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

Why Unity 5.0 is STILL a good deal

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by hippocoder, Mar 20, 2014.

  1. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    The point isn't that 5% is expensive. It's that 5% isn't necessarily cheaper. That's the difference.

    Some people obviously got all upset and confused along the line.
     
  2. Slyder

    Slyder

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Posts:
    270
    Nobody is saying it's "necessarily cheaper"...

    People are saying that a $20 subscription model is less upfront expense (risk) than $1500-$5000 per seat for Unity.

    Also...that 5% royalties are a non-issue for a large majority of people.
     
  3. pkid

    pkid

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Posts:
    201
    I'm not sure I understand what you mean. 5% IS cheaper in my example of 2 people making a mobile game until you hit around $180,000.
     
  4. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    Well it's enough to make a mid tier Indie flinch, then again I can live with the 5% as we all know the biggest killer to any project is staff costs.. Six months development time for your own engine for me would weigh in at $175,000.. Every month we spend fighting and engine and making tool's it's 30K.

    So it depends if said engine has what you need, if it cuts development costs I can live with it.
     
  5. Manny Calavera

    Manny Calavera

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Posts:
    205
    For people who claim they wouldn't mind paying 5% if they made millions, please be mindful of a couple of psychological patterns that might influence this line of thought..
    - Loss Aversion.. Read more here and here.
    - How you think of your future self (whether the same as you or different than you). See research from Kelly McGonigal, author of the “The Willpower Instinct”.

    Google the topics above. There are plenty of research coverage. See how it affects investors, stock traders, business analysts, doctors, etc. And it affects you and me.

    So whether you choose to postpone the cost (royalty) or invest in advance (license) make sure it's a rational decision rather than a mental bias. If you understand then, great, you can go either way.. but if you don't... well, people who don't understand these concepts are the same ones who procrastinate, don't save for retirement, eat whatever is in front of them and say stuff like "I would also help Africa if I had a billion dollars", "when I win the lottery then I will help all my family".

    Ok, that said.. I still think Unity was too expensive. Not because of the business model but because it feels it's not a polished product. Let me explain. I've paid more than 5k for software before. For instance, Autocad. It's a powerful and robust piece of engineering.. Unity seems worth the $4500 well until your circle colliders get stuck in mid air next to a box collider that is not even touching it, or the triggers don't trigger in a timely fashion or dont' trigger at all (see OnTriggerExit2D), or when you submit a bug and the tester agrees with you and later the dev replies 'it's a feature :)', when you read the documentation full its bad patterns, copy/paste errors and bugs (checking if a struct is == null, etc), .. well, then at this point it feels like a beta and that you shouldn't have to pay $4500 for it.

    And, since I'm venting :), what's the logic in cutting effects and profiler from Unity Free AND at the same time forcing a splash screen? Why would you force your splash screen of your brand on a lesser game? If you are going to stamp your name on a game then make sure to help the developer make the best game possible.
     
  6. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    If you earn 180 000$ by your own then by all means you are a successful developer! But that's the problem, buying a bunch of Unity licenses doesn't guarantee you any kind of success, just the right of develop games with. :rolleyes:
     
  7. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    I would re-iterate on my last post. People are really comparing two very different models, Upfront costs vs Royalties share, both are very different (they have their pro and cons). I sarcastically speaking like how people compares those models assuming that you'll earn a lot of money. Well that's not the case for 95% of developers here and for the majority of smaller developers around the world.
    Also, making those ridiculous assumptions about 1million dollar revenues it's... well ridiculous. :rolleyes:
     
  8. orb

    orb

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Posts:
    3,037
    Then there are the staff picks, which make a lot of eyeballs see your game, special categories (see iTunes weekly temporary categories). But apart from that, what HAVE the Romans done for us?

    Choo choo! Crash!
     
  9. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182

    Why I'm sticking with Unity Free. I'll try UE4 too, but later after they have some nice art in the asset store multiplatform publishing.

    What's nice about UE4 is I can start stop the subscription according to if I feel like 'playing' inside as opposed to outside.
     
  10. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    Don't get me started on that: I've suggested a 1/2 dozen times at least these App Markets should create an Indy section were once company earnings surpass $100K they get kicked out of the Indy section. Really, for 30% they can add what amounts to nothing more than a web page on there store front to highlight indy companies' offerings. They must be afraid of loosing revenue for the big businesses. I suppose the problem is verifying company income the flood of phony SEO offerings that would come in.
     
