From what I’ve seen it’s a lack of a proper “brush” tool like hammer and streaming terrain.
Really? One tiny tool makes it not AAA?
Whether something is or is not AAA is kind of a nebulous spectrum. Perhaps we should say that Unity it as the low-middle end of the AAA spectrum, and rising quickly?
But really, Unity is not supposed to be AAA-only, it is supposed to be accessible to ALL levels of ability and the full spectrum of developers all the way from solo indie developers with no money to huge companies with millions.
This question has been asked countless times. Its all about the team collaboration tools and lack thereof.
I see what you did here 
(sarcasm-meter is high !)
Is it? Would a AAA team share their homework? Given that there is yet to be a AAA team interested, you have to wonder, what does UDK and crytech have that Unity doesn’t. ( Don’t get me wrong, I love Unity).
Personally speaking a updated terrain system is a must!
However I am building terrain in my game out of modular meshes.
I think the main thing that makes a game seem “AAA” to the average player is that graphics. So that’s the models, the textures, the animations, ect. All of that is made in other programs.
That’s all subjective to the developer. I want to know why it is that we’re yet to see a serious studio, such as Gearbox, consider a solid, stable, and light weight engine like Unity.
EDIT: given the overhead, that is.
Sorry for the DP, but aren’t commercial engines like gamebryo known for their nondisclosure pricing that goes up with every successful release? (See GTA and Elder Scrolls).
There are many serious studios using Unity. It’s just that - whenever anyone points this out - the troll in question changes the definition of a serious studio or determines that it’s only being used for a game in a genre they don’t like.
If you’re hoping that picking the things you want done and pretending that they’re the only two things preventing Unity from breaking some kind of mythical barrier will get your features added…
- It won’t work.
- You really could use some lessons in subtlety.
- You’ll need to drop really obscure things which mean nothing to the vast majority of developers like the brush tool. It’s a dead giveaway.
I apologize if that seemed like a wish list. If you look into my past posts, I assure you you can peg me lower than a wishful dev. Just a hobbiest. The question was a sincire inquiry.
Unity isn’t comparably solid or stable. It is lightweight.
They actually have team collaboration workflows…
For prototyping not development.
As I’ve said before, the biggest thing Unity is missing is a showcase title, showing off the engine (Like Unreal, FarCry, etc.). UT needs to get a solid game dev team put together and show what Unity is really capable of.
Some people buy really expensive handbags just because they are a brand even though they are no nicer, of better quality, allow better storage or feel more comfortable.
Whats holding unity back is nothing. It is aaa and when people actually use it to full power that is shown.
i think that Unity it’s more easy and accessible to the mass. You can’t put tons of especial features, shaders, fx and support for that low price.
When you buy an expensive engine you also get a team to work with new solutions and a lot of help from others devs using the same engine in a closed environment.
You can do that using Unity, i remember i asked it before and was just expensive as UDK (>>>>$50.000). If you want to have an AAA game using unity you should pay for they support and share codes/etc.
Big devs like Naugthy Dog have a lot of help of Sony engineers, Guerilla Games in Holland, Japan Studio in Tokyo, Santa Monica LA, Microsoft help you with DX11 and they team too. So why would you pay that amount of money to use Unity if you can spend the same in a closed engine and also get help from the engineers who produce the hardware/software? It’s business… if you go with sony and they see that you have a good idea, then they will help you a lot with tons of studios supporting your game, also with marketing and maybe making it exclusive.
If unity get more closed and start a near support for everyone who use the engine, also very picked about the gamea…well, then we should see some AAA tittles… and we would have to pay a lot more.
Ah, so that wasn’t sarcasm 
The stuff madfinger is putting out is pretty nice .
For me its not about looking AAA . The fact I can have a working prototype in a week is amazing .
I geuss the OP was… Not_Sure ba dum tsss
Seriously though, this thread is doomed to be a big flame war. Just to help the thread a bit though: I think it’s not because lack of feautures, AAA will write their own anyway. It comes down to what resetme said: You need good support, and be absolutely sure this engine will run no matter under what pressure. It’more of a brand name, really.
I was at a large closed doors developers conference (not for indies) earlier this year in California and when someone asked if anyone had heard of unity not a single person responded.
Numerous games made by big companies have used Unity… they may suck but surely they are classed as AAA. A better question would be why have no good AAA games used Unity? Even then though it is perfectly possible that there are already AAA games out there using unity, most don’t say the engine there using on less it is like a showcase game… I think this is most likely actually as why continue console support if no one uses it?