![]() I feel like Unity 2023 will make or break the engine for me. It's almost like learning a newly developed engine, at which point I question why should I stick with Unity if I could spend the same time learning a different engine that has its priorities on game development. And news relating to those engines almost always are applicable to the work I do or plan to do in the future, unlike Unity with their loud non-gamedev acquisitions and packages that still can't match features from legacy systems that stopped being developed 4 years ago.Īnd while I can find lots of information about Unity's legacy systems, anything new in package manager is poorly documented and tutorials often are out of date due to these systems undergoing breaking changes on the regular. Meanwhile, exciting things are happening all the time in Unreal and Godot lands. So I just wish Unity could move in that direction a little.Ĭlick to expand.Yea, none of the acquisitions of the past two years have affected my client work either. In summary I guess i'm a bit annoyed of Unity shouting out about these wonderful acquisitions and even some development tech that ultimately does not affect me or my decade of client work, yet in comparison Epic's announcements have all been appealing in one way or another. Reasonable level of subscriptions would likely be enough to invest in some of them ( hence my interest in ArtEngine if they had adjusted the cost ), but I would also have welcomed Unity promoting these acquisitions with some free content, for example SpeedTree. I'm not even sure I would honestly expect to get this stuff for free from Unity. I can't see myself ever using Ziva or Weta due to costs and not really needing that functionality in my client projects, but I would definitely be making use of MetaHuman, Quixel ( actually had a license before it went to Epic ) and Quixel Megascans if I were using Unreal. This is even worse when Unity market/blog these new acquisitions as being amazing new developments for the engine or pipelines, when in reality they barely effect the vast majority of users if at all and when there might be some overlap the costs are just unacceptable ( again for the majority of users ). However unlike Epic who buy or create cool tech and bundle it with the engine for free, Unity is obsessed with selling it piece meal to boost earningsĬlick to expand.Yeah all true ( though I might debate that Unity should be profitable from the engine/asset store ),but I guess my point is more the perception it creates, which for Unity is obviously a bad look. I feel like Art Engine has been the only purchase since TextMeshPro that really interested me and could have provided extra value to Unity. This seems to be an area that Unity is constantly failing on. I mean they’ve literally just killed the desktop version but at least existing users still have the application, cloud solution you have nothing! So this kind of move really doesn’t provide any confidence. I was waiting to see what the new price model was going to be and see if it was worth investing any time in, but well, I guess that’s not happening now, and there is no way I’m going to pay for a browser/cloud solution that can be taken away at any time, for any reason at all. Wow, last I heard about this was they accepted the subscription price was way out of line with the market, or more specifically what existing Unity users were willing to pay and as such we’re going to announce new subscription prices that would be far more acceptable.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |