Poll of the Day > Unity is going to start charging devs per install

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/megacrit/status/1702077576209207611

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9scVNFiaWU

DeltaBladeX posted...

https://twitter.com/megacrit/status/1702077576209207611

I'm inclined to guess that removing their ToS from Github is less a matter of recognizing that it's a violation of trust and more a matter of trying to cut down on the number of devs that realize Unity has no legal grounds for retroactive charges like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR6-u8OIJTE

adjl posted...

I'm inclined to guess that removing their ToS from Github is less a matter of recognizing that it's a violation of trust and more a matter of trying to cut down on the number of devs that realize Unity has no legal grounds for retroactive charges like this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/16hnibp/unity_silently_removed_their_github_repo_to_track/

> When you obtain a version of Unity, and dont upgrade your project, we think you should be able to stick to that version of the TOS.

They trusted there would be no changes because their old TOS said there wouldn't be. -_-

Lokarin posted...

samesies! and bomberman

Yellow posted...

Link?

Sulugnaz posted...

Thats The Legend of Zelda.

lmao

Godot is definitely better since adopting C#. If anyone has used GDScript you know it was very painful.

DeltaBladeX posted...

https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/16hnibp/unity_silently_removed_their_github_repo_to_track/

They trusted there would be no changes because their old TOS said there wouldn't be. -_-

Yeah, there's pretty much no chance the retroactive thing will hold up if existing uses of the engine did so under a ToS that explicitly said "your project will only be held to the ToS as it stands at the time that you produced it." That's a blatant breach of the licensing agreement. There's also pretty much no chance anyone's going to start developing with Unity after this, and a substantial chance that current Unity projects will be either moved to a new engine or abandoned, outside of a handful of cases where the developer can take the hit. This is almost certainly a matter of grabbing a golden parachute and dumping the company.

Surprised I haven't seen anything about leaks explaining why this decision was made. I've seen people suggest it's because unity can't compete with unreal... but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me because I felt like they had separate niches.

Yellow posted...

@grimhilde00 oh wow, it's actually a straight .NET class library and not a janky Mono implementation... this makes me so happy. I can right click on my project in Visual Studio and add nuget packages. I could maybe even use JsonConvert in a non-Frankenstein way. I can add project references. I can build and do unit tests straight from the editor. Holy shit.

You can't just slap a C# sticker on it and call it the same thing.

Also, the whole editor is just faster and less laggy overall than Unity.

yay join team Godot!

I've actually not bothered with their editor though, just use vscode, so can't speak there

and yeah I did c# Godot back when it was mono. I was able to use .NET packages (I use yaml instead of json for things, and there's a yaml serializer/deserializer I use, and I made a Godot plugin for loading yaml resources and being able to drag and drop them in the editor) but I remember there were some workarounds that were annoying

even besides that though, I had various ways of structuring code to get around a few things (how I was grabbing various exported nodes in code, making constants since they had a lot of strings being passed around for signals, stuff like that. the yaml resource stuff too just works now where I had issues with it before) and stuff that's been really improved with Godot 4 so I don't need to do that anymore. and how they're doing event handling now is nice. lots of nice c# improvements with the new version.

Devs stated they're removing Cult of the Lamb from all stores on January 1st

I don't understand, this new model doesn't even make Unity that much money, it's just terrible PR

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F58ZeiCXQAAMijv?format=png&name=medium

The only reason they'd choose this over 5% after $1m is if they're actually hoping to fraudulently take the fee after a user re-installs it 10+ times? Or is this just directly targeting Genshin Impact?

Lokarin posted...

Devs stated they're removing Cult of the Lamb from all stores on January 1st

That sucks.

Yellow posted...

I don't understand, this new model doesn't even make Unity that much money, it's just terrible PR

I mean this is the company with a CEO that had to backpedal after saying devs that don't prioritize monetization in the development of their games are fucking idiots.

I'll be curious how much they backpedal, because they've permanently fucked their reputation at this point regardless of what they do.

My brother switched to Godot for his game after the Unity CEO called devs who weren't focused on monetization "fucking morons"

Humble just released a "learn Godot" bundle. Not about to let this opportunity slip them by, I guess.

Yellow posted...

I don't understand, this new model doesn't even make Unity that much money, it's just terrible PR

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F58ZeiCXQAAMijv?format=png&name=medium

The only reason they'd choose this over 5% after $1m is if they're actually hoping to fraudulently take the fee after a user re-installs it 10+ times? Or is this just directly targeting Genshin Impact?

A very significant number of games never make more than a million dollars, and Unity is used for a substantial proportion of those due to its ease of use and the abundance of assets available to flip (or put legitimate effort into using). I'm guessing they're looking to capitalize on those (never mind the ways they already capitalize on those, such as the up-front license fee). Kind of a quantity over quality thing.

BlackScythe0 posted...

Surprised I haven't seen anything about leaks explaining why this decision was made. I've seen people suggest it's because unity can't compete with unreal... but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me because I felt like they had separate niches.

The problem is that corporations don't want to have separate niches. They want to have all the niches so they can make all the money.

https://www.polygon.com/23873727/unity-credible-death-threat-offices-closed-pricing-change

LinkPizza posted...

https://www.polygon.com/23873727/unity-credible-death-threat-offices-closed-pricing-change

Yo what the fuck, that's not the right response.

Yeah. Like I know that people arent liking what theyre doing. But death threats seem a bit far

I mean, I can kind of understand it. For studios that have been working exclusively in Unity for years and have multiple projects out in the world but haven't been successful enough to have enough assets to absorb a catastrophe, retroactively applying fees like this stands to bankrupt them and destroy their livelihoods and those of dozens of employees. That's a very big deal, to the point where it's actually kind of easy to sympathize with wanting those responsible for that ruination dead.

Of course, there's a world of difference between threatening a Unity office and random staff and threatening Riccitiello and other decision-making executives. The latter are the ones actually responsible for destroying lives. The former are also probably having their lives destroyed by this, given that I suspect the company's getting dumped after the executives take whatever bonuses they can out of it, and they have zero responsibility here.

LinkPizza posted...

https://www.polygon.com/23873727/unity-credible-death-threat-offices-closed-pricing-change

Why do people threaten to blow up employees when the CEO does something shitty

obligatory if someone is going to blow you up they won't tell you first

Yellow posted...

Why do people threaten to blow up employees when the CEO does something shitty

obligatory if someone is going to blow you up they won't tell you first

Because figuring out who they should really blame is too much like work. These are mostly people that probably saw a tweet about it and get angry. Brought to you by the same people that will threaten to murder someone's family over a videogame disagreement.

Yellow posted...

obligatory if someone is going to blow you up they won't tell you first

Depends on the context. In this case, the threat could be intended to coerce them into reverting the change. It won't, obviously, because the people with the