Wow! Amazing!
I like how you keep scoring these own goals by yourself.
“You trying to compare apples to oranges”
Exactly Sherlock!! Exactly! That was my VERY point in my last reply. Who started comparing plugins/assets to games? me or you?
Wasn’t I just merely showing how flawed your comparison is? And somehow I’m the one comparing apples to oranges??
Moving on…
Here you go on again talking about the Unity license…
Same thing… I’m not even going to respond to this one cause it seems you can CLEARLY see when someone is going off-topic. Seriously why are you going on about Unity as if we are arguing about Epic changing it’s engine’s license? Stick to the topic and as you said , stop comparing apples to oranges.
“You are the childish one here.”
Really? I’m the one who resorts to calling opposing views nonsense when I don’t have a better argument and just blatantly dismiss valid points without even addressing them?
The reason you can not focus on the topic and beat about the bush is this ,
You can not dispute the fact that it’s very unfair to expect sellers to provide lifetime updates without any recurring revenue when most plugins/assets go for around $20. You just can’t justify that. It’s exploitative at best.
Besides… Why are you trying to force the seller’s hand?
Let sellers choose if they want to implement charges for updates/ or just give them for free.
LET the market decide.
Sellers who don’t mind doing it for free, will do just that, do them for free
Those who want to implement a subscription model can just tick a box. You’ll be clearly notified as the buyer before you buy if the seller charges for updates.
If a buyer like you minds, they can go buy elsewhere. And that’s fine. We are not forcing you , and you are not forcing us.
The laws of supply and demand will settle it.
If you want to keep things civil between discussions, you better learn not to throw the word nonsense around, and reply in a civil manner. And other people will keep it civil with you. Or else we’ll end up with what we have above.