Nice enough if you like that sort of thing… but $430 for a dozen prefabs?
Very similar set but this one is a whopping $650
Really?
1 Like
I agree much much overpriced compared to the rest on there, but he can price them how he wishes.
3 Likes
Sad part is, somebody’s gonna buy it. Someone who doesn’t know better and/or has money to burn.
Even sadder is the probability that the asset dev knows this and is just waiting for that one person/s.
2 Likes
Maybe they put the decimal in the wrong place or were thinking in the wrong currency. I can hope, at least.
1 Like
Or maybe they’re inexperienced with the Asset Store here? There are other storefronts where that pricing would be considered normal.
5 Likes
He just wanted to make this page.
Indeed, in the grand scheme of things, that price isn’t outrageous, though it’s definitely on the high end for the asset store market. In the end it’s up to the publisher, if they don’t shift any, they can adjust the price.
6 Likes
That, surely, is the key point here.
Let the guy charge a million pounds/ dollars/ euros/ yen/ bitcoins. The primary purpose of a market is to bring together sellers and buyers and allow for price discovery. Who knows what the ‘correct’ cost really is?
After all, this is not a life-saving item under discussion. Everyone is completely free to walk away from the deal.
5 Likes
If that would be a huge set of really high quality PBR environments and props, I could understand that. But these are just a bunch of simple low-poly assets, a half decent artist could create over the course of a weekend.
This is either a mistake, or the seller has no idea how much he overestimates the value of his set.
IMO market forces are what determine the final price and it’s 100% acceptable for a seller to be pricing however they like. If someone wants to spend 500 quid on a penut then that person can. If someone has 500 to spare on penuts then they can help themselves.
Anyway pretty sure no action is going to be taken.
3 Likes
There’s nothing wrong. It’s a free world, nobody can tell someone else what to do with their money. You’re just assuming that nobody wants to pay that much because you wouldn’t do it yourself.
Tbh, it’s quite pleasant to see an example of this extremity of store pricing when all I seem to see everywhere is its opposite.
4 Likes
Soon enough, artists will be promoting something like just a quad with a texture flood filled with orange, in a gilded frame, called “Orange”, for $1500.
Why not be bothered by all the fantastic stuff being handed out for free? There are a lot better options than those assets, in my opinion, being dished out at heartbreakingly low prices. If someone wants to sell a lowpoly cactus for $1000, it really doesn’t bother me to just not pull out my wallet.
The asset store, at least in terms of artwork, is one long sad story of underpriced craftsmanship being sold to guilt-ridden devs who are worried about their underpriced games being called an asset flip.
Seriously, I don’t know what’s the story with this thread.
1 Like
The price isn’t as outrageous and some make it out to be.
Yes, the art style is simple, but making appealing hand-painted textures like that is harder than it looks. It takes some talent. The modeling – yeah that could be done in a weekend even by a very junior artist like myself. So, I might estimate that it’s anywhere from 15-30 hours of work (this isn’t only modeling and texturing, but lookdev time and testing everything out in engine, setting up prefabs, all that stuff). If the artist charges $30 an hour, which is low for a 3d artist, that totals into the 400+ price range.
I think the issue is that these are very generic assets, and stuff like this people are usually just giving away for free, more or less, on the asset store. I get that most of the people in this thread are probably just having some fun poking at this content creator, but if anybody is serious about, “this stuff is so simple, why they charge too much!”, well, you are free to make simple assets yourself (which means owning the licenses to the appropriate DCC’s, as well).
2 Likes
I completely agree with this. A lot of the objects available on the asset store serve as the identity for your game. Once you realize your game is using the same assets as some other game, it’s like you have that feeling people get when someone is wearing exactly the same outfit as you, and the more expensive the more embarrassing.
Sure, you can use these as placeholders, but cubes and cones work just the same. I think it would give artists a lot more respect for them to show off their wares on artstation and the like, rather than sell themselves short with whored out generically used objects.
There’s nothing like a good old forum moan thread in between games to play and make.
3 Likes
If I thought my programmer art was valuable I would be uploading it right now. 
2 Likes
It‘s all about supply and demand. That determines the market value eventually.
You can not really estimate the price by taking the hourly rate and the time invested into the work. Simply because this is a non-exclusive product with limitless quantities, rather than custom work for a client.
Nobody would pay a couple of million dollars for a single copy of a triple A game, just because it took that much to pay the people, who worked on it.
There are even a dozen better looking sets with similar style, for a reasonable price. You don‘t have to sell dirt-cheap but over 400 US Dollar is definitely over the top. I‘m pretty certain nobody is buying that, ever.
Then the seller will choose to or not, to adjust the price.