had properly anticipated the current situation.

    At the end of the day, there is no one "fix" for what he's describing. The slightly negative reputation that Unity has accrued on Steam and Steam Early Access is a consequence of the freedom and accessibility that an engine like Unity provides to its users. The boom in small to mid-scale indie development is partially thanks to Unity's free "personal" edition, and the Asset Store's accessible tools and inexpensive graphical assets. There are a lot of decent projects that couldn't exist without the infrastructure that Unity has put into place.

    But at the same time, that infrastructure now allows for numerous opportunists to abuse both Unity and Steam for short-term commercial gain. And no one can really deny that we're seeing that exact scenario playing out. We don't like it, but there's no real way to stop it without tearing down a system that is both useful and beneficial.

    As far as Unity's reputation is concerned, the best way of addressing that problem is a step that Unity is not likely to take. The best way to improve Unity's reputation is not to try to stamp out low-quality games, but to associate their brand with high-quality games. However, most high-quality games that adopt Unity's Pro licensing are not likely to want to advertise the middleware their using. And one of the advantages of paying for that Pro licensing is getting to NOT display the Unity logo. Reversing that policy in the licensing would upset people who are actively paying Unity money.

    So yeah, it's a bit of a mess, with no "good" fix without making some pretty sweeping changes.
     
    Socrates and theANMATOR2b like this.
  9. Dreamback

    Dreamback

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2016
    Posts:
    220
    OCASM likes this.
  10. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    what is with that logo paywall thing anyway??
    its actually really backwards as hell

    shouldnt they force it on Quality titles, and not force it on Cheap titles??
    a business or any entity doesnt want to be associated with Hitler, but EVERYONE wants to be associated with... uhmm.. i dunno lets say Elon Musk .. "OH!! I KNEW ELON MUSK IN HIGH SCHOOL!!!! I SEENS HIM!! I DID I DID!!!"

    hmm what if i make a splash screen that plays after the made in unity splash screen that says
    "PSYCH!! just kidding!! this is actually made in unreal engine guys!"
     
    pithakoteTata likes this.
  11. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    There's a real problem with Unity forcing people to pay money to remove Unity branding. This is an ass backward approach to generating revenue.

    Maybe you like Sterling or maybe you hate him, but he's absolutely right on this subject. Unity has been monetizing at the cost of it's reputation for years and years.

    If UT cared, they'd address the issue. They haven't addressed it: so they don't care.

    They've been making money hand over fist, and nobody wants to rock that boat.

    Personally, I used to get mad, now I don't care. Regardless, it's really a bizarre way to monetize the engine.
     
    JamesArndt likes this.
  12. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,965
    Once upon a time forced splash screens and watermarks were more common.

    I wonder how much of it is genuinely because people want to remove the logo and not because they've hit the $100,000.
     
  13. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    Given the amount of outcry on the subject of splash screens over the years, I think quite a lot of people are far more concerned with the splash...and the fancy dark skin.
     
  14. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,965
    I legitimately can't remember the last time we discussed the dark skin in a way that wasn't completely joking. We may have had a large amount of it in the past but we've had almost none for a good while now.
     
  15. Dreamback

    Dreamback

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2016
    Posts:
    220
    Back when Unity was primarily for indie developers, having the logo come up in every game except ones who paid extra was good advertising - if another indie developer saw a lot of games start with the Unity logo, they might look up what this "Unity" thing is. Back then, the difference between paid copies and free copies wasn't really about big AAA companies vs. indies, but just indies without much money and indies with lots of money :) Maybe Unity doesn't need that free advertising anymore, now that they are a major player in the game engine business.

    Having said that, these days the Unity Logo doesn't matter. When a game like Bomberman R for Switch is released with bad performance, real gaming enthusiasts find out it's a Unity game and blame Unity anyways, though the game doesn't have the Unity logo. Unity already has that reputation, though Unity 5 fixed quite a lot of the problems the enthusiasts complain about. It's too late to fix it by removing the need for the logo.
     
    frosted likes this.
  16. RichardKain

    RichardKain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Posts:
    1,261
    Well, this is most likely a product of the altered perception regarding the personal edition. The negative reputation it's managed to accrue is part of the reason why developers would want to remove the logo. Many of them feel that taking the default Unity splash screen down gives them a level of credibility that they would lack otherwise. In a way, they've incentivized removing their own branding, in favor of pushing their involvement in bigger, more well-funded projects into the shadows.

    Whether or not this is the proper approach is up for debate. It is somewhat damaging to smaller developers who can't afford a pro license. But then, the fact that they aren't paying for a pro license also has value.
     
  17. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,084
    The last time I remember it being treated as anything other than a joke was back in the 4.x days and prior when Unity still had the Actual Feature Disparity thing going on.
     
  18. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044

    The thing is - first impressions count - and starting out a game with the Unity logo is starting with a strike against you. Unless the game is exceptionally well polished it can be a real problem.

    99 out of 100 users might not care, but those enthusiasts are the most likely to post reviews and every bad review counts.
     
  19. RichardKain

    RichardKain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Posts:
    1,261
    Well, the really frustrating thing for Unity developers is that most of these assumptions are simply unfair. A lot of the comments on the Jimquisition video reflect this. Unity is a tool. All game engines are tools. And generally speaking, blaming a tool is the wrong approach. Most of the bugs and errors that users complain about aren't due to the engine, but how it is being used. And this is true for all developers, both large and small.

    Any engine can be used improperly, and frequently are. Unity is hardly the only middleware solution to eventually result in buggy games. Much of its notoriety in recent years is simply a result of its prevalence in low-quality Steam titles. But low-quality, buggy games are constantly being developed in Unreal Engine, Cry-Engine, and pretty much every engine under the sun. And the vast majority of the time, the blame shouldn't be placed on the engine.

    Game engine middleware is a fairly competitive scene at this point. And the companies in question don't stay in this particular competition by sitting on their thumbs. All of them must constantly innovate, polish, and improve their offerings in order to continue appealing to prospective developers. By now, all of their core technology is reasonably sound. Attempting to lay blame at their doorstep is kind of pointless. They have people CONSTANTLY evaluating, criticizing, and nit-picking their engines. Those people are called their end-users. The developers who actually use Unity are constantly pushing for improvements and bug-fixes, and always will be. And they actually know enough about the engine to make reasonable, technical criticisms.

    No one really needs to hear game players whining about the quality of a game engine. Most of them are going to be woefully uninformed. The frustration with this mis-directed blame is understandable.
     
    Socrates and theANMATOR2b like this.
  20. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    3,015
    I honestly really enjoy watching Jim Sterling's videos. He is consistently laugh out loud funny, intelligent, and well informed on game industry topics. I am a huge Jim Sterling fan, and I have tremendous respect for him.

    Having said that, I don't feel like the topic of "Asset Flipping" is meaningful for most gamers anymore. There was a time a few years ago when it was relevant and important. I am talking about the dark days before Steam added refunds and before Steam required game developers to include actual videos and screenshots of the game. Prior to those two changes on Steam, "Asset Flipping" was a threat to gamers, because it was a way to steal money from unsuspecting gamers.

    Now days, "Asset Flipping" simply is no longer a threat to gamers. If somebody does flip an asset to make a quick buck, gamers can quickly use the Steam refund system to immediately take that buck back. And developers cannot intentionally mislead in their game's store page on Steam anymore. I remember the outrage about the game "Air Control", and the world benefited from YouTubers like Jim Sterling standing up for consumers in cases like that. If "Air Control" was released today, Steam's refund system and Steam's store page policies would mitigate that without the mass outage.

    As for an image problem for Unity, I know that some users are trying to avoid playing games made with Unity. But a lot of those same users are already enjoying Unity games and don't even realize it.
     
    pcg, lemonrays and frosted like this.
  21. LMan

    LMan

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2013
    Posts:
    493
    I feel like Jim is one of those journalists who made a TON of content off of finding bad games to talk about- which happened to be made in Unity, since it is available for free.

    Now, having helped start this "image problem" fire, he proceeds to tell everybody "Geez, you guys have a huge PR fire that needs dealing with over there."
     
  22. FrankenCreations

    FrankenCreations

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2017
    Posts:
    326
    I think unity could spend some advertising money. They could give out free subscriptions or even pay money to some of the high end games that use unity to include the splash. It would of course have to be on a case by case basis and someone would need to decide which games were good enough. To me it seems like a fair use of advertising budget.
     
  23. LaneFox

    LaneFox

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Posts:
    7,462
    He had a funny streak making fun of crappy games, I laughed. Seems like he's more toxic now that instead of simply being funny hes trying to make 'funny serious' stuff or suggest that his topics now have genuine value beyond humor.

    Now his topic has shifted to something like "developers don't like me because I made a significant contribution to publicly smear Unity" which is really just a drama splinter off his original theme that has no value. I feel like it's turned sour and into some little pedantic meta.

