They’re still scumbags though

  • BURN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    170
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Nothing they do at this point will bring any of the goodwill back. They already messed up and no amount of walking it back is going to change the perception that they might just do it again at any moment

    • nothingcorporate@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      1,000%

      I’m a year into developing my first game though and this means I don’t have to abandon all the progress I’ve made. After I publish this game, all bets are off as to where I go…or should I say where I godot.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Have you explored what level of effort it would take for you to convert it to use another engine? There are a TON of tools people are making to assist with porting projects from Unity to any number of other engines. Sure, the tools won’t do 100% of the work, but by what I’ve been hearing, they take a HUGE amount of the tedium out of the process.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      And pointedly, there was no mention of acknowledgement whatsoever of their sneaky license modifications from months ago that a bunch of people discovered after the fact.

      Unity’s execs and board do not fucking care. Their opinions have not been changed. They will certainly try something just as scummy at some point in the future. It’s only a matter of time.

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      They don’t need good will, unfortunately. They just need devs to not abandon it for Unreal or some other engine, and the cost/benefits calculation on that is going to be made by short sighted people on a project-by-project basis.

      • dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        10 months ago

        Which is exactly why anyone in a position to do so should still drop Unity like a hot potato, sunk cost or not. We can’t condone this kind of behavior.

      • nous@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        the engine costs several hundred million dollars to maintain

        I just don’t understand this. Godot is fairly comparable in scope and while it is behind Unity somewhat it also has a tiny fraction of the budget. Sometimes just throwing more money at a product does not make it any better any faster.

  • PlexSheep@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    10 months ago

    Sub 1 million is not going back, they are just reducing the scope. Unity is dead

    • Danc4498@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Exactly. Somebody needs to explain to them what “backtrack” means…

    • jballs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Is it even reducing the scope? I swore they had some language about only taking a cut after the first $1 million before. Something like "if you sell $1,000,001 then our cut would only be 5¢”

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    10 months ago

    Don’t trust it. Even if it was a dry run, the only way to prevent this happening in the future is to abandon the platform completely. Fuck these people.

  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    So future versions of the engine will still have these awful price changes? Why would anyone start using them then? Seems like if you have a choice, it’s time to learn a different engine anyway

    • hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      If they had just made it a 2.5% revenue share for the high-revenue games in the first place, I doubt even many game news outlets would’ve covered it, let alone “real” news. Now, after the massive dustup and pissing off all their customers, falling back to that may be a bit more difficult.

  • backgroundcow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.

    A few things:

    • Unity is still bleeding money. They have a product that could be the basis for a reasonably profitable company, but spening billions on a microtransaction company means it is not sufficient for their current leadership. It doesn’t seem wise to build your bussniess on the product of a company whose bussniess plan you fundamentally disagree with.

    • It would be the best for the long term health of bussniess-to-bussnies services if we as a community manages to send the message that it doesn’t matter what any contract says - just trying to introduce retroactive fees is unforgivable and a death sentence to the company that tries it.

    • Ænima@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      You had me going until the first blunder of the old saying. Oh GWB², your antics paled in comparison to today’s Trainwreckublicans.

      • uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        George W. Bush is still the torture president, the surveillance state president, the police state president, the war on terror president and the war profiteering president.

        Oh and the signing statements president.

        Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize in his first year just for the act of Not Being Bush.

        • randon31415@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Not to bash Obama, but how many of those things did Obama stop doing? GIMO is still open, five eyes was started under him, and Biden was the one that pulled troops from Afghanistan.

  • eee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    10 months ago

    “We’re sorryu it didn’t work this time, we’ll work harder to make sure that the next time we try again, we’ll do so in a more insidious way that boils the frog slower”

  • simple@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    10 months ago

    It still doesn’t return the broken trust or conformation that the people running Unity are insane, but this is a good move and devs don’t need to alarmingly port their current projects to other engines.

    I want to start with this: I am sorry.

    Translation: damn, we really didn’t get away with this.

