I actually never understood the full idea with a free license. Why would you be able to make money using a software you don’t pay anything for? Seemed like too nice a gesture.
Now with what Higgy wrote about what will be pro and what will be free it is obvious that most of the features that takes Unity to the next level will be pro only making what was before not such a big gap between pro and free much wider. The platform where you don’t need all the new fancy stuff to make competitive products is for the Iphone which there are no free license version for.
If you really intend to do business it would be a really bad move not to pay for the pro license making free more of a gimick than anything else.
So why keeping the free license at all? It only serves as a crippled version of Unity anyways. Sure some products use crippled versions instead of timelimited trials which is usually a bad route.
Unity has a trial but a time limited trial for such a complex software as Unity isn’t ideal either. I think an fully featured educational license would be a better way to go and as soon as you want to do business pay up. It will at the same time keep the generous atmosphere around Unity as a product intact.
The other alternative will be keeping it the way it is in which I foresee a huge escalation of pirated versions of Unity. This would probably making the forum and its friendly atmosphere between users and other users and Unity staff become more suspicious and less open which benefits no one.
People here is always so friendly and willing to help each other out making life so much easier for the Unitys support. When people will be thinking, am I helping a pirate or not, prove that you payed for the software. Or people using pirated version will not be involved in the forum helping others out even though he/she may have great knowledge to be shared.
This happens all the time in other forums and it would be a sad if it would happen here.
well why the free one: cause you will surely never see again a version that costs 16% of pro yet offers 90% of its features as before.
UT could move where Unity came from, just the pro, but that does not make it attractive, nor does it help them that users with interest give it an indepth test, as the can do with one
its not like the free one is crippled, its just not current gen. but for web games for example there is not that much thats really missing, nor if you want to target a large audience.
Well technology moves forward as does Unity. But if unity pro moves forward much faster than unity free then the free license will after while become absolete.
You don’t expect web games to look the same forever do you? The major point with Unity is that interactive experiences on the web can be much more than it has been. After a while the things you can make on the web with Unity pro will be what people expect to see and so things made with free will look dated.
“I actually never understood the full idea with a free license. Why would you be able to make money using a software you don’t pay anything for? Seemed like too nice a gesture.”
If you only knew how much they charge for the console licenses… I can assure you that they are not losing money by getting developers hooked.
That was kinda the point I was making. There are really not any good business cases for using the free license making it more of a gimmick, gesture than anything else
Maybe They could reinsert a “indie” license, as other engines do (Unreal UDK, Torque, etc…). The concept is easy:
do you want to make a game to gain money (for commercial use)? Well, if you are a “small” developer team, you can buy a cheap license, then…
Unity could gain money by applying a royalty. It means a small team (no money!) can gain all the features of Unity Pro at a small price.
Or…
Sell license based on game revenue: if you make a lot of money selling game (or pubblicity, etc… see UDK license contract for more info), you need to pay a full Unity PRO license (or even a more expensive license). Else, if one cannot gain a lot of money selling the game, Unity will be free or sold at a cheap price.
I think engines like Unity, since they are used by indie people (sometimes even single persons), Unity team must consider to help those people.
Don’t think that $1500 are a cheap price, since not every person has those money. But if I can use an engine to make a game, sell it–>make money, then I will be very happy to pay such price (or even more, no problem!).
I think Unity team must “invest” on indie people.
if you can’t afford $1500 you aren’t indie, you are a hobbiest.
Indie does not mean broke, it means not funded by a big publisher.
Also: If you can’t afford it, you don’t need it. Otherwise you would find ways to afford it.
And last but not least: the none pro license will be even less expensive, if that one is too high, mobile dev is nothing for you as an android phone that fullfills the min requirements is more expensive than the iphone / android non-pro licenses actually
I’m very happy you can find $1500 so easily, but your concept is wrong: don’t judge people or team only for the money, but for the final quality of the product, for the working methods, for their competencies.
Are you joking?! OMG!!! This is a typical phrase I hear in the movies, not in the real world!
Please don’t forget that “indie” license are usually sold between 0…300$ (don’t believe what I say, simply make a check over internet in the market).
Please feel free to show me the $300 indie license on UE3, Crytek, Trinigy Vision etc
You seem to be missconceptioning Unity as being some cheapo weak crap technology just because you pay $1500 for pro instead of the 5 to 6 figure per project licenses that are common for powerfull game middleware which is a massive error out of my view.
Also there is the non pro license that will become available for android once its out, which is much cheaper and should fullfill your needs better if you don’t need the pro features.
I think it is a bit over the top to say that you should secure making money before paying the license. You have to take risks as a developer as with any other business venture.
What I was talking about was giving people the opportunity to learn the software with all its features. If you think your software is good, letting people learn it should be encouraged not discouraged. Hey even if you are just a hobbyist playing around why not letting them play with all the goodies. what harm could come out of that?
The harm could be: Why bother paying for a pro version, if I have all pro features for free?
This is non-sense. The free version is more than enough to learn the in and outs of the engine. If 30 entire trial days is not enough to get an idea about the software and it’s capabilities BEYOND the free version, you’re doing it wrong… sorry to say so.
I’ve evaluated, tested and reviewed more than one application, SDK and/or engine. POV usability and learning curve, Unity simply beats them all. I’ve had my first mini-game in less than 8h. A friend of mine created a proof of concept for a hack’n’slash game with in less than a week. Ok… we’re both professional game developers, so we (most often) know what we’re doing
If you want and need the pro features, pay for it.
No one said, that independent developers find $1500 easily. BUT what is said (between the lines) is that independent developers check what they actually need, evaluate how much it would cost them to produce the same, and buy if the full license/pro license features are necessary for the product.
Also, don’t forget that this investment is not “for a single game” but a “lifetime” license. No one hinders you from using V2.6 until the end of time.
90% of those indie license are bound to a single product. Considering fmod, this is actually within your Unity license. And so is Umbra and Beast with U3.
We’re talking business here. Being an independent developer means running a business. And as thus the costs of software, hardware, offices, and all other related costs have to be considered when you do your business plan.
Unity licenses are one time licenses for as many products you want to create with it. Unreal Engine license fees grab 25% of your income after you have paid the $99 of royalty bearing (for anything >$5000). Make a quick calculation which one might cost you more on the long run.
Now, if you’re making games “for the fun” and not as a business, go with UDK. It would cost you nothing because the chances of releasing a game which has been developed “for the fun” are quite slim (by experience).
Fully agreed.
Thats exactly how it works if you are indie and have to rely on your own funding to get something.
If I would find $1500 growing on trees, the Nexus one would be on its way to me. Unhappily I had to get an ipad recently to fullfil my duties as contract dev for iOS meaningfull, which killed the chance to get it within the close future at all which makes it pretty hard to go for it anytime soon cause a nexus one here costs already 50% of the full android pro license, just to mention that.
I was just suggesting an educational version of pro. It is not a groundbreaking jawdropping idea so whats with the attitude? getting a ferrari for free to test it, come on seriuosly…
Unity free is more than enough for “educational” purposes… What is the educational purpose of not having a splash screen of Unity when starting your stand alone app? What is the educational purpose of not having Video Playback and streaming?
“Educational” doesn’t mean that you get the version to learn how to use it, “educational” versions allow you to have a tool to grasp the idea behind it because you’re actually studying i.e. game development or something closely related. If companies like Autodesk hand out educational versions, it’s after you have proven that you are actually a student. And they’re not doing it for fun, because they want to tie you to the tool, so that later on, you purchase a full license which costs 3-4 times what Unity actually costs.