    Whats next? "Look fans, now Unity developers are talking about me talking about developers talking about my topics!"? Yeck, please, be funny - or be serious - but always try to avoid contributing to the toxicity of the community. I don't particularly care if Unity has a bad image or not, but I don't have any interest in rants between a couple of internet drama queens and it seems like he's shifting his brand into that category, despite some attempts to validate himself and his points.
     
    Aiursrage2k and theANMATOR2b like this.
  24. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    The guys an jerk who makes money off of invented problems and manufactured outrage. That said, he seems to be making decent money, so who can blame him? Jim Sterling is as much a product of the media system as UnitZ is of the asset store system.

    Now onto the splash screen, I still think it's a really good marketing system as currently used by Unity. Unity is not selling directly to the established large game developer. Large studios are perfectly capable of evaluating tech as choosing the best engine without any advertising. Anyone in the industry already knows about the big games Unity has made.

    Unity is selling to the little guys. The student who wants to make games when he grows up. The engineer bored with his day job. The teenager who wants a laugh with his mates.

    This group of people look at a game made with Unreal and go 'that's out of my league'. They see something super pretty in cry engine and think 'I don't have the time for that'. Then they see something crappy with the Unity splash screen and think 'I can do better then that'.

    Thus Unity markets firmly to the bottom end of developers, in a way that none of their competitors even comes close to. It turns out bottom end developers don't stay bottom end. Many go on to be high end developers, and they take the engine they know with them.

    Unity might have a minor reputation problem with players as a result. But the competitors have a reputation problem with developers. Which in some ways is worse.
     
  25. LaneFox

    LaneFox

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Posts:
    7,462
    Pretty much on point, he doesn't really have any reason to stop doing what he's doing or modify his patterns if he's still making it rain. In that case, there's not much point in trying to reform the situation.
     
  26. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    3,015
    This is exactly why Unity has won the market of developers. I even suspect that a lot of new developers were downloading Unity today after they watched Jim's latest video.
     
    Kiwasi likes this.
  27. GCatz

    GCatz

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Posts:
    282
    one could argue YouTube has an image problem. .

    it lets anybody post S*** videos.. even ones with fascistic theme playing the ugliest games around to bitch about,
    reaping that sweet patreon money while virtue signaling the hate for Unity games
     
    theANMATOR2b and LaneFox like this.
  28. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    It seems to work though :D... I wonder if Jim is actually helping Unity get subs??
     
    frosted likes this.
  29. neginfinity

    neginfinity

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Posts:
    13,554
    Well, he directly profits from blowing "bad unity image" and "asset flipping problem" out of proportion. Not sure if that brings in more subs, though.
     
  30. Mauri

    Mauri

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Posts:
    2,663
    Pretty sure it will... sadly.
     
  31. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,084
    Doom and gloom reporting always brings in the numbers, unfortunately.
     
  32. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    Its possible. By inflating the 'bad reputation' of the engine and the splash screen, it prompts more people to upgrade to plus to remove the splash screen.

    It could go either way with the total number of users of the engine. On the one hand saying 'its a terrible engine' discourages new users from picking it up. On the other hand 'its an easy engine for everyone to make games in' encourages new users.

    Even saying 'terrible developers are trying to make a quick buck off asset flips' prompts others to wonder 'can I make a quick buck doing the same thing?'.
     
    hippocoder and frosted like this.
  33. Aiursrage2k

    Aiursrage2k

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Posts:
    4,835
    I think it’s bullshit. If your game is good are people going to say oh it was made in unity won’t buy it.
     
    theANMATOR2b likes this.
  34. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Edit: changed what I said (sorry) -

    Yes it is and it includes dark skin. But I think it works. But I don't think it's possible for me to put the logo on my game in a prideful place considering the company it keeps with some games. It's a shame, because I really did want to, but now it is just too risky.

    So I'm pretty clear I won't be showing the Unity logo in light of what is going on. Anyone can investigate deeply if they like but I don't think I'm willing to risk a cent.

    Unity and it's developers are now locked into logo-dysphoria...
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2017
    chingwa, Socrates, OCASM and 2 others like this.
  35. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    3,015
    Also, remember that Jim actually loves some games that were made with Unity. For example, he recently showered "The Sexy Brutale" with heaps of praise.
     
  36. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,084
    And?

    No, seriously, and?

    The guy has entire video series where he complains about bad games that were made in Unity. And that's another thing about Jim that I've noticed, because up until this S*** got too much to bear I used to be a fan of his. Jim tends to only "praise" (and I use this term extremely lightly) Unity when there's a load of pushback against his typical Unity bashing shenanigans. This cycle is why he made his "Unity is a Good Engine" video a while ago, because people were coming at him for having no idea about how engines work or why so many "bad" (see: beginner) games are made in Unity.