    The Runtime Fee policy will only apply beginning with the next LTS version of Unity shipping in 2024 and beyond.

    We will make sure that you can stay on the terms applicable for the version of Unity editor you are using

    Good. This is how it should’ve been from the start. If they bake that into the license I think people will be comfortable staying on Unity for the time being.

    For games that are subject to the runtime fee, we are giving you a choice of either a 2.5% revenue share or the calculated amount based on the number of new people engaging with your game each month. Both of these numbers are self-reported from data you already have available. You will always be billed the lesser amount.

    Also good. It should’ve been revshare from the start. I still don’t understand how they would trust self-reported numbers but we’ll see.

    These are good changes. The damage isn’t undone but at least current Unity devs won’t be thrown under the bus. I still think they should switch to something open source in the future but they get a lot more time to decide now.

    • Terrasque@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yep, this is good as in won’t rail someone already developing or have developed something on Unity, but it has a lot of “and I would have gotten away with it if it wasn’t for you meddlesome kids!” energy to it.

    • ripcord@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      I still don’t understand how they would trust self-reported numbers but we’ll see.

      Because this was primarily about mobile. And because they can sanity check by looking at home many “installs” are reported by Apple and Google. I’m convinced that’s half the reason why they did the weird move of basing this on installs and not purchases (the other half or so being that they needed some way they can get more money from the bajillion free-to-play mobile games out there that Unity dominates)

      And they can sanity check SOME numbers being reported by Steam/Sony/etc though console and PC matter less to them.

      Also - how are they currently getting metrics for game revenue that they’d bill off of? Seems like a lot of self-reporting would be happening there too? And enforced with contracts, etc.

    • FunctionFn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I still don’t understand how they would trust self-reported numbers but we’ll see.

      This is just how this stuff works. Unity already operates with some self-reporting reliance (although afaik they don’t even require a report on the personal license), since the different tiers have a maximum revenue cap before you must upgrade. Software audits are a thing, and trying to skirt them by lying on your numbers is an easy way to get fined or sued.

  • xkforce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    This is what they wanted to do from the beginning. They just boundary tested to see how far people would let them take this.

    This is still a step backward, its just a step backward fewer people are going to push back on. But the issue is that if it is allowed, theyll slowly introduce more download tracking over time.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      I do think that’s just standard practice these days with “bad press” moves, but I don’t think this is what Unity wanted. They never expected to have to move it as far back as they have, nor did they expect the loss in trust, which was really stupid of them, frankly. They really thought their dominance in the industry was enough that clients essentially wouldn’t have a choice other than the shit options dictated by Unity and only Unity.

      But not only was that dominance proven extremely fragile (and now heavily fractured), they just put themselves in the very precarious position of having to entice back clients after essentially hitting them in the face and daring them to go somewhere else. Any smart person/company isn’t going to willingly leave themselves reliant on Unity ever again.

      • Clasm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        This also could be their original goal, but they tried to pull the “throw it at the wall and see what sticks” and then dialed it back to try and make it not seem as bad.

        Like when the justice system adds on a bunch of superfluous charges in order to make their primary ones stick.

        • Ech@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I guarantee their original goal didn’t include “and now only stupid clients will work with us”, which is my point.

          • Clasm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yeah, those corporate types usually can’t see past their next quarterly earnings report.

            The fact remains that this playbook failed rather drastically, earlier this year even, with the D&D Franchise making similar headlines, and it wasn’t even enough to give them pause.

    • ripcord@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I really doubt it. This seems like a pretty typical corporate leadership fuckup and walk back. I’ve seen it enough from the inside to know the real source is management just being greedy and stupid, not some devious multilayered plan.

  • TheBananaKing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    An apology, to people like this, is just the thing that lets you get what you want, despite doing what you want.

    That’s all it is. Just an annoying little ritual they have to do for some reason.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    Lol, imagine grabbing your customer’s head, blasting a massive fart in their face, and then trying to say, “Just kidding! Just kidding!” when they get pissed off and leave.

    Unity can get fugged.