Is Unity pro with all the modules overpriced?

Is Unity pro over priced seems to be a topic that comes up a lot around here. I decided to tackle this myself and go into hard numbers with it. If you're so inclined (and don't mind wading into a little bit of simple business math), take a look and sound off if you agree or not.

 

URL blocked. All url shortners are blocked at work due to potential phishing scams, plus, they should never be used outside of twitter posts anyways!

 

http://crowquillgames.com/how-much-...in-consideration-of-unitys-pricing-structure/

Some disagreements with op. Claims:

This is proven to not make sense from a business standpoint. You will be forced to upgrade to remain current. And upgrade cycles are quicker now. Some features and platform bug fixes are not for older unity. While 3.5.7 does support Android, there's some show stoppers that are only available fixed in 4.x. So this claim is not valid (for business).

And the rest of the world? I mean if it's a monologue I understand. But it's not a statement of fact for most people, no.

You also do not address the cost of multiple seats. There's a few nit picks I could argue about your blog posting. But ultimately, I do agree: for what you get, unity is excellent value for money. However I am not sure Unity is getting enough custom charging 1,500 per platform for casual developers and indies. I feel for that crowd, additional discounts per extra platform may have some pro users wanting to chance their arm where they might not before.

Ultimately, I do not think unity is expensive for what it offers. So for the most part I agree with your interesting blog post.

 

My mistake. Here you go my good sir! http://crowquillgames.com/how-much-...in-consideration-of-unitys-pricing-structure/

 

Darn. Hippo is too fast for me.

 

I'm not a pro user, and I agree that Unity Pro is NOT overpriced. I currently write games as a hobby, and I can easily work around the free feature set.
If/when I decide/am-able to pursue game development as more than a hobby, then Pro becomes a great investment. And $1500 base cost is rather cheap for such an investment.

 

I think it's a good price. (Unity)Saves you weeks of time over the life of a project in productivity. I have pro at work and basic at home. At work they charge $4k just to put an app in the app stores(ios and android) for a client. lol

I spent $2k on photography equipment when it was my main hobby, never made a penny from it and don't regret buying it, meanwhile personal unity experience got me a job that I love...

 

Unity Pro was a gem of a value for me. With all the add-ons, it began to lose it's shine. And when it came time to upgrade, the diamond began to look a little worn out. $1500+$1500+$1500 or $750+$750+750, is a lot.

Gigi.

 

Hey Gigi, out of curiosity, could you share what your ROI has been on each of those modules? Obviously I write form my own experience so I'm keen to see how things have worked out for other people.

Heya Hippo, you are quite correct, most of the world doesn't suffer under the onerous tax burden of California so valid point. However, most places are able to write off business expenses vs. sales, so the tax issue is not a completely moot point either. It simply means take whatever your effective tax rate is, and that percentage of your total cost of purchase is effectively nullified by tax savings.

Also a very valid point. Still Unity's model is better than the per game licencing that is in play with some other options. Also to that end, upgrading is probably still cheaper vs. the time it would take to keep your own engine up to date so I personally feel still very worth the cost.

Thanks for the feedback guys, I appreciate it. I love the fact this group always has intelligent input.

 

Interesting read. Here are some things that jumped out at me.

I know you touched on this later in your blog post but everything Windows will be free for Pro users so when BlackBerry comes out as a publishing option, the most you could spend on publishing platform add-ons would be $6000 (Pro + iOS Pro + Android Pro + BlackBerry Pro) per team member.

Because I know the numbers, when I read you saying that it cost $9k and then later said "actually... it's not that much because we get some of it for free" it just seemed like you were throwing out the big number first to get a shock reaction or something. Did not appreciate that.

Just a small note to clarify: If you earn more than $100k in a single year, you are required under the Unity EULA to purchase Pro licenses for every platform you use for everyone in your team. Something to keep in mind

 

No, not if you want to make games professionally and threat it like a serious business.

