Hi
I want to make a request: if your asset doesn’t need a feature of version 4.2 (for example a simple 3d model without animations), please could you reupload it or configure it so it doesn’t demand that version in the asset store?
I think I’m not the only one that haven’t upgraded his version from 3.5 to 4.2 and I can’t purchase some assets because of that even if those assets are just 3d models or textures that doesn’t use Mecanim or any other new feature.
Just a suggestion,
Regards.
I agree. It is a pain in the ar5e to update unity just to download some low polly model that is version independant, chances are the update will destroy all your working projects with deprecated commands or something else will break.
Try installing the latest version of unity in a folder named unityXX then this way you can keep your old version and use the latest version to grab assets from the store.
According to David Helgason, only 5% of asset store users are on Unity 3.5, everyone else is on at least v4.
I’m sure David knows what he’s talking about… but I have a hard time believing that percentage.
Ditto. I personally know tons of people still on 3.5.7. However, back to the original proposition, it’s easy enough to re-install V3.5.7 and add version-specific code to target different versions of Unity. There’s really no excuse for locking out that 5+% with how easy this is.
But that 5% refers to the total of people owning 3.5 version or only the 3.5 users that have purchased something in the Asset store?
Because if it’s the latter then the way to increase that percentage is to make most assets 3.5 compatible. That is something that apparently depends on the content creators so I say it as a suggestion to increase your customers number.
That 5% is based on real data, not made up fancies or opinions. Only 5% of people on the asset store are using Unity versions below 4.0
There are likely more using 3.5 who are not on the store.
Undoubtably, especially as so many plugins on there these days require V4.
Indeed.
I’m not sure what is meant by ‘on the asset store’, if it means people selling or giving away assets on the store then that maybe true. If on the other hand it means people who get assets from the store then this low % maybe due to the reason above.
But then there is still the issue of having to update for version independant assets.
How many of the 95% ‘on the asset store’ that have V4.0 are not able to get assets that require V4.2.
The issue still remains.
I don’t get this one…if you have a 4.0 license, there’s nothing preventing you from upgrading to 4.2 is there?
i think its not the task of ALL asset providers to install an old unity and develop their assets on them as a new project cannot be opened in old unity afaik. i also don’t know if a unitypackage exported from a new version can be opened with an old version.
the fail is clearly on UT’s side. why is a certain version of software required to purchase and download a package? afaik when i purchase something on the asste store i purchase a licence anyway. this should not be bound to a certain unity version. they could print a warning when the version is lower than the asset version but they still could sell it. the user/buyer should decide wether he/she wants to purchase it anyway and use it later or try to get it running with the old version. the asset creator could also state the minimum required version in the description when the asset releays on specific unity features. if not (like models, sounds, textures) it does not matter anyway. i also think that UT could/should run a test with different unity versions and officially name the lowest required version.
so my suggestion: remove the version check from the asset store (not sure yet but when you buy via webbrowser the version is not checked, right?) and print a version requirement but still let the user decide. this rude enforcement to update unity with every little version increment to purchase some assets is not userfriendly and imo the assetcreators are not in charge of this.
This seems to be an architecture issue. Unity files simply are not backward compatible. If you open your project in 4 it reevaluates your project for that version… then if you try and open it again in 3.5 you are out of luck. If you package assets from 4 and try and bring them to 3.5 you are out of luck. So this is just being carried over to the asset store.
Not only is it the customer’s loss, as many many assets are only for 4.0 and above, it’s also the developer’s loss because the vast majority of those don’t actually require the 4.0 feature set and they are simply losing customers by not taking this into account.
I hope you know there’s a way around that. Just delete your library folder and ProjectSettings.asset in the ProjectSettings folder and you can open it open just fine in older versions. I do this all the time to test things.
Remember that ‘small’ 5% is actually 100,000 people… I always submit my packages through version 3.5. 
Ditto. That at least gives us the edge over competitors who do not.
Yeah. Every time I’m about to submit a package, this lazy side of my brain says “But… You already have it in 4.2, just submit it”. But I force myself to import to 3.5 and make a demo in 3.5 to go with it.
Edit: Though one thing is. I see no reason why ‘free’ users would have any reason to use 3.5. 4.2 has shadows for free now, so all the more reason to upgrade! I suppose though, some people still own 3.5 pro and can’t afford to upgrade.
The problem is that there is so much you can do in Version 4 that you cannot do in Version 3. Models are animated differently (giving you so much more freedom), etc. You can (and should) use namespaces in scripts, etc. Keeping your asset compatible with v3.5 is getting harder, and you almost have to have two versions, or develop specifically with compatibility in mind (since you need to do things a different way in v4). You either increase the work, or end up decreasing the features. And all those 3.5 assets cause problems importing into v4 projects – outdated shaders get imported, namespace conflicts, etc.
While I supported v3.5 with my earlier asset, not sure I will be able to in my next one, it just doesn’t have the features needed.
Yeah that much is true Jaimi. For my plugins it just hasn’t mattered since I don’t use models or animations in mine. Interesting about the namespaces
i did’nt know that. thanks for the info. but this applies only to the project level not to the asset package level and thus does not help with unity preventing you purchasing older assets. i can’t believe the file structures used for that change in EVERY little version increment so probably unity simply checks the version which the asset was created with and refuses to load lower version albeit technically it could still do it as the structure has not changed.
the reason why all user not using the most up to date version are various and does not really matter for the problem as an asset created with 4.2.1. can’t be opened with 4.2.0. so it would require all users to allways have the most up to date version to be able to purchase all available assets.
my main reason for NOT upgrading is that it first takes time to update, upgrade my projects and reconfigure unity (fe copy a script template). then this all yields the potential for going wrong or breaking something (never change a running system). also the download is quite heavy (albeit i have unlimited download) because it always contains the example project and monodevelop (which has not changed since some years afaik). so the update process is currently an inconvenient pain in the butt. on the other hand if i get nothing “valueable” out of it why should i bother. no features who are relevant for me (nested prefabs, new gui system) irrelevant bugfixes so i gain nothing with most new versions.
if UT wants me to update regulary they should include an online update which checks current files and creates a patch on the server.
i think noone expects the assets developers to create and maintain two different assets for backwardscompatibility. if you can’t run in on an older version because of feature lack or bugs its fine to require a minimum version. the point of this thread imo is that users are forced to upgrade only to purchase assets and/or asset creators are forced to build their packages on an old version. thats inconvenient for both sides and only UT can and should change this.