  11. Teo

    Teo

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Posts:
    564
    Totally agree.

    Don't forget the peoples who play in millions+ circle (budget or income), they probable already got a full UE4 license and they don't make any worries about royalties.

    For rest of us, that royalty system is damn good instead paying upfront. In the end, is just 5% more from 30%. You pay nothing in advance.

    You can consider 35% store take, instead 30%.. nothing different, but you get an AAA engine to do stuff with. And this is very tempting for everybody instead paying in advance, for any kind of license.

    But again, if you can make one million and you are to greedy to pay 5% more for the tools what can made it possible... then is more that amusing:)
     
  12. ZJP

    ZJP

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,649
    At last!. The most evident comment written about the 5%.
     
  13. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    3,015
    Well, tomorrow is the one month anniversary of Epic's UE4 announcement, yet there is still no announcement from Unity. There has been plenty of feedback in these forums to let Unity know what everybody wants. I guess at this point, we need to assume Unity is going to ignore the UE4 subscription instead of coming up with a competitive subscription offer of their own.
     
  14. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    Except I think it's 5% of 100% and then 30% of 100% but then that would reduce the tax burden should one need to file for profits.
     
  15. pkid

    pkid

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Posts:
    201
    I think they will have to change their pricing to survive. The problem with not changing their pricing is that it is the people who are paying them the most (the multi license developers) that have the most to gain by leaving Unity for UE4. The free unity users are already paying nothing so they have little incentive to leave Unity. That would leave Unity with all the free users and a lot of the high paying users would leave. I have a hard time believing that they could survive like that.
     
  16. Teo

    Teo

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Posts:
    564
    I think UE4 will ruin some dev company's this year, If they do not find a better offer for their engine. Who do not get UE4 in computation will probable be out of business next year.

    Looking at how fast UE4 forums move, is pretty clear for me whats the trend.
     
  17. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    You forget they make more money from the asset store and we'll leave institutional licenses out of the argument.
     
  18. melkior

    melkior

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2013
    Posts:
    199
    I fully agree, I bought the desktop version without too much pain in part because I make more money on desktop products. I make very little on mobile and paying the same amount for mobile , for multiple platforms is painful enough I have not done it yet. I just use free for mobile right now.

    If said :
    1500 for desktop + web (all desktop platforms win,mac,linux,etc)
    1500 for mobile (all mobile ios, android, windows phone , blackberry etc)

    I would also be willing to do it.
     
  19. pkid

    pkid

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Posts:
    201
    I would be willing to go for that too.
     
  20. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    3,015
    Unfortunately, it won't even leave them all of their Unity Free users. Thousands (possibly hundreds of thousands) of Unity Free users will leave the Unity ecosystem in favor of paying $19/month for UE4. A lot of Unity Free users would like to pay $19/month for Unity Pro, but that option has not been given, so a lot of Unity Free users will switch to UE4.

    Eventually, Unity will have to adjust their subscription prices. I'm worried Unity will wait until it is too late to make a difference, such as after hundreds of thousands of people have switched to UE4 and the UE4 marketplace has been filled with content. I'm betting Unity will wait until well after Unity 5 ships to adjust their subscriptions, and that will be too late.
     
  21. pkid

    pkid

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Posts:
    201
    Where did you get that information? I don't believe for a second they make more taking 30% of asset store sale than they do licensing the engine for $1500-$4500.
     
  22. Teo

    Teo

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Posts:
    564
    I actually think your very wrong.. I am sure asset store is a constant source of income for Unity better that individual licenses sales.
     
  23. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    Unity isn't going to release their income breakdown to us but will UE4 have an asset store - yes. Cry Engine and others - eventually maybe.

    Ask yourself: Apple App Store - good. Now then Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, Blackberry, and ... want to play.

    Think of Asset and App Stores as big business' version of 'microtransactions' game companies are using.

    And my own case: I actually bought and paid for Unity Basic, Unity Basic iOS, Unity Basic Android and a couple of upgrades and I've spent way more in the asset store then that with plans to buy more. If you're not using the asset store a least with regards to assets based on code then you must be wasting a lot more than your time because even at minimum wage pay some of these code based assets are bargains.

