If you have a client who needs the kind of rendering you cannot do with flash right now, Adding $1500 to the bill for Unity should not be a problem considering the time/money involved in most 3D projects. If it is, either this client is to be avoided or the project is simply not realistic. Or both :))
Fabrice On Jul 30, 2010, at 6:01 PM, Darcey Lloyd wrote: > Unity being nice and all, I don't think I will ever get to use it because it > costs a fortune to develop for, something like $1500 for the web app, then > they have different versions of it each with features turned off to make more > money. Milking everything out of the developers they can. > > Slap on another $1500 for android version and another £1500 for the iPhone > version on the pro (full features) packages. > > This to me is a joke. I personally will leave it to a select market. > > Google are fully backing and pushing WebGL or something like that name, which > should push adobe to keep up or get left behind. They have droped O3D for now > and are going to make it JavaScript driven apparently. > > Hopefully adobe will put a lot more effort and resource into the upcoming > requirements on the flash player. Open GL ES has been on mobile phones for > years, it's time they caught up. I don't expect much from adobe though, sadly.