 

The bottom line is, NOTHING is expensive if you can afford it and the value that you get from your purchase justifies what you spent on it. If you buy Pro and don't produce anything with it, then of course you're going to see it as an expensive investment. If you build a great game and make even just 10k in sales, then what you spent buying Unity Pro becomes a distant memory. It's all about your position and perspective. There's no correct answer to the question "is Unity Pro too expensive". For me, it's paid for itself (and then some), and that's all that I needed it to do.

 

I also agree that it's not over priced. Having said that, someone posted the first ever pricing suggestion that I agreed with a few days ago - to incrementally lower the price of each additional platform add-on purchased for a given user, or offer a package deal, just to make it more attractive for businesses to simply buy 'em all instead of picking and choosing. It might end up with Unity making more sales and with more users getting more options, which is a win-win.

Having said that, I think it's less of an issue now than when that was posted, because since then it has been announced that MS and Unity have partnered to include Win RT building with all Pro licenses. That's essentially knocked $1500 off what we thought we'd have to pay for the complete set a week ago, so while it isn't as psychologically enticing it is an objectively better deal than the suggestion above.

 

This is true. Plus basic mobile licenses now being free... I think Unity throw us enough great bargains that complaining about the standard pricing is just a "spoilt child" mentality. They make a kick-ass product that's priced (in my opinion) quite reasonably. They deserve every dollar they get.

 

To be blunt, I agree entirely.

 

It's not a spoilt child mentality. It's an opportunity for unity to make more money from the larger mass of unity pro users who are otherwise reluctant to remain current or expand. Do you think most of the pro users are small to medium businesses, or indies/hobbyists having a crack at things?

It's data unity has to get hold of (currently, they do not have that data, judging by the questionnaires they've put out). They're not really asking that question and they should ask it clearly.

Pricing 'right' isn't the same as greed or generosity, it's often a mutually beneficial arrangement. Getting there is a risk however. Ask anyone if they want it for less, and the honest users will always say "less". People who try to think on behalf of Unity aren't really in possession of the facts anyway.

But when does less become more? well, when more people buy, of course. We're all also assuming upgrade cycles won't get shorter.

 

If your game doesnt sell on one platform it wont sell on the others, but if you got a real hit on your hand the 1500 isnt going a problem to port to the other platforms (otherwise I dont think its worth it).

 

In regards specifically to complaining, it feel that it is. I did just post a price drop suggestion of my own, after all, which I felt spoke to exactly the benefits you just mentioned.

But I feel that there's a huge difference between "hey, there could be mutually beneficial reasons to do X" (a suggestion) and "Unity is too expensive, they shouldn't charge me $1500 just to take their logo off the front and have some post effects that other engines have for free" (a complaint). That complaint and its line of reasoning completely ignore and devalue the huge amount of value that Unity has already given the user for nothing.

(Please don't confuse this with users who have issues with upgrade pricing to get access to fixes only available in newer version of Unity. That's a different issue, and one where I sympathise with both points of view.)

 

unity is not over priced. The tool is one of the most powerful in its industry. Just look at cryengine and UDK they charge royalties and cost alot also. Compared to them Unity is cheap.

 

How about ZBrush, they are selling with free upgrades, and it works well for them AFAIK. But then that is used as a major tool in the game and movie industries.

 

Free upgrades to every new version for LIFE, or just free upgrades in the current version lifecycle (like Unity)?

 

I'm pretty sure ZBrush has free major (3.x to 4.x) upgrades for life.

 

That sounds too good to be true. Can't spot anything either way on their site. Will have to research it - I'm curious to know the answer.

 

I'm not sure if they guarantee it but it has been like that sense V1 AFAIK.

 

It is true. So far they never charged for major updates.

If you're on the fence, I would buy it now, because they raise the price pretty soon.

And damn the new Zremesher kicks ass

 

That's excellent value for money. Even most small developers charge for major version upgrades these days.

 

The money went on the $180 Ouya.

 

$180? Was that just import shipping, or was it Ouya plus second controller plus shipping?

 

Mine arrived today Can't wait to get home and get the thing set up.

 

Maily that the Ouya in UK cost $160 plus postage. If they release it like next month in Aus for $99 I will be raging, though I don't think they will.

 

I just bought mine from the Ouya website. $99 + $20 shipping. Not sure that they have stock now though.

