Picture taken from their Twitter

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1652 years ago

    We have never made a public statement before now. That is how badly you fucked up.

    Lmao shots fired. Unity’s C-suite made their own bed… and the bed is made out of anti-personnel mines. I genuinely hope this picks up steam.

    Unity showed their hand when they made the announcement. I had never thought to look up who owned them before. Now that I am aware that they’re majority-owned by VC and PE firms, it’s pretty clear to me that this category of monetization-oriented behavior is here to stay, because that’s how VC and PE operate. Unless and until they somehow get a new owner, it’s my sincere opinion that Unity should absolutely not be seriously considered as a game engine for any new game project.

    • Sippy Cup
      link
      fedilink
      English
      382 years ago

      If there’s a penny in your hand, it’s a penny they need. Leave not one cent to be saved, not a morsel for tomorrow, because the people who control the money, want to own it all too.

      There’s a subscription for every need, for every hobby, for ever facet of reality. No matter what you do you can give one of these firms between 30 and 300 dollars a month to send you a box of crap you don’t need.

      There is no aspect of your life that is not fully monetized, and if there is, they’re coming for it. A stroll through the park? Buy water from a fountain that used to be free. An old game with friends you love? Why not buy the expansion, play online only a small fee to have the latest updates and play with anyone! They’ll find any avenue to sell to you and completely miss the point of what it is you’re looking for, in the quest to fill that need at the highest price you’ll pay.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        122 years ago

        This. We’re only just now feeling the sting more keenly in a number of ways because companies are desperate to stay the course with increased profits year over year despite there being a massive global economic slump.

        The 2010’s were full of venture capital pumping money into companies, and when we asked, “How is this business profitable,” they’d respond “Just trust us, bro.” Well, now the well has dried up, the venture capitalists are here to collect, and we all get to be surprisedpikachuface.jpg watching this trainwreck unfold in slow motion.

    • Turun
      link
      fedilink
      English
      412 years ago

      I read rust as the programming language for way too long reading that article, lmao.

      • EtzBetz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        82 years ago

        Ohhhh me too, right until “Rust 2 won’t be a Unity game”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      I’m buying rust and a few other games that I am probably not going to have time to play in order to support these companies.

      Fuck unity! Unite!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    262 years ago

    Haven’t Hearthstone been made in Unity? Are we to believe Blizzard will be OK with this?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      502 years ago

      Looks like you’re right! Blizzard definitely isn’t okay with it. But I would expect them to get a sweetheart deal behind the scenes

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        162 years ago

        I’m willing to bet this won’t affect the AAA companies - they almost certainly have exclusive licencing deals already.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    732 years ago

    Yeah fuck Unity, I’d love to see devs abandon them altogether whether they revert the changes or not.

  • rockerface 🇺🇦
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3422 years ago

    I love that last line.

    “We have never made a public statement before. This is how badly you fucked up.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      It must have felt good to say but I suspect they’d have better chance of seeing positive results if they avoided confronting the Unity team’s egos.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        132 years ago

        The only way Unity can realistically fix it at this point is to pull a WotC and not just backtrack all these changes, but implement a legal mechanism that guarantees changes like this cannot ever be retroactively applied to past versions of the engine.

        I don’t think Unity will do that.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4592 years ago

    They should honestly just move their engine anyway. Unity has played their hand, and showed they are willing to make changes to their pricing retroactively.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      162 years ago

      Exactly. They should take this as the warning it is, and start work on moving to an engine not run by morons.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        152 years ago

        I have a feeling a lot of the engine devs from unity are seeing the writing on the wall and looking for places to jump to. Betting they have a brain drain soon

    • JJROKCZ
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1282 years ago

      Yep, they might roll back the changes this time but they’ve shown where they want to be and now we know. They’ll work their way slowly towards it instead of a sudden change now and it will be less noticeable and harder to fight legally when they do that

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        682 years ago

        I think most developers can see the writing in the wall there, but switching mid-way through a project will be costly and time consuming. If the changes were fully rolled back, I would still bet many would finish what they working on and then switch for their next game.

        • JJROKCZ
          link
          fedilink
          English
          362 years ago

          Problem is that if your current unity game is successful this year, and then they reimplement the retroactive charge next year, you’re still screwed. If you can afford it then it’s best to change now in order to avoid that mess that might mean you have to delist your game

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            332 years ago

            I’m not sure it’s legal to implement it retroactively. I’d be very curious to get an attorney’s perspective - seems a lot like trying to unilaterally change a contract after both parties have signed. But I have a hard time imagining anyone being willing to develop using Unity going forward.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              142 years ago

              There’s no way this is legal unless it’s already in a contract – and even then, it might still be illegal. The notion of charging people more money because you’ve raised your prices after they’ve already bought something just breaks economics completely. You’d be able to sell a bunch of a product for cheap, and then later say sike and charge everyone a lot more.

