Hello everyone.
I want share with you an reasoning about the asset store.
Unity team is maybe making twice money from users by creating content / system on asset store and after some time , adding this content to the Unity Engine.
So they deliberately let the engine be bad on some points,so they can then sell the asset improvement on asset store, then add it to the engine.
“And i will not talk about the fact , they are no change of promo assets on start page or the really weird/unfair ‘top’ order list” (i’m not selling anything , so i’m not talking about any personal assets)
I’m not trying to prove what i’m saying. I explain how/why it’s possible, The main element is the 2D system and the new GUI coming soon. Apparently very close to NGUI (i’ve ear that is the same guy who is working with unity (it can be wrong)).
So, theoretically , it’s possible and it’s very easy to do.
None required. You have stated something based on pure speculation with no evidence, and quite frankly fails logic on many levels. You have a theory, you need to provide some evidence or logic to support it.
I could just easily demand that someone prove to me that Unicorns don’s smell like peanut butter.
It’s possible that I’m actually the only person working on Unity and that everyone you see at places like Unite are actually actors I’ve hired and the moderators are all sockpuppet accounts of mine.
It would be stupid to deliberately make your core product poor just to sell some assets on the store. Because you inevitably lose some potential users to competitors that way, especially for something like 2D which has proved to be more important to many developers in recent years than we might have expected before the casual/mobile game industry got a new lease of life via smartphones and tablets. And which Unity have fallen down with in terms of timescale in a manner which has not exactly enhanced their reputation. In an ideal world I’m sure they would have liked to have had all the 2D features nailed for the initial 4.0 release at least.
Don’t forget, features that can be added to Unity via the asset store are not as high-profile and obvious to all potential users as the core features that come with Unity are. Just because Unity has had a great start and competing engines don’t have quite the same mix of easy editor features/pricing structure/etc, doesn’t mean Unity could afford to give the competition an open goal just for the sake of making some asset store money. That would be counterproductive and risky, and this thread is a silly conspiracy theory that is worthy of mockery.
This is not a conspiracy theory. Indeed, it seems very big and can be. However, as we know, companies do many things to earn money (tax evasion, taxes, blur in contracts, etc…), then it seems possible to me (although perhaps unlikely) that a big company such as Unity s 'devotes several uses such strategy for money.
Now, have a blind trust in a company just because it is known and important is, I think, very bad.
I don’t believe in blind trust, but in order to function as a social animal and collaborate with the efforts of other humans, decisions have to be made that involve an investment in trust sometimes.
Personally I like the asset store model, and despite its flaws and less than 100% perfect rules, I find it easier to put some faith in that model, and a company that have delivered useful products over the years, than for example some relatively unknown individual who wants to sell his assets privately for very high prices.
Consider for the sake of argument that they do exactly as you describe.
So what?
Have they broken the law?
Have they ripped anybody off?
Have they even done anything offensive?
Unity has every right to publish some things as extra-cost add-ons, if they so choose to.
They could later give them to everyone as a no-added-cost feature built in the engine, if they want to.
Why would this bother you?
Its just a slightly different way of doing business.
Maybe a bit deceptive if Unity developed it and pretended like they weren’t involved, but why would they do this, and if they did, why does it matter?
Who cares? Companies deal with each other, companies deal with individuals, etc. One thing is clear though, in order to do deals that are mutually beneficial and stand the test of time, an atmosphere of trust and respect is as important as any direct financial considerations. The very opposite of paranoia, aloof ranting, public accusations, demands, a phoney sense of entitlement, etc.
That’s a standard business relationship. Mixamo has a huge library of mecanim compatible animations and you can buy them. It’s a mutually beneficial arrangement.
No, that’s just nonsense. They work on the features they think best, regardless of what may or may not be on the asset store. In no way do they put assets on the store and later just plug that code into the engine. This is a very poor understanding of how Unity works, and if it did happen for some reason, it would be easy to detect.
Unity do make money off users more than once, everyone knows this. People bought Unity 3 Pro and then they bought Unity 4 Pro when that came out and will buy Unity 5 Pro when that comes out. Users also buy pro versions of the mobile platform adding, so Unity do make money off users multiple times. There is nothing dodgy about this, it’s standard business practice for a software developer.
What they don’t do is pretend to be other people to sell stuff on the Asset Store. Why would they even bother do that when they could just sell it normally anyway? They would no doubt get more sales selling an asset as being made by the Unity Team than selling it under a fake name no one knows.
At least you have the balls to admit you were wrong. Many here don’t.
But yes it is highly unlikely. The asset store is meant to supplement the community with what Unity lacks or can’t provide.
They are not doing it to make ‘double’ money.
If you took away the asset store it would be the community and the asset store developers who suffered the most, not UT.