> I'm sure they did. But I wager there is no such thing as "smooth development". Every engine has its quirks, every team has its odd dynamics and clashes. That

> I'm sure they did. But I wager there is no such thing as "smooth development". Every engine has its quirks, every team has its odd dynamics and clashes. That's not really what I wanted to convey. I'm not saying that their development process became spotless as a result of using Unity, but that these developers don't appear to be constrained by the engine in this extreme fashion like what the top commenter was suggesting - they successfully used it to make wildly different (and sometimes boundary-pushing) products. > You had to pay to remove the splashscreen, so that meant low effort titles would have "MADE WITH UNITY" front and center, where higher budget titles could remove the logo. Yeah, I agree with this. Almost all people have no idea what engine any given game runs on (if any), and professional developers will only put that in the credits, if at all. Admittedly, I can't think of any better ways of introducing some limitation for free users that wouldn't get overbearing - interfering with gameplay or other interactive stuff is probably a no-no, so a splash screen is one of the few viable options.