Compare Helix Core and Plastic SCM 
- Users report that Helix Core excels in package management integration with a score of 8.6, making it a strong choice for enterprises that require robust integration capabilities. In contrast, Plastic SCM, while user-friendly, does not emphasize this feature as strongly.
- Reviewers mention that Helix Core's package access control is rated at 8.9, which is particularly beneficial for larger teams needing strict access management. Plastic SCM, while offering good access control, does not match this level of specificity and control.
- G2 users highlight that Helix Core's rollback functionality is rated at 9.0, allowing for seamless recovery from errors, which is crucial for teams working on complex projects. Plastic SCM also offers rollback features, but users feel that Helix Core's implementation is more reliable.
- Users on G2 report that Helix Core has a higher overall satisfaction in quality of support with a score of 8.8, indicating that users feel more supported when issues arise. Plastic SCM's support is rated at 8.5, which is still good but slightly less favorable.
- Reviewers mention that Helix Core has a better score in meeting requirements (8.4) compared to Plastic SCM (7.6), suggesting that Helix Core is more aligned with the needs of enterprise-level users, while Plastic SCM is more tailored for small businesses.
- Users say that while both products have similar star ratings (4.2), Helix Core's larger market segment focus on enterprise solutions (38.3%) indicates a more robust feature set for larger organizations compared to Plastic SCM's focus on small businesses (64.7%).
- Response < 24h
- Unity3D plugin
- Team Engine (Up to 15 users)
1) It's so easy to learn, even artists, writers, and other "less-technical" users can get it right away; 2) It's FAST; 3) It's a very, very strong product, best I've ever tried; 4) It scales really well. One depot can handle ALL of your needs; can handle...
Branching is lacking. Unlike Git, branching is very linear. This makes it difficult to identify the ancestry of a commit.
Plastic SCM makes it very easy for new users to become proficient. The menus are very intuitive and there are not too many of them. It gives you exactly what you need and not much more. We have rolled out to large 100 person teams at multiple sites with...
The interface of conflict resolution is not very intuitive, access to some properties, such as accessing the history of a file, is not always easy to find
1) It's so easy to learn, even artists, writers, and other "less-technical" users can get it right away; 2) It's FAST; 3) It's a very, very strong product, best I've ever tried; 4) It scales really well. One depot can handle ALL of your needs; can handle...
Plastic SCM makes it very easy for new users to become proficient. The menus are very intuitive and there are not too many of them. It gives you exactly what you need and not much more. We have rolled out to large 100 person teams at multiple sites with...
Branching is lacking. Unlike Git, branching is very linear. This makes it difficult to identify the ancestry of a commit.
The interface of conflict resolution is not very intuitive, access to some properties, such as accessing the history of a file, is not always easy to find