    Now art assets is another matter - I often buy it just because I like the looks of it and if I ever use most of it in a game I'll be lucky. That's not to say there are plenty of art assets that are really good deals - they just can't be as good a deal as good reusable code.
     
  24. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    We can make a few guesses based on what know:
    Tarshen shared that he makes 300k a year on the asset store. If that is his cut, UT made around 120k from nGUI last year. It is on the higher side of pricing for stuff in the store, but always the top seller. We don't really know where the other big sellers compare. My guess would be that nGUI is probably a pretty high percentage of asset store revenue. I would guess 20-30%, simply because of the cost and vast user base. Many big companies that use Unity also use nGUi. But if we play it really conservative, let's say nGUI is only 5% of all sales(by revenue). In that case the revenue from the asset store could be as high 2.4million. (roughly). Again, that is just a guess based on the top asset's revenue, and probably pretty high.

    If use that number, it is equal to about 1600 pro licenes in a year. Or a little over 500 pro full packages (ios/android). It is a safe bet that they are selling a lot more than that per year. That doesn't even count source licenses, which are... well... let's just say, a bit more expensive.

    Again, just guesstimates, but if you are really generous with asset store sales, and really conservative with license sales, its pretty clear that most of their money is coming from their core product. Though, certainly the asset store isn't small change.
     
  25. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Heh... it's actually much more devious than microtransactions in games. Typically with game using MTs, they are fremium or F2P. With Apple/MS/Sony/etc... every player in the whole loop pays. With Apple, at the bare minimum, a developer has to pay $99 for a dev account. More than likely they also bought Apple computers and probably at least a couple of iPad/devices to test on. Apple takes a cut of the sales of the game. Since the games only run on iOS, the player also purchased hardware from Apple. Basically no matter what happens, Apple/MS/Sony etc make money from everyone involved. ;) Even if you release a completely free game on the app store, Apple made money from and the player at some point.
     
  26. Hikiko66

    Hikiko66

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    1,304
    If unity relies any more on the asset store for funding than it already is, then you can probably expect to spend a lot more money on assets that would be vital, yet not fully integrated. I don't like that.
     
  27. Antigono

    Antigono

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2013
    Posts:
    63
    and someone once wondered why the new version of unity GUI is not yet available...
     
  28. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    As a beta tester I can assure you it's because its had a lot of development behind it, not for clandestine reasons.
     
  29. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Heh... in my neck of the woods, that would be a freaking bargain. ;) That is a prototype/exploration budget at best. The amount we have invested in internal engines is... well, is enough to make The Princesses™ cry. In hindsight, developing engines for short cycle games on fast moving platforms like the web and devices probably wasn't practical. ;)

    Indeed, but even though Unreal and Cry were closing on 7 figure fees, (IIRC Cry actually crossed that line), I wonder if they will still be able to maintain those numbers or risk cannibalizing their own potential clients with their "new" model. Or if the new model creates much more revenue than the old ever did.

    Obviously everyone here is talking about the UE4 model in relation to Unity, but in reality, it affects a lot of things. Will it affect their own sales, how about Cry? Will Crys offering cut into UE? Will UE make enough from month Obviously only time will tell, but things will change, and it will be interesting to see what happens. One example I know of is I have a two friends who are specialists at core UE engine code. They make a ton of ridiculous money consulting and contracting. Part of the reason the could charge what they do is that because few actually access to the source, their skills were very unique. That'll change quickly.

    What ever plays out, it will be interesting.
     
  30. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    3,015
    A $19/month subscription can generate a lot of money for a company once there are enough people paying for the service. For example, with 438,597 people paying $19/month, a company can collect $100 Million per year. That is without adding in the 5% royalties. That is just the $19/month payments. I've heard Unity has over 2 million Free users. I think Unity could easily convince hundreds of thousands of Unity Free users to upgrade to Pro if the subscription price was $19/month. This is a one hundred million dollar per year opportunity for Unity. Epic obviously sees this as a hundred million dollar per year opportunity.
     
  31. Wild-Factor

    Wild-Factor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Posts:
    607
    You have a typical ratio of 1/100 between free and paid user (in most industry).
    so 2 million -> 20 000 paying ->400 000$ per moths -> 4.8 millions per years.
    And you will loose 99% of your free user (less support, less word to mouth, less clients for asset maker etc...)
    From a community view, Unity is still far more superior than UE4. You can try it whithout using a credit card and even when you are too young to have one.