 

Mine is arriving tomorrow according to UPS. I ordered a controller at the same time, but that's arriving on friday for some reason.

Is there any reason that the Ouya hasn't officially been released in Australia, or is just not there yet? I know there are some problems with gaming there and am wondering if that has anything to do with it (like the lack of an 18+ rating because one of the politicians needed to make it happen refuses, or something like that). This thread has been thoroughly derailed, now .

 

Not sure. Isn't it only available from Ouya themselves or Amazon? If that's the case, I guess it would only be available in countries that have a dedicated Amazon site, which Australia doesn't. Can you actually buy it in stores (physical) in the US, or is it online orders only?

 

That is a common claim that people make with virtually every product or service (games as well). Often though, the math doesn't line up with idea. In games (social/F2P) it often breaks down to "people who will pay" and "people who won't pay" Shift a price point down (even way down), and it usually doesn't convert a significant amount of non payers to payers justify the cut in revenue. And in many cases a price increase (within reason), won't significantly reduce the number of payers. But with those type of services, adjusting prices is common.

Unity pretty much sells one product, so experimenting with prices is uber risky. But as an example, let's say they cut the price in half across the board. $750 is still huge chunk of change for a hobbyist, or a causal developer. They would need to double their pro user base to not suffer a loss in pro sales. Yes, that may also result is an increase in related sales like the asset store, but would it be enough to offset the loss sales? Most likely not, because it isn't likely that $750 price tag will bring in a ton of new users. Probably they would have to hit something like the $200-$300 range to really convert a significant amount of non-pro users. But that's just a guess. In practice the "lower price equals more sales" doesn't usually pan out without a some other change to the revenue stream. Especially when a product is free and the costs are a "premium" feature set. For those who the free version is good enough, the lever to convert them to payer probably isn't cost effective.

Though, a reasonably priced subscription may turn out to be a very different story.

 

Well 35% of tax burden in California, in Spain we pay a 41%, plus a fixed fee of 400$ per month just to be a "legal professional", and that fixed quote is a monthly payment, wheter you work or not, wheter you have been paid or not.

 

Compare the public transportation, university, and social help from the Spanish government with California's and the US's and you'll see that Spain and most of Europe has the better deal by far. Our 35% is going to corrupt weapons, corrupt investors and banks, and other corrupt government contracts.

This is a government that paid a high school dropout over $100K a year to rat on a spy system that has been in place for decades. I know the type of activities such a job as his would require and it's not $100K of smarts but rather his father's prior work rather than son's merit. The 3rd party company that actually employed him was being paid over $200K for the son's services. I'm not too concerned about what the government has collected about myself, rather I'm more concerned with data collection and sales by marketing and credit bureau companies which is far more extensive and jumps to the wrong conclusions too often, far more than the government.

I do agree the $400 a month to be a legal professional is stupid, it's like the government is begging professionals to vacate the country. If you are not making the money to pay this fee and live comfortably despite being a professional you should organize to have this fee based on income. A retail worker at the local grocery store is a professional too. There is a presumed high amount of income from being a 'professional' and an attempt to recoup some of the costs from the very generous and inexpensive training made available to those that are lucky enough to be professionals.

 

This is a good problem to have.

 

What maths might that be? how can you even relate unity to games? Do you have to purchase the same game every 2 years for multiple platforms, and does that game cost 1500?

How about a car? Do you constantly buy cars? I've had my car 10 years. It cost the same as my unity pro licenses. Still works fine though on old roads, unlike unity

 

Making all the Unity Pro licenses free isn't going to attract new Unity developers. The price for all the licenses is cheap to target so many platforms. Unity is what Java was supposed to be, although Java plays a part in Unity, Java is mostly back-office now.

Their business model is pretty much geared towards big business and government and the free aspect to Unity is to all those interested to teach themselves Unity so that big business and government have a way to leverage Unity in-house. Whether that was their original plan is beside the point.

This should be a help to artists and the humanities fields in general while just being another avenue for a paycheck for programmers and sys admins.

 

I went to the store originally to buy mine, but they had sold out within an hour. All of the major games retailers here are selling them in-store (GameStop, Best Buy, etc).