    This happens in cycles, even, though usually it manifested in off-hand remarks in his Best of Steam Greenlight series or Itch.io Tasty videos. The rest of the time it's him whining about Unity while having no clue what he's talking about because he's a journalist/"consumer advocate" and not anyone who has any actual experience with game engines. I put "consumer advocate" in scare quotes because he long abandoned that post for the far more "entertaining" venue of Generic Games Bashing Man.
     
  37. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Well, everyone is voting for opinion these days. Facts are laughably unimportant in 2017.
     
  38. Not_Sure

    Not_Sure

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Posts:
    3,546
    I've been watching Jim Sterling since his escapist days, and he's been spot on, but lately he's trying to be an anticelebrity, even mentioning it now in his new intro song, and I'm getting tired of the same rederic again and again.

    Namely Unity, asset flipping, Konami, and Steam.

    I mean the man is making a living, and I get that, but I don't care to keep watching if he just plans on being the Donald/Kardashian of the game world.

    And I'm positive he's looking at this thread, so Jim feel free to let that sink in.

    It's @JohnSmith1915 , isn't it?

    @JohnSmith1915 is Jim Sterling. :D
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2017
    JohnSmith1915 likes this.
  39. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,617
    I think this really strongly depends on your audience, right?

    If your audience has a significant overlap with the viewership of that YouTube channel then it might be significant for you. Am I misunderstanding something, or is that about the extent of it?

    Unity is really strong on mobile, and I'm having trouble imagining most mobile gamers knowing about this stuff, let alone caring to the point where it'd effect their behaviour. On Steam things might be a bit different, but by the time they can see that a game is made in Unity then hasn't the developer already had multiple opportunities to show their stuff and hopefully put on a good enough show to allay that fear?

    I know they're a highly vocal minority, and I could be wrong, but I think that this "reputation problem" is mostly constrained to a subset of the audience on one particular market channel. In all honesty, if it hurts us then it also hurts Unity, so if it were a genuine and significant problem I'm pretty sure they'd take steps to address it.

    On the splash screen itself, I'm of two minds. On one hand, if they're giving us something for free then I'm totally 100% down with them wanting us to display their logo. If we don't like it, well, nobody's forcing us to use their free tools. On the other hand, I can't help but think that it's marketing to the wrong people (gamers generally don't care about what tools are made to make the stuff they like) and with a potentially unintended message (the whole negative associations thing where only low-budget stuff shows it).

    On the other hand, personally, being able to explain that I'm a professional programmer with loads of experience in Unity has worked out pretty well for me so far. Certainly this problem hasn't bled over there.
     
    Socrates and Kiwasi like this.
  40. Peter77

    Peter77

    QA Jesus

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Posts:
    6,590
    I had this idea in my head for a while and finally found the trigger to write it down :)

    It seems Unity already has a program to show games, which they believe, are worth being connected to Unity. It's the Made with Unity program.

    The Unity logo could become a seal indicating "Unity believes this is a quality product". In order to get permission to show the Unity logo (seal) in a game, the game must be approved by Unity. Which could be part of the "Made with Unity" evaluation or perhaps an entire new service Unity is going to offer.

    The developer benefits from showing the Unity logo by either getting an one-time payment from Unity or by having to pay less % from the games' sales.

    Unity benefits from this, because only games that are in Unity's eyes worth showing they're "Made with Unity" have that logo now. Unity wants top-notch games to show the logo, because it's good PR for them and thus also worth paying for it.

    They could even provide a new service to work towards that goal: The "Unity quality for games" program. I imagine it as an external QA that flags technical issues and lack of polish, kind of TRC/TCR/Lot Check, but way more picky. The first submission could be free, but if it fails, re-submissions cost money (just like TCR).

    At some point the Unity logo could be an indicator for high-quality polish, publishers could getting interested in having that seal of quality, thus might be willing to pay developers extra money for reaching that goal.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2017
    Murgilod likes this.
  41. ArachnidAnimal

    ArachnidAnimal

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Posts:
    1,766
    What I dislike about this guy is that he criticizes a $1.50 game as if it is being passed off as a $60 AAA game.

    The game is $1.50. Is it really that shocking that the game is not AAA quality?
    The "bad" games he's showing are not as bad as he tries to make them out to be.

    Also, he can't distinguish between a bug with the Unity engine vs a bug with the actual game.
     
  42. FMark92

    FMark92

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Posts:
    1,243
    His complaint about unity logo being associated with "BAD" games is legit, but calling those games bad is a bit of a stretch. If the cost of the game reflects it's quality, I can't really call it bad.
     