    Epic don't care about making money right now, they are a challenger in a new market and they cut the price to enter this market like any challenger in any industry. Their contracts with AAA are enough for them. When they will have a big chunk of the market, that will be another story :)
     
  32. Teo

    Teo

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Posts:
    564
    Lets assume Unity go for $19/month subscription scheme for Pro (pc/mac/ios/android) same as UE4, will still be competition for them to keep developers.

    Probable only peoples who don't know c++ or do not like or love to much c# ( fanatically i can say), will stick with Unity, but to rely on a that percentage of users, is not really solid, as peoples opinions can chance... and is very risky. But from what I know, most (game) developers like/love c/++.

    And once they start losing users, the asset store will produce less money.

    As I said in previous post, in my opinion Unity should just give for free Pro version for all platforms, and keep making money from asset store and console licenses, and maybe gambling licenses. Having a strong user bases will help a lot for asset store income.

    About Epic, I don't really think they count the $19 subscription, as you are not forced to keep it, maybe is just here to control the peoples/company's who can possible release a game with out paying them 5%. The picture for me looks like this, from the whole pie of games made right now, who represent a multi-million business, they want 5%. For the whole pie, 5% can means a lot for them. So is pretty smarty actually as business. Game devs wins, Epic wins.
     
  33. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    If they did that, they would have to get 10 times the amount current pro users subscribing for 2 years just to equal their current revenue. The problem with that scenario is that they would be drastically cutting their current revenue by 90% in the hopes of converting a lot more. Franky now that they actually have competition, it would be a tough bet.

    Maybe if there was still a middle solution. like an "Indie" package or something, that was the $19 you suggested, but still have the pro level which is the same features, but like currently, required for <100k in revenue. That might work. That would avoid cutting into existing sales too much, and still make the full features available to small dev for a reasonable price. In a way, it similar to UE4's royalties, but with a max amount to pay.

    Fully free would mean they would be throwing away hundreds of millions for a few million. Also, as others have said before, if the focus becomes the store, they would have less incentive to add new features. Since they are pretty much entering a feature battle with other engines now, this would just be a beginning of the end.

    I fully agree, it was a completely brilliant move by Epic. Unity had very little serious competition for the indie/hobbyist market. If it were a brand new game engine by an unknown company, it would probably never work well. But any game developer knows (or should know) what unreal is. if even half of the current Unity users, drop the $19 for just one month, that is about 20million that Epic didn't have before. if they get 10% of unitys base paying monthly, that is about 4million a month in subs. Not to shabby. They are making new revenue off an existing product and building a whole new userbase. And 5% and other restrictions keeps it from cutting into their current userbase. Unity faces the challenge with cutting their current fees of cutting into their current users. Their price is so low now, that they do have many hobbyists and very small users paying the full fee. A price cut would mean loosing a portion of that. Not a problem with UE, as they probably don't have any causal/hobbyist users paying the high six figure license fee. It is a win on almost every level for level for Epic. With such a small share of the market (before) and a well known name in gaming, it is impossible for them not to grow.
     
  34. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    3,015
    I'm guessing that Epic's 5% royalties is only to prevent existing big clients from switching to the $19/month plan. I think Epic's main focus is really on the $19/month, but I have no evidence beyond my own gut feeling. As long as Epic continues to do frequent updates and release high quality demos (which requires an active subscription to download), then people will stay signed up. A lot of people will sign up thinking they could leave anytime, but then stay signed up for the updates and free demos. If Epic ever becomes stagnant with their updates, then I suspect people will stop their subscriptions (at least for a while). But in general, I doubt most people will sign up for one month and then immediately quit. Everybody loves the idea of being able to leave anytime, because it reduces risk. But I am guessing that most people who sign up will stay signed up.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2014
  35. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    Totally agree.
    My short take on EPIC move:
    - Getting as much monthly subscriptions as possible. Remember when CryEngine free came out? They got a whoopy 100 000 downloads. I'm pretty sure they already surpassed that amount, @20$ = that's (at least) 2 millions for their first month (second one already started).
    - Even if Unity users will stick to Unity for a while, that doesn't stop them for trying out UE4 (= 20$ for each one of them). I got a free subscription till December 2015 as I was an early beta tester of UE4 but even so I would have paid the subscription, cause it's hellish cheapy.
    - Lot of artists and designers are (and will continue to jump), they don't mind to learn C++ (either any programming language), they will do all their small demos and games with BPs anyway.
    - If their developers are successful they also get a 5% of that pie, which represents an other big cash revenue for Epic.