 

Hahah! May the old black Plymouth Duster, with the squeaky hatch back and star-galaxy-faded-black paint, rest in peace. She served us well.

I love Unity and believe $1500 for Unity Pro is a wonderful deal! I do not think $1500 per deployment target is good deal at all. I think $750 to upgrade to Unity Pro 4.x is a good deal and also once again, think $750 per platform is a bad deal. I feel manipulated and so, I haven't upgraded to Unity 4.x. I am loyal, and I'm not blind.

Note - this is my personal opinion as an owner of multiple copies of Unity Pro (including iOS and Android Pro plugins), and as a professional game developer (by day), founder of an indy company (by night), and manager of software engineers. Your mileage may vary.

Gigi.

 

I'm happy with Unity's pricing. If you earn $20 an hour..

That's 2 weeks work to pay for your Unity license...
Or 1 weeks work to upgrade your license...

Now if a new version of Unity comes say every 3 years, 1 or 2 weeks out of those 156 weeks is really not a lot of time to spend paying for software that makes the other 154 weeks a pleasure to work with. Sounds fair to me.

The only thing I would change about the Unity licensing model though, if I had to put forward suggestions would be...

1.) Offer a monthly subscription (Unity does, but it expires end of July), why expire this offer?
2.) Give incremental discounts on multiple license purchases. So offer a 10% discount on 2nd platform license, 20% on third platform license, 30% on 4th platform license.. etc...

 

Simple math, as I stated, if you cut the price in half, you have to sell twice as much to justify the reduction. A product is a product. People make those claims for everything from hardware to physical goods to software. Apparently the customer of any given product or service has much better business savvy and knowledge than those who sell the products. Just ask them.

I have never tried tried running Unity on a road, but I am sure it will run just as well on a road today as a 10 year old road. A 10 year old computer... not so much.

 

I think those prices weren't so bad early on when the markets were more separate. If you weren't interested in developing for Android for example, it was nice that you didn't have to pay for something you didn't need. But now, it is pretty common to develop for both, and their are more platforms, and more coming. A subscription does seem like good move, and a "package deal" of some sort would be nice, Maybe a reduced price for all supported mobile, or even just bundling them all together.

I can understand the separate pricing for some things. Like someone developing for desktops and not mobile or the other way around. But if you are doing a "mobile" game, it is pretty likely you are doing to release on most mobile platforms.

 

+1, on big game projects those weeks can turn into a year or more...

 

I have to agree with this a lot, spot on. The other thing I didn't deal with in my blog post, and think in retrospect I should have is ROI. How much money will you make using Unity that you would not have earned otherwise. The answer to that is a bit harder however and differs from developer to developer. If your coding your own engine, it's not unlikely 50% of your time is going just to maintaining your engine's compatibility. If that's the case, as Meltdown points out, Unity pays for itself in short order. A bit more murky would be using another engine with a different licencing cost structure. Then the relative value of Unity has most perhaps to do with how much money you make on your games as many of the competitive engines charge a percentage of your revenue above as certain threshold. In this case, using Unity becomes more cost effective the more you make and the other agreements become more onerous the more you make. Of course, if the game doesn't do so well and doesn't pass the engine's threshold, you did likely get a better deal from the other guys, if only because you made fairly little.

Perhaps more to the point for the indie crowd around here is the question "How much money will buying a given module make me?" At full price the Android module would cost $1500. If you didn't expect to make at bare minimum twice that, why would you pay for the module in the first place? Some markets just aren't worth going into for some games. This is probably the biggest reason I prefer Unity's "a la carte" model for build targets. I can build my game, put it out to platforms I believe have the highest chance of making me money (iOS and Desktop), and then use the profits from those markets to expand into other markets. It makes the overall risk of rolling out a game very low. If I'm feeling ambivalent about a given market (maybe Android isn't worth supporting because of the fragmentation and piracy issues in that market) I can put out a version using the (now free) basic target and if I get some good early response pony up for the pro module and do it right before I start promoting to that platform in earnest.

