Hi everyone!
I would like to know your opinion!
I have submitted a pack for sale called Classic Shooter Weapons pack and provided this link:
This is the reply I got:
Hello, I just took a look at your models and I don’t think the quality is high enough for the Market. I think the textures could be improved upon. It’s really close to being Market ready, I just think they need a little more work.
The model you linked is over a year old, we continue to raise our standards and if that model was submitted today it wouldn’t get on the Market. Your right yours is better than that model, however, I still stand by my current review.
I also provided description that can be viewed here:
In short: all models are rigged, chain animated with keyshapes, 6 barrels rotate, 4k textures sets for Unity, UE4, Blender
Brrowsing through the market I found only 4 modern weapons present:
That’s it, that’s all they got for sale.
I’m writing this not only as a rejected seller but as a customer as well, as I will be considering such models for purchase in the near future for my project.
They are refining the quality standard over time. That’s the way it should be in my opinion. It is even better, since they are raising their standards.
On the continually raising standards. I do get that they don’t want the market flooded with mediocre products and/or hastily made items designed as a way to make a quick buck, but raising them too high could actually lock out everyone but CG professionals (and reduce the variety of items that can be purchased, as many will not go out of their way to make models they themselves may not use).
Maybe they could have a committee of everyday artists who would help the staff choose which products can be useful for people, or maybe the prospective products can get an automatic rejection if the average user review score goes below a certain number with X number of people. My opinion anyway.
I feel like the low end of the 3d model market is really struggling to find a foothold. The line between someone who is willing to pay anything and the vast sea of users looking for free models is pretty clearly defined. if someone is going to be spending money for a model, they are either a hobbyist with some spare cash, or a professional whose time is worth more than the time it would take to create these assets themself.
Professionals need to deliver a professional product, and including entry level modeling in their final product doesn’t reflect well on them. the reason you see $100 plus models on turbosquid and the other marketplaces is because professionals are willing to pay that much to get a product that doesn’t make them look like a noob. Look at the math:
Let’s assume a professional CG artist is making $20 an hour. And modeling and texturing a decent gun probably takes 4 hours, if you are really fast. so one gun costs at least $80 in professional labor. if you cut that in half to sweeten the deal over that artist doing it themself, it’s $40 a gun (you see a lot of guns on TS for around this price). so a pack of 7 guns could theoretically sell for $280, lets call it $250 for good marketing. If I needed to model 7 guns and my boss knew it would cost him $560, and lose a week of my time, that $250 looks like a sweet deal, if and only if the product is professional quality.
No disrespect to the OP, but those guns do need work if you are going to try to sell them. And the people running the marketplace have a responsibility to keep the quality up in order to attract professionals.
The good news is, if you put the time and effort in to create a quality product, you don’t need to try to under-bid everyone. You can sell stuff for a decent price, and get more sales. I have purchased models professionally, and I really don’t even consider anything under $20 unless it is really high quality. Keep your head up, it sucks getting some negative feedback sometimes, but use that as fuel to increase your skills. Prove the haters wrong by really besting your previous best effort.
The models indeed don’t look that good… They kind of look like in games some years ago.
Also, remember, having 4k texture is actually a harm here - because if you use highres textures, you should use their space to maximum detail. These kind of look like the resolution is 1024 max. and, the normalmaps/ specularity (or roughness) channels just don’t show up at sketchfab reallistically.
Please, take this as constructive feedback, and motivation to improve. Doing 3d really well is a long way.
Hm, tris to quads might remove a lot triangles, here; and without those at some point you might add some faces to make it more smooth at other places. you might even bake textures and displacements maps from this; to reduce the mesh count.
Maybe it was banned because they where not sure it was orginal art, (as for the high triangle face count it could have been a result of some other model conversion), from what i know game developers can get into problems if its not original art, recently some game devs had to pull back their releases maybe that could be a reason, but i’m not sure i’m not into gaming at all.
I would take the advice to heart, there’s a lot of room for improvement here and the fact that there’s worse stuff being offered isn’t a good argument.
The shading relies entirely on vertices, which makes those assets look like they’re from the early 2000s (“washed out” smooth normals). If you go down that route, Blender will give you a hard time for lack of normal editing tools (though addons may help). The models aren’t optimized for realtime rendering either, you just left them the way you modeled them.
If instead you went for a highpoly normal-map transfer workflow, you could get much better shading with less triangles. I believe that’s what is expected out of pretty much all game assets these days.