              I’m sure companies would love to do that, but no company exists in isolation. Every single company is buying something from another company to sell their product. If they could do this to their buyers, then their suppliers could do it to them. It would probably end up cancelling any gains you’d get.

              I’m guessing this was a move their executives made without any consultation with legal, because it’s the kind of idiotic move only they could think of.

            • JJROKCZ
              link
              fedilink
              English
              112 years ago

              I feel like any company with a legal department would surely check with them before announcing something like this. But maybe unity is so poorly ran they don’t have a legal team or didn’t check idk

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                192 years ago

                I think you overestimate how much they care about doing illegal things. They will try it, and if someone can prove it’s illegal, they’ll pay a minor fine and stop, maybe. Otherwise they’ll get away with it. That’s how corps look at laws.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                62 years ago

                I mean you’d think so, but look at how often companies get into lawsuits for clearly illegal shit. Plenty of places will still try to enforce arbitration/NDA clauses that have no actual legal basis or consequence.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 years ago

                I would think so too but this entire decision has felt like the company is shooting itself in the foot, so who even knows anymore.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1192 years ago

        They’re cranking the bad PR to 11 so they can dial it back to 9 and point to it as a compromise.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1002 years ago

      I bet they will do so for their next game but reimplementing a entire game is FAR easier said than done, something like that could very well bankrupt a smaller studio!

      • dog
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I mean it’s easy to reimplement entire games if you’ve built it modularly. Just swap your core game logic to run on another library and the game works the same it did before.

        Edit: 'course, exceptions exist like if you wrote everything using their proprietary coding language, instead of using something universal.

        Edit 2: It MAY still be possible that a translation/compiler exists that’ll run as a plugin in a proprietary engine, and converts it into something universal.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          252 years ago

          Game Dev isnt just code. Remaking a project from scratch is a massive undertaking. Porting the code could be difficult too especially if relying on core unity libraries.

          • dog
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Not downplaying the effort, it still takes time. But not impossible.

            How you made it all matters in situations like this.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          102 years ago

          The surface area is huge. This is not an SQL database where you can just change the ORM’s backend.

          • dog
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            Depends how it’s built.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              122 years ago

              If you don’t use anything from the engine itself, implement everything from scratch, only using the engine as an entry point that launches your own code, and pay unity two thousand dollars per year per seat for that privilege - I guess porting should be fairly easy.

              • dog
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                If you ask me engines should be free for most indies (UE, Godot?), because they’re not making millions. But yeah. I get it’s not feasible for most new devs especially, and senior devs have better things to focus on.

                It’s more a code principle you’d stand behind.

        • @[email protected]
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          222 years ago

          Technically you’re not wrong. The work is done, the logic already exists.

          But systems like Unity aren’t like other code where you can rip one section out and still have 80% of a working codebase. Game engines are as fundamental to most of their game code as the language it’s written in. It’s not like you can just drop things into unreal or godot, connect a few interfaces and call it good. You still have to write the whole thing from the ground up.

          • dog
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            As I said, it depends on how it’s built. And how proprietqry the engine is.

            Unity from what I know supports universal code/mesh/texture formats, but if the devs opted for the “easier to use” proprietary systems- well, that’s a problem.

            Now what I don’t know is how easy are scenes to export in Unity. They’re probably built with Blender or something else though in most cases, unless Unity has drastically changed.

            • @[email protected]
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              162 years ago

              Assets are safe, but they often need to be re-rigged or re-formatted. It’s still a non-trivial task though. Levels will need to be rebuilt, open worlds have to be started almost from scratch, and a lot of other things I can’t think of off the top of my head.

              The real problem is underlying systems. Unity often handles networking, render engines, game logic and most other things. The reason Unity was so popular was because it was easy to use (and free). Game code will need to be at minimum heavily refactored, if not rewritten, as anything that interfaces with the engine needs to be changed over. Just like you can’t just port c++ -> c# without major changes, you can’t port a game engine without major changes too.

              Unless theyve built everything as a separate code bundle, only interacting with the engine at a bare minimum, there’s no way to change with minor impact. It’ll be a huge project that will also require the engineers to learn a new stack that behaves differently, further slowing down the process.

        • Natanael
          link
          fedilink
          English
          102 years ago

          It also depends on how many engine unique features you used, and what optimizations you applied. It’s certainly possible, but doing it without changing any game logic will require very complicated translation layers which will likely cause performance issues. It might very well be easier to treat it as a porting and refactoring project. You might not even realize which behaviors are unique to each engine if you don’t regularly develop in multiple engines.

          • dog
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            This is true, and I vouch for gamedevs to first test other engines to see the differences.

            Calculating for the future is extremely important in pretty much everything.

            Also I wouldn’t say there would be performance issues, unless you somehow completely screw up coding and compiling said code.

            Projects should work on top of a bottom layer, or translation layer as it’s sometimes called; game logic calls for functions from there, instead of directly from the engine. This is also important for code security.