I may be being dense here, and I apologize if I am, as I'm not trying to take cheap shots at anyone, I really do want to understand the thought process here. I'm a bit mystified when other devs talk about the build targets not being worth the money. Clearly I think not all targets are worth it for every project or even every developer. So why buy them if they aren't? And if you are buying them, why continue to do so if you've found a given platform isn't actually profitable for you? There's no rule that we all have to develop for every platform. I can think of several apps as well as games that are either iOS only or only came to Android over a year after they were out on iOS. This seems like a fairly straight forward business decision to me.

 

So you have the failures, the home runs but there must be making enough money to survive but not enough to justify the $1500 port to every platform which I guess you could chalk up to failures. If unity lowered it to say $500 a platform after you got pro for one of them then you would probably see more people at least trying.

Quite frankly if you consider most people will fail, unity should lower the price so that more people will be willing to give it a shot (IE buying a lottery ticket).

 

Thank you for writing the article. When I clicked the link I kind of expected yet another of those really stupid rants that Unity is too pricy. But then it turned out to be the opposite. Awesome

Obviously, $1500 means different things to different people. So, I understand that people coming from certain countries or with a certain (low) income don't like Unity's pricing. It is very understandable. But the trouble here is that they're based in Europe and the US, and here, prices are the way they are and people working in the software business earn what they earn.

The subscription model they're offering is a rip-off, though. You pay about as much as if you'd buy the full license - but never get to own Unity. But if people are willing to pay that much it's their problem (and when they feel good about it, I guess it's not even a real problem ;-) ).

 

@Jashan - I don't think the subscription is a rip-off, I personally think it is there to help a few people form small studios without an enormous initial outlay. Probably meant more for a group of people than 1 lone developer. In the lastter case I don't think it is a good deal but in the former it's a great opportunity and worth taking the risk. I don't feel the pro is overpriced, pretty good deal I feel. As for the add-ons it's all ROI. If it's a medium sized team doing it and there is one person on permanent marketing duties then the addons are a good deal as well. For a one man band maybe not so much because of the time needed to market a game on every platform and supposedly only 20% of Android users buy apps compared with 68% of iPhone users, so those numbers would deter me buying the Android add-on.

 

I agree it's too risky to drop the price that much. But I still believe there are other ways to attract a larger audience. For instance:

Unity still offers the free version exactly the same as now, a version with all pro features but you're not allowed to publish anything made with it, and the regular pro.

Before anyone says "but people will publish anyway!" you have to realize that this is already happening. People are actually using cracked pro versions and publish their game with it and how many you think get caught? I don't see how Unity has the money to find all these people and sue them that isn't cheap either. And I don't believe it's because they don't want to buy pro but it's more likely that they can't afford it (there are always exceptions). I genuinely believe most people are willing to pay for Unity but not being able to buy pro when you're on a serious project that needs to be finished isn't helping small developers.

Unity free is great but if you're skilled and underfinanced you can forget about your dream game because you need to be able to use everything Unity has to offer but you can't. I always read these dogmas that you don't need X and that Y isn't that necessary. Who are you to judge what someone's game need and how he/she envisions it? At least give them some cookies so they can finish their project and when it's done they most likely find a way to finance the real pro so they can publish their project and it's a win-win situation. I'm quite sure nothing much will change compared to the current situation except for an increase in sales and indie developers really feeling empowered. Right now I don't really feel empowered, and with 'not really' I mean I have all the ingredients of the pizza except for the bottom. Unity likes to profile itself as indie friendly but I'm not sharing this idea. I love Unity but from experience I can tell that there is no way in the world you can create a quality game if you're on a tight budget like me, I can't take that risk. Before your thoughts get a life of their own, no I don't use a cracked pro version and I'm not intending to publish my game with a cracked pro. There is much to be won here by both parties I'm more than very willing to hand over my hard earned money to Unity if I'm absolutely sure I can finish and publish the game I have in mind. I don't want to implement features afterwards that's simply retarded. That's what I'd call empowerment. The price doesn't even have to be changed if you ask me that wouldn't be a very wise decision.

Btw I can't afford 75 bucks a month that's a lot of money in this country, like over a third of a regular income.