  43. neoshaman

    neoshaman

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Posts:
    6,493
    It's like saying youtube as an image problem because terrorist and hater of all sorts use the channel, that's not credi...

    The adpocalypse Happen ...

    OH DANG !

    K I'm going to sleep, good night ...
     
    Kiwasi likes this.
  44. pk_Holzbaum

    pk_Holzbaum

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Posts:
    95
    You forgot one of his biggest nemesis, Nintendo!

    I stopped caring about his opinion after the video where he kept repeating: "I'm not saying you should pirate Nintendo games, but you should totally pirate Nintendo games!".

    Apparently, just not buying their product is not a viable option.
     
  45. andyz

    andyz

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Posts:
    2,251
    If the logo was a seal of quality, people would add it to their games.
    It is not and so the business model is to charge people to remove it!
    Trouble is less people will use Unity if it has a bad rep.

    So... Remove logo - pursuade makers of great games to use it?
     
  46. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,965
    That said I have seen at least one game that advertised it was made with Unity. It's easily past the $100,000 too.

     
    Martin_H, JamesArndt and Farelle like this.
  47. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    It will be a while before it's seen as a positive by all. Here's the problem (and arguably the proof):

    - It's a *lot* easier to make games in Unity than UE4 or Cryengne or any of it's competitors
    - asset store means you don't even need to be good at it either!

    So when you combine those, it's going to be impossible to make the case where "anyone can make a load of rubbish in any engine" - it's not going to happen. Even less so when you consider blueprint only benefits people who can make their own assets.

    For the kids and people wanting to troll or make a quick buck, Unity is the only choice, and of course that's with the logo. It's logo is not known by millions of gamers, in fact I would guess most people don't realise it's an engine logo at all. But it is a logo that seems to show whenever a sub par experience is due.

    So that isn't hurting Unity or anyone on any form of paid plan. If you don't like the logo, you can remove it. If people are stupid enough to want to criticise a game for the engine it's made in, they're welcome to peep into the source folders. That would require stupid people though.

    In any case if publishing on steam I don't recommend anyone shows the logo. It's not worth the thumbs down from sterling's audience and idiot fanboys (and they are legion on that platform).

    Luckily I and many others lobbied for a low entry sub for Unity. I lobbied even though I don't need it. I did see this coming though. It's called Unity plus. Originally, it did not have the logo removed. We had to make a pretty big noise for Unity to listen, and some convincing arguments. I think now Unity is happy it did get convinced. Because that's basically affordable, and if not, it will be after the first run of sales.

    I don't care a damn about filling Unity's pockets really - but I do care about the community and if you're selling a game on steam, you need that logo gone and you need a professional product, so get plus and use it - you can do this closer to launch date, then have a years worth to cover updates.

    In before some twit starts screeching "we need logo gone or it's not democracy" just no. Don't use this issue for grabbing even more freebies. The answer is to just weather it then pay up like everyone else.

    If you're poor, and you think the logo is killing your game that bad, take the hit. Likely the initial income will either be so bad it can't even pay for plus or it will easily pay for plus. In any case that meant your game deserved the logo, or it deserved to have it removed. Thanks Darwin!

    In any case part of the problem is steam and youtube. I'd love it if there wasn't this prevalent logo-dysphoria going on (it doesn't affect me) but I can see it's a source of anxiety for many people thanks to youtube or whatever.

    We're going to see some changes in the long term though. Give it 10 years and the logo won't matter. Unity will be doing films. Other engines will be doing the same and so on. It won't just be about games.

    Until then we'll have to accept Unity's business model - I don't see how it can remove the logo until services become the most important aspect of using Unity - and I hope they don't become the most important aspect.
     
  48. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    I love it. Bad games deserve the logo.
     
    elmar1028 and hippocoder like this.
  49. Teila

    Teila

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Posts:
    6,932
    Isn't this the second post on this subject in a few days? Isn't one enough? I am beginning to think Jim is paying folks to give him some attention. lol
     
    TeagansDad, Kiwasi and Aiursrage2k like this.
  50. Reanimate_L

    Reanimate_L

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Posts:
    2,788
    This part is make sense. In fact, seems an interesting idea.

    This part, kinda bothers me. Unity are game engine. Making Film or animated demo could make unity ended up in the same cycle. Why they never thinking to create a game??!! a really actuall game just like how other engine used it to brand their engine? and it can improve unity on every "game" side features. Finding the weakness and fixing it while develop the game just how epic did.