            _move_entity might be calling the proprietary unity_move_object with a different reg stack, but when compiled the performance should be +/- 0.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              52 years ago

              The things you are suggesting are adding complexity and therefore cost.

              It does take a higher level of expertise to adequately abstract away engine specific limitations and requirements.

              It’s again an even higher level of expertise and therefore expenditure to account for performance issues with these abstractions.

              • dog
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                Not untrue, but it helps to adapt your future projects if done in such a way.

                It does require more expertise, and it takes more time, thus it’d have to be the first thing done for the project, not something you do after everything’s done already.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          19
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          I’ve written game engine wrappers and converters for all sorts of code and file types.

          It would honestly be easier to fire up Unreal Engine 5 or Godot and start again.

          • dog
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            Well I’d say that was true 5 years ago. Is it still? I’d not be so sure.

            Small projects might as well start from scratch.

            But projects with years of devtime are best ported.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          82 years ago

          Not moving is what they’ll do if “changes are completely reverted and TOS protections are put in place”. In such a case, while punishing Unity is still desirable, there won’t be installation fees that justify the costs of rewriting the game.

  • dinckel
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1382 years ago

    Even if they do revert it, the trust has been lost. They’ve made mistakes before, but none as stupid as this one

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      502 years ago

      It’s a matter of self-preservation to get away from Unity as soon as possible at this point.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        Yeah, you should diversify your skills as a dev because soon the market for Unity devs might become noticeably worse. As a company, if you can afford it it might be worthwhile investing some money into Godot

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    852 years ago

    Just the latest in a wave of companies that seem to be looking for ever-more scummy ways to take advantage of their customers in search of the Holy Dollar.

    This is hardly a comprehensive list, there’s so many recently, but this is just what I could remember off the top of my head:

    • Wizards of the Coast
    • Adobe
    • X-Rite/Pantone/Danaher
    • Monotype
    • BMW
    • Netflix
    • Reddit
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago
      • Wizards of the Coast

      The OGL stuff and the Pinkerton incident, right?

      • Adobe

      They’ve been pretty shitty for a while now. What have they done recently? (I don’t use any of their stuff.)

      • X-Rite/Pantone/Danaher

      Don’t even know who these guys are.

      • Monotype

      Something font-related?

      • BMW

      This is the heated seat subscription, right? Anything else I’m not aware of?

      • Netflix

      Account sharing?

      • Reddit

      No explanation needed there.

      • brianorca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        162 years ago

        Pantone suddenly decided to assert copyright and licensing to the literal names of colors in a way the broke art files going back decades.

    • morriscox
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Evernote. Mentioning adding AI is code for incoming price hikes and limitations.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      Add sony to that list for the recent ps plus price hike and google for their new invasive ad tracking feature in chrome and their youtube ad changes.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      362 years ago

      Add Google/YouTube to that list as well! Google is enshittifying both Chrome and YouTube to prevent ad blocking.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      342 years ago
      1. It’s a significant effort to change engines
      2. Even though it’s just one dev, they’re giving Unity a reason to revert. If you just say “Yo, I’m OUT!” then they’ve already lost you and they have no reason to revert on your behalf.
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1492 years ago

      Because changing the engine in an existing project is a huge pita that requires many, many hours and possibly in some cases a full rewrite.

      This also applies to games that would be released in 2023 or 2024.

      Nobody should be considering Unity for a new project, but it’s understandable to make either decision for many existing projects.

      Ripping out the engine of your game isn’t a trivial thing.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        542 years ago

        Many many hours is a massive understatement.

        Thousands and thousands of hours is more appropriate

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          42 years ago

          I don’t know how you could change the engine without rewriting the entire thing basically from scratch.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            It really depends on how modular their codebase is. The Doom 1/2 modern ports they did in 2019 use Unity. But it’s actually still the original Doom underneath and just using Unity for input and output to make porting easier

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 years ago

        I agree, although a lot of the work going into a game is the game design, art, and iteration, and not just the programming and rigging. And it may actually be a catalyst to rewrite parts better

        • my_hat_stinks
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Strongly disagree. While a lot of work does go on to art assets which should be simpler to migrate, the code is absolutely what makes the game. There are tons of very successful games with low quality or stock assets, there are very few popular games with broken code.

          Even then, it’s still a lot of effort to check every asset you’re using to ensure they work as expected in your new engine.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          I agree for a specific scenario: if you don’t use many unity specific packages or assets. Then, perhaps you are correct, still I don’t blame anyone staying even in that case, as it is still daunting to take on such a task.

    • Alimentar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Cause it’s probably not worth it for them to migrate and learn/train on a new engine unless Unity goes forward with their plans.

      But you’re right, this completely destroyed Unity’s reputation. Even if they revert, who’s to say they won’t try something like this in the future.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        This is the classic tactic of doing something just to see if people will accept it. Even if they backtrack, they absolutely WILL do shit like this again. It’s just like EA and micro transactions