    I won't even mention their private non-royalties custom licenses with phone support and all that (which is also an other way of revenue for them). Plus, don't forget that Epic is also a game developer, they have pretty good solid franchises that sells a lot.

    I would also like to reiterate on something. People criticizing UE4 are probably unaware that UE4 is in constant development and being used by very huge multimillion dollar projects around the world. At it's current version it's pretty stable. Also by giving UE4 sources to anyone, lot of guys (including big players) can contribute simultaneously to it's development and maintenance (for example Lionhead). I've already saw a bunch of individuals providing bug fixes.
    So all this to say that UE4 it's feature set complete, solid, stable, scalable and most of all CHEAP!
     
  36. MaxieQ

    MaxieQ

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2012
    Posts:
    295
    While most creative industries has figured out how to turn the clueless wannabes who figure they want to be a writer, musician, film maker, or game dev, I don't think either Unity or Epic will rely on those low-ball subscription fees for much. They're just too chaotic as an income stream. I think that's why Epic has just shrugged their shoulders and allowed for one time subscription, and then cancellation.

    I don't even think Epic relies on those five per cent, to be honest. Whenever it is brought up, you have an enthusiastic response from Epic along the line of “but that's not written in stone. Email us for a better deal!”

    Like with self-publishing of fiction, I expect most wannabe's production to be dreck. I've downloaded enough games to make that generalisation, I think. The game dev equivalent of the purple prose passive voice novel written on pink onion paper in comic sans are abundant.

    So, I don't think either the 5 per cent or the $19 is going to factor into anything for Epic. Those who have the capability to actually produce playable games will approach Epic and get a better deal. Obviously Unity will need to find that sweet spot as well, and obviously they need to hurry because the perception will soon be that 'everyone develops on UE4 – why would you bother with Unity?'

    That is the danger when all the wannabes flock to the latest greenest pasture. Sales rarely account for objective measures, or iPhone would be a dead platform considering how much more it costs compared to comparable Android phones. Often sales are driven by perception. I would say that in most cases, sales are driven by perceptions.
     
  37. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    It's disrespectful to go off topic to the extents some of you have, so please either make a new thread or try not to go over old ground repeatedly in completely the wrong thread for it.
     
  38. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    I would of thought by now Unity have enough feedback so I can't find much reason to criticise any further, hopefully Unity put that information to good use. If you build large 3D games, can't afford pro or you don't like the way things have gone / can't wait for U5. We now have a competitor worthy of being one in the Indie segment and thanks to Unity Epic stood up and listened.

    Choices have to be made sooner or later which one is for you and your project. We made our choice and looking forward to the future..
     
  39. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Ok deleting posts that take the piss. Do NOT continue to troll. Be on topic. Moderation isn't the topic. UE4 topic was closed with good reason.
     
  40. Misciagno

    Misciagno

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Posts:
    88
    If it did't work the first two times I don't see why it will now.

    But to stay on topic I will only consider Unity 5 to be a good deal when I get to see some more information about it from Unity. I wasn't overly convinced from the video they put up but I did like the screenshot of their shader. The pricing doesn't bother me like it does other people but I want to see how their features stack up against the competition.
     
  41. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Ok guys had to delete a total of 11 posts from people complaining about moderation and UE4 this or that since my post above asking you not to. Other moderators have already advised me to hand out infractions, but that is what I consider an extreme resort.

    Be sensible and discuss the topics you wish. If you must open a new topic about something else (probably UE4) make sure it has *not* been already done to death in another topic and is actually relevant not just a troll thread. Thanks!

    End of discussion about moderation. Back on topic!
     
  42. daisySa

    daisySa

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    341
    I’ll consider U5 to be a good deal if the software is stable and it delivers what they’ve promised; e.g. I need a 64-bit editor in release 5.0, not “later in the version 5 release cycle”.
     
