A few months ago I searched the asset store for a good, cheap character controller to build off of for the game I’m currently working on, just so I didn’t have to completely reinvent the wheel. The problem is, the asset store is filled with tons of free, low quality character controllers, and tons of expensive, needlessly complicated character controllers. So I decided to build one from scratch. I got to a point where it could be used for any project, and figured I might as well publish to the asset store. I assumed if it got rejected it would be for some minor issue with the formatting or some other issue along those lines, but today I got the email that it was declined for being too simple, and that I should spend more time researching the current game market. It’s not that big of a deal, but I’d be lying if I said it wasn’t frustrating, especially considering there are similar assets released just these past few years that have significantly less functionality (not trying to criticize any asset in particular). I gave it a $5 price tag and this is the video I submitted alongside it. I recognize that, as per the submission guidelines, assets that are already extensively available will be judged to a higher standard, but I feel as though my asset fulfills a need for a cheap, functional, and easily modifiable character controller that can be used as a foundation for any first person game. Did I make a mistake assigning a price to it, or is there something else I’ve done wrong?
Any insight is appreciated.
What does it offer over the free https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/tools/physics/scivolo-character-controller-170660 and free unity controllers and so on? These have API as simple as a move command.
Maybe your asset is actually quite simple (and so is the video).
Well for one mine is a physics based character controller, not a kinematic character controller. Mine can also function properly out of the box, which, based on the reviews, that controller cannot. There are numerous free character controllers on the store, but I haven’t found a single one that actually functions properly as advertised. One of the most popular free character controllers on the store is just slightly more complicated than mine, but has serious issues that prevent it from working correctly in a lot of circumstances. And the free standard asset controllers are great, but they aren’t easily modifiable. I recognize my asset is not revolutionary or particularly unique, I’m just confused as to why mine specifically was rejected when there are so many others that are both less complicated and less complete than mine is.
Perhaps it’s up to you to demonstrate that to the asset store staff and so forth. The video doesn’t show any of what you explained to me
Though obviously I don’t work for Unity so I can’t say if it’s enough.
I‘ve seen this video. No, wait, that was for kinematic character controller. Essentially the video automatically brings up the comparison but yours seems „simple“. Maybe the impression is wrong though but given the price tag, honestly, you could as well release it for free on github. What‘s the point of charging $5?
The video (and asset) should explain your rationale as you do here. Perhaps that will sway the reviewer‘s opinion. Though I doubt it, like you said: there‘s already a ton of character controllers available and the more expensive ones do everything anyone needs quite well. Whether it‘s using „true“ physics or „just“ kinematic is mostly just a technical variation to get to the same end result. With kinematic having the advantage of not being influenced by other physics objects without the designer‘s consent. I would definitely prefer a kinematic controller than one that adds forces to my character because I stepped on some rubble.
I thought I did a pretty decent job of explaining my reasoning when I submitted it. It’s not really about making money, and if I could have set the price to a dollar I would. I just wanted to make ‘an amount’ of money, if that makes sense, but if you think it’s one of the reasons it was denied I can just submit it for free or upload it to github like you said. I didn’t come here to complain about the Unity asset reviewers, I just genuinely do not understand what I need to change to have this asset be accepted. The asset store has numerous character controllers, both paid and free, that aren’t as complicated as my relatively simple one, and I don’t see anything the ones that are accepted have that mine does not.
This is the issue, Unity is all about making money from the assets. When an asset is not going to make them good money why would care in general.
Imagine that took just a 3% increase in sales to destroy completly all older established top ranking assets, by hiding them from users.
If you want an honest answer: The video is awful. Just awful. I wouldn’t use that asset if it were free. And given your lack of understanding the use of paragraphs in forum posts I deduct that the code is horrible. That’s just my personal experience over the years and I may be totally wrong. But you asked what you’ve done wrong. This is an answer, probably not the one you were looking for 
This usually shows. This is the wrong attitude to put up an asset for sale to be honest. If it’s really not about making money then give it away for free. 
There are plenty of such assets around and they rarely get any updates. If I were a reviewer and an asset had that „stale smell“ and many comparable assets already exist I‘d probably dismiss it, too.
As for the existing assets, have you checked how well received they are? How frequently they were updated? If both questions have a positive answer then an entry in the same category/niche requires comparable if not significantly more effort.
Above all if the OP returns I suggest they look at this feedback as being useful rather than to attack. It’s hard for people to accept that kind of honesty, but it’s valuable.
Mine definitely is in no way an attack. Totally not. You can make a character controller look good. But not with an enviornment that looks like it came from a Commodore 64. And it’s very easy to even make probuilder look good using post processing. That may also be an idea, ie create the level using probiuilder and add pp with at least aces tonemapper and using ambient occlusion. Using white-ish walls, not hard green and blue.
And be more to the point. I don‘t want to watch 10+ seconds only to see the camera move up some stairs with neither voice over nor explanatory text why walking up stairs is a „cool“ thing that no other asset does (well enough).
Sorry, but the video shows almost nothing about why someone should pay for this asset. It’s a first person character moving around, colliding with stuff and jumping, things a novice can do in about a day or two worth of watching tutorials on youtube.
You need to explain clearly what differentiates your CC from the many other CCs on the asset store and github.