Hello, you see, I am trying to upload an asset that I have created to the asset store, the problem is that after waiting for a queue of 1000 or more in the end they tell me that it is too simple and add more things.
I was already clear that it was going to be a simple asset, what it basically does is the following:
It is an asset that with a single camera will help you change between 3 different camera modes by pressing a key (key that you can choose and change to your liking, it has an option where you can change it)
The asset has 5 scripts:
Character control script
Camera switcher script
third person camera script
first person camera script
free camera script
Afterwards it also has 3 prefabs
the character model with its animations
2 cameras separately(One camera has the 3 camera modes scripts attached (third, first and free camera, and the other only 2 camera modes scripts, third and first camera modes)
Afterwards, the asset also contains its respective usage documentation, materials and example scene organized in their respective folders.
The thing is, after all this explained, I don’t know what else to add to the asset, my idea was to put it cheap at $5, but I don’t know if I should put it for free because it is too simple…
Any suggestions?
While Im not an asset seller, Ive heard of this before so, this wont be much of a consolation but
someone i know had an idea, made it, and submitted it for submission. Theirs was considerably simpler than yours but, it was something you often see questions about, and i cant remember if it was going to be free or real cheap but it was not like they were going to be asking $100 for it.
Unity wrote back, sorry its too simple
then released someone elses which actually did less…
TBH ive seen a lot of assets that do less than yours, it seems a bit of a lottery
Apparently you are not aware of Cinemachine which has all these modes and camera switching is trivial, and there are also two free Starter Assets (first/3rd person) from Unity which have an animated character and use Cinemachine.
For some tips check my blog post on the subject (most importantly the part about market research) but I’m afraid no matter how much you improve this “asset” it’s not going to go on the store because it’s essentially recreating already available features.
Note that’s from almost 4 years ago and it’s free unlike the threadstarters.
As usual with individual review it will unfortunately depend on the reviewers mood to a degree at least since assets are too diverse to write an absolute guideline.
Honestly, I think if you’re only willing to put in the work to make a $5 code asset, which replicates stuff that’s already built into the engine (Cinemachine, Starter Assets), then don’t bother. I don’t want to spend $5 on something I can finish myself before lunch, and I definitely don’t want to spend $5 for something that already exists in stock standard Unity.
What’s a piece of code or artwork that everyone TODAY and NEXT YEAR has to create for themselves, which you can save them the effort? Not something they already have the solution for, right out of the box. Something that’s a pain point that is holding back progress in their project, that will cost them time and aggravation of implementing themselves.
Remember, somebody who buys an asset is also committing the time and effort it takes to download, inspect, understand, test if it works, and integrate into their project. Your asset needs to overcome the cost of all of that effort, AND solve their problem.
Exactly. Quality bar keeps rising year over year and it may generally be lower for free assets during review.
When researching assets ALWAYS check the first release date and date of last update. Then you know whether the asset is dead in the water or continues to receive updates.
You know, I had written a paragraph just like this … but then thought, oh well, never mind, and deleted it.
I concur. Creating script assets with the intention of selling them for LESS than $20 is … just not worth considering, for both sides.
So I picked in both your opinion a bad example, but there are plenty of controller/camera items on the asset store… I picked it specifically cos all it did was follow, and nothing more. I was trying to demonstrate that the “too simple” is not an overly informative answer, as simple doesnt seem to be a cut off, if the suggestion is “too simple for that price” … maybe, but as I said, i know somehow who went about writing something for people following too many questions, there wasnt really anything like it on the store, they got “asset too simple” and within a week someone elses lesser doing one got approved… for the same price.
Can you provide links to these two assets? It piques my interest because I would think it was either a close call or some obvious explanation just by comparing the feature descriptions. The other asset may have more value on top, such as higher customizability or visual tools or more controller options.
No because my friends was rejected so there is no link and i know he was mad as a frog on a hot tin roof
But I do wonder if some of it comes down to description, it maybe does more but if they dont list absolutely everything then perhaps it loses points… as im confident unity dont open the assets to check them that way
Yeah, but what I specifically want I haven’t found with cinemachine (internet. tutorials, etc…) where they use more than 1 camera, what I want is to use a single camera that changes in different positions by pressing a key and that’s it, which is what it does simply
my asset
Ah right, of course. Where’s the facepalm smiley?
There are additional components for Cinemachine and one of them is a controller that can decide, based on distance, angle and what not, which camera to activate. I think Unity Learn has that as a tutorial, I vaguely remember this was some Unity video I saw at least pointing this out as a feature.
You can then hook into that, event or subclass, to add a hotkey camera switch to it - if that isn’t already part of the feature set.
Well a lot of people say “Hey this similar asset was accepted so my asset should be accepted too!” but the very fact that some other similar asset was accepted means that “hey, we’ve already got that other asset, we don’t yours too. We don’t need two of the same thing.” Being just as good as some other asset on the asset store is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Yours needs to be BETTER or, at least, different.
No, I get that, but as part of the original story, my friends was denied and a week later a simpler one approved… after his was deemed too simple… So, it does feel like theres an element of RNG to it.
