I have been under the assumption that UT will make an announcement that they will rework their subscription pricing to be more competitive with U4 or CryEngine. Can they afford to do this? What would be the consquences for UT (ie retrenchments)? What happens if UT hold their ground and don’t re-price their subs and/or licenses, how would you feel?
I understand that Enlighten is free in Unity 5, yet with UE4 you buy an addon of Enlighten for it - which provides options for consumers. Why did UT not follow this model to reduce the cost of Unity 5?
Why you need to assume that you needed a new topic for the same thing being talked about in several other threads? Does anyone here actually even develop games anymore or just moan about pricing?
I saw the other day in gamastura for example that call of duty mobile game would be using unity3d.
So when you price your thing at a lower price new people will think its crap but if you put it a premium price then people will be willing to pay top dollar for it.
Or it could be that Unity is a more mature development platform for mobile releases than UE4 (which activision would negotiate licensing costs for anyway) and Unreal Engine 3 doesn’t offer the best older device support so that Activision could capture most of the CoD audience. This has less to do with pricing and more to do with the engines and capabilities.
Yeah I doubt the big boys care about the 1500 cost, its nothing to them. I meant in general developer would start to see the lower priced stuff as junk and the top tier as quality, for example look when people see games like call of duty mobile made with unity not UE4
Again, that’s because UE4 is not mature enough of a development tool for mobile deployment yet. It’s incredibly scalable, but it’s still new. That’s a bigger factor than anything else, and anyone reading about that is going to know that.
I don’t think they will.
UE4 asks for $19/month + 5%.
What do you think Unity should ask for a subscription model without royalty? $25? $35? $50? How do you get these numbers?
Also, Unity has a free version, which works pretty well for mobile (I don’t think you really need rendertexture for current mobile generation and while static batching might be a useful tool, there are ways to make your game work without it).
I think the disconnect we’re seeing with UT’s response is that they don’t see it as $1500 vs $19/month like most of us do, they see it as FREE vs $19/month. I think if anything changes, it will be specifically be the relationship between free and pro and how features are distributed between them and the terms in which they’re provided. I don’t think Pro is a bad deal, in fact I think it’s a great deal, but the way they gate important features does cause a divide in the community and is a bad deal to those of us who don’t have any commercial ambitions.
What I’d like to see specifically is both versions being feature parity, with pro license required for any commercialization.
Good point, if there were a few features like sockets, render textures, external libraries, and maybe a couple of the common post process effects like bloom/AA in free I think that would be acceptable for me. As it is now I cannot even work on the game I want if I was to convert to free because free lacks a couple features(sockets and external dll’s being the two biggies).
That’s not everything, what I want is the ability to make a game. Without those 2 features I listed that is not possible without Pro as it is today.
Also even if I was using free it’s not like I’m not spending money, just looked at my invoices folder and I have 68 asset store purchases sitting in there, ranging from $5-$800 each. A good portion of them require Unity Pro because they either package a non native DLL or use a specific Pro feature that should arguably belong in Unity free version(render textures).
Yes, of course. My concern is minimizing development costs. Unity’s concern is turning a profit so they charge whatever they think they can get away with, and their Free version exists solely to lock people into a Unity-based workflow so they use the asset store and eventually migrate to Pro.
I think unity needs to be $50 a month for all build options, and you lose access when you don’t pay.
This is what I thought from the beginning, it’s not even a response to UE4. I just hope that UT realizes that $200+ subscription fee is pretty nuts.
I think Unity is worth more than UE4 in it’s curent state. Unity is a very mature platform for game releases that you can rely on to get you to the end with routes that have been well paved. UE4 is still beta, probably still needs at least another year, or two, for things to be as ironed out as Unity. But another year or two, and who knows where Unity will be? The race is on for sure. But I think there is enough room for both. It’ll be like C4D and Modo, or 3DS and Maya, different flavors for what resonates with you most. Unity has a particular style of workflow that some will prefer, UE4 others will prefer. This isn’t just a game of lowest prices. However I do hope UT gets some more sane subscription pricing because of this.
