Search Unity

  1. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Why doesnt UT purchase licenses for user-made tools?

Discussion in 'Assets and Asset Store' started by janpec, Oct 21, 2011.

  1. janpec

    janpec

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Posts:
    3,520
    I am wondering does anyone have input why doesnt UT purchase licenses for tools (plugins) that are created by users? There are some briliant tools out there that can match basically features of any other engine (like Road tool or volumetric cloud tool and plenty others). Why doesnt UT just pay those users some fair ammount of money and include this features in either Pro or Free versions?
     
  2. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,601
    because that would be useless?

    Unity does not add engine features on the .NET layer. thats only the scripting. engine features are done in C/C++ a whole layer below that :)

    the only exception to this would be native code plugins especially on mobile.
     
  3. janpec

    janpec

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Posts:
    3,520
    Oh yes you are right about that. But would it still be that unproffessional to include this tools as add-ons or plugins that ship with engine files?
     
  4. spinaljack

    spinaljack

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Posts:
    990
    Well the really good developers get hired by Unity so you can expect some integrated versions of certain plugins in new versions of unity.
     
  5. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,601
    Unprofessional is a matter of definition.
    It would not be desireable cause outside windows and osx the performance difference grows from small on next gen mobiles to massive on older ones and consoles.
    on consoles the paralelization lack actually suffers enough to not make it an option at all anymore when they are heavier or would need to be SPE parallelized on PS3 for example cause scripts just can't do that. And consoles are the market where unity makes the money with the licenses beside desktop source licenses, not free or pro


    As for being hired: only if they want to. Not all are interested to relocate to scandinavia with its cold, long and dark winters or the european union sinky ship at all ;)
    Some do not even have the option to do so cause they couldn't work there
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2011
  6. janpec

    janpec

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Posts:
    3,520
    When you say Scandinavia you mean Denmark right? Becouse Norway or Sweden are far from being on any ship that is sailing in the wrong dirrection:D
    Ok i see the point, optimisation for all platforms could be difficult. Ah thats real problem of Unity, if you want to keep engine on IOS and PC you have to make compromises which often suffers for PC users.
     
  7. Chickenlord

    Chickenlord

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Posts:
    381
    Another point probably is, that Unity would get less money for each license.
     
  8. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,601
    If they buy the technology they don't have to pay royalities. Its not like the 3rd party can just go out and say 'i want that and that amount on each license or you don't get it' cause UT otherwise can just offer it inbuilt and said person gets exactly nil in the future ;)

    So I doubt that this is a reasoning behind it.
     
  9. Chickenlord

    Chickenlord

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Posts:
    381
    True if Unity wouldn't get 30% for each package sold on the asset store. I'm fairly sure they make a good amount of money with the stuff which would be worth integrating. So why include it for free, if you can leave it to the user if he needs and maybe make some additional money.
     
  10. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,601
    Yeah but those things that they could integrate ie native code stuff is not sold on it at all or only partially so no lose. Be it Amplify, uWebKit or Prime31 plugins.

    The things on the asset store are with rare exceptions all pure managed code and that just drops out for 'buy to integrate' unless its an editor focused feature as the editor is managed only anyway
     
  11. janpec

    janpec

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Posts:
    3,520
    Yeh but that is looking it from short term. From long term what you are doing with this is beating competition with other engines, including more features in engine for free cost, this leads to more features in engine for someone who is just jumping into new engine.
    This one of the main points why i was asking that. There are some tools that users made that are already in some other engines, and to some users it might play huge role to what engine they would choose (lets say that this user cant afford to pay even 100 dollars) and you get all this features in some other engines for free. Thats the whole point, its beating the competition with including some technology in engine that others already or do not have.
     
  12. drewradley

    drewradley

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    3,063
    Seems to me buying up user made addons is a lose-lose-lose situation. The creators get screwed out of a steady income for the more successful ones. Unity loses their percentage of asset store sales of them. And the end users get screwed when Unity raises their price to cover the extra expense of the addons that not everyone may want.
     
  13. andorov

    andorov

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Posts:
    1,061
    I remember reading something about the Terrain tool being done entirely in C#. Also, there is quite a few non-runtime 3rd-party addons like the shader editors.