[unsignedqword]

This really doesn't tell me anything about Unity, especially in respect to other solutions.

- Unity is only for games

Who said they were? You can find lots of examples of game engines being used for other applications, such as in Archviz, non-game simulation areas, interactive art, etc.

- You can only do small games with Unity

Again, who said this? If an engine is free and well supported you might find a lot of smaller games on it, but that's not indicative of the engine as a whole. If you're planning on making a large game, the question you'd be asking is not whether you can make a larger game in Unity, but whether it's appropriate for your larger game in particular.

- Unity is worse than Unreal Engine

Now that's a opinion if I've ever heard of one. Also, you don't need to use C++ to use Unreal. UE4 natively supports Blueprint scripting out of the box (I wouldn't recommend making a game completely in a visual programming language to begin with, anyway). Support for interacting with Unreal through other languages (JavaScript, Nim, etc.) has shown significant progress in the community.

- You don’t need programming knowledge to use Unity

Many of the popular free engines nowadays have some form of visual programming feature. You'd be severely hurting yourself trying to accomplish a bigger problem using visual languages only, however.

- All Unity games looks the same

Some gamers enormously conflate a game's art with its engine, which is completely wrong. Bad art will look bad in any environment - any developer would know that.

- Unity has a lot of bugs

That's an incredibly vague statement that you can apply to just about any large software project, not even just game engines.