  43. Games-Foundry

    Games-Foundry

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Posts:
    632
  44. Wild-Factor

    Wild-Factor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Posts:
    607
    Well Unity is used by EA and Ubisoft and etc.... Small dev that also use UE4 for many years :)
    They use Unity more and more because apparently it has some quality over UE4 :)
    I don't know about the gross value, but in number, there is more production made with Unity than with UE4.

    AAA dev are usually forbidden to give any code. Big company are VERY conservative with that (their legal departement are). And you may have one or two exception, but this is still not close to what small indie dev share. And indie must share his module on the asset store to survive. A AAA dev must keep his module to avoid the competition to have it.

    10 000 download in free of the cryengine can't be extrapolate with a 10 000 in paid of UE4. When people have to pay even one dollars, it's not the same.

    And lots of artist and designer will learn C++. They will learn their first pointer bug, memory corruptions etc... They will learn the this 2 minuste compilation time, break their productivity, because each time they tend to go to facebook.They will learn that using a visual scripting is a bad idea for a complet game. And if they are smart, and don't fall into the "I continu in my mistake because I can look bad to other if I show that I changed my mind", they will understand that using C# is the best compromise to make a game fast without bugs.

    Artist/dev using Unity will have a head over thoose using UE4.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2014
  45. tatoforever

    tatoforever

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Posts:
    4,364
    EA, Ubisoft and the like uses Unity for their tiny small mobile/web projects yeah.
    It have some quality over UE4? Define that quality. :D
    Unity has more production than with UE4? You mean there's more projects being made with Unity? Yes of course, UE4 is only one month old (publicly) but UE have been using by the gaming industry on big projects for several years now (and there's a tons of upcoming small and big projects made with UE4).

    Dunno exactly what you mean here but let's say I'm OK with that. ^^

    I don't have the numbers but I'm pretty sure Epic will share the download amount (which translate to subscriptions) very soon.

    I understand that you love Unity (I do too) but that's purely fanboy total no sense. If an artist/designer doesn't know how to write programs (C++, C# or whatever language), he won't get too far. Visual scripting it's not intended for complete games, only to wire up high level events and behaviors. You can get away with simple demos and tiny games but that's it, as soon as you want to do something complex you'll get in trouble, either your game will run slow as hell (if you are lucky enough), either you'll get a bologna spaghetti of arrows and boxes (the most plausible case) thus things will start to fell apart.
     
  46. Wild-Factor

    Wild-Factor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Posts:
    607
    We can't make mobile game with UE4 (or UDK) ?
    Unreal is a lot older than Unity.

    UE4 is still for bigger project and bigger team. EA and Ubisoft have both engine. They just know what tool to use for what type of project. And they know that no engine are the best for every project.

    If you what to make a AAA game UE4, if you want to make an indie game -> Unity.

    But both engine try to do everything. UE4 is becoming more and more small team friendly (it's not the case yet). And Unity is becoming more and more AAA rendering quality (not yet there also)

    Well I don't understand because that's exaclty what I'm saying too.
    (But maybe ironic sentences wan't clear, or it wasn't clear from which previous sentence I was replying)
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2014
  47. pragmascript

    pragmascript

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2010
    Posts:
    107
    here is what i would love to see in unity 5 pro

    not neccessarily in that order:

    -> full source code available
    -> update to newer mono version
    -> expose a native c/c++ api
    -> improved multithreading support (e.g. invoke api functions from different thread)
    -> all blocking api functions should have an asynchronous version exposed
    -> occlusion culling on fully dynamic scenes
    -> pathfinding for fully dynamic scenes
    -> improved performance of deferred renderer
    -> the unity editor should not crash when a game script is caught in an endless loop
    -> nested prefabs
     
  48. CarterG81

    CarterG81

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    Posts:
    1,773
    I am so lost. Was there this major news break I missed or something? Went to the front page, and I see nothing.

    edit: Nevermind, I read it as "Unity 5 cost $90,000" but now I re-read it and understood what I missed out.

    I am not sure why this thread even exists though. Comparing Unity to Unreal is like comparing apples to oranges. The only thing they have in common is that they are fruit.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2014
  49. pkid

    pkid

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Posts:
    201
    Before UE4 and Unity 5 were announced I would have said the same thing. Unity was for mobile and casual games and UE was for big AAA projects. Now that UE4 has changed the price and become better at mobile, and Unity 5 has become visually much better with GI and physically based rendering I think the two engines are direct competitors.
     
  50. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    ... which is why we should wait for more data :)