Secondly, while the models look okay at a distance in Sketchfab, some of your renders are lazy and just plain bad. You’re better off with having a few pictures showing your model in the best way possible, rather than just a lot of pictures.
Yeah I just get rejected too…they say i still need working on my skill,they don’t see my product was market ready,i don’t know what are tehy quality standart nowadays,but i need you guys opinion,is my model look that terrible
CheckMate 3D models meet the industry’s only technical modeling quality standard, ensuring a 3D model meets or exceeds professional production needs, regardless of industry.
As a customer, we know that you’re under huge pressure to deliver, so you shouldn’t have to worry about the quality of the models you buy from TurboSquid. CheckMate certification provides quality and compatibility and was developed with leading 3D companies around the globe. It is managed in concert with our CheckMate Advisory Board.
You can also go share on Blendswap, sell on Unity & Unreal store, CGTrader, 3Docean/3Dsky, Renderosity, 3Dexport… sooo many many much more…
So what’s holding you back, really keeping you from selling… or just not wanting to become better/worthy modeler?!?
You should know & be aware, market dictates the tempo…
Those models actually look quite good, just the box wooden parts really need just a little of bevel and maybe something to make the material look more realistic…
I am buying 3d assets on a regular basis and I am going to be brutally honest, such that you can see how I am analyzing the assets before I buy them. If you are not interested in this critique, please ignore my comments.
The first impression is not too bad. Overall it looks good, but there are several details that seem off to me. The modeling looks good. It is at least far better than the materials.
As mentioned, the wood of the box does not look realistic. The same is true for the fabric material, especially in combination with the stripes which seem to have a perfect color with the bumpiness of the fabric. The “cross symbol” seems to be a perfectly dark black diffuse which feels wrong to me.
The details on the gun’s painting feel off to me. Of course, the handle is touched most often, but the way the painting is stressed seems still kind of random to me. E.g. every hard edge seems to have the painting removed, even around the trigger area where it does not make too much sense in my opinion. When the gun is in the box, there are reflections from the stipes which look extremely artificial. Maybe that effect is not anymore present when the stipes have a better material, but this totally ruins it.
The material of the knife’s blade feels off too. I guess it is used for the scabbard as well where it fits better in my opinion, but could still be improved. The black material on the handle looks very artificial too, which might be cause by the lighting of the scene.
Regarding the materials, I am skeptical that I could just swap out the current lighting and replace it with something else and it would still look good. I am not even sure whether the principled shader is used. At least it is not used appropriately throughout. When I buy something like this, I want to be able to use any HDRI and it has to look realistic without any adjustments from my side.
TBH I think user reviews based on purchase should be the ONLY deciding factor on quality…that is after a user has purchased, they can then give it a rating…
after this people should be able to filter results based on ratings as well…I do not like the idea of people overseeing digital content(or elitism), aside from it meeting some packing guidelines and maybe max file sizes based on your seller rating…
…admittedly I only read the first few lines of the first post…I hopefully got the gist of it before posting…if I just sound like an idiot…just move on past this post.
As someone who purchases 3d assets on a regular basis, I prefer quality control a lot and I even argue that sales can be increased because of that. It is really hard to judge the quality just based on screenshots and the standard information. It is not unusual that there are assets with very few or no ratings or even worse without reviews.
If I know that the assets went through a thorough review process, I am also going to purchase assets that don’t have reviews or ratings and I also trust in assets without an optimal rating. Just because of that, I am spending more money. On top of that, I am far less likely to be pissed of that I have purchased something with shiny screenshots which turns out to be totally useless. Whenever I went through such an experience, I was held back on my follow up purchases and was overall very skeptic.
In my opinion, there is not only an advantage for customers, but also for the creators. Creators without a lot of experience can be comfortable, because they know to have met the required quality standard, which in turn means they won’t have to deal with grumpy customers for whom the asset is not usable or good enough. I argue that if the customers feel more comfortable, that they are going to be more likely to spend more money. The creators certainly benefit a lot from that.
4/10, would not buy.
Textures/shaders are the worst offender, they look like you spent 10 minutes each. You presentation is shoddy. The colors are ugly, the damage/wear and tear looks like you randomly slapped scratches everywhere. Models aren’t that bad, but the textures pull them down. Overall it doesn’t make a very professional impression.
Sorry. Sounds harsh, but i don’t think it helps if people are nice at the cost of proper critic.
The double-barrel shotgun looks half-decent, definitely the best piece in the collection.
Swallow your pride and work hard on it, it doesn’t make sense to compare your stuff with even lesser quality work, you should compare it to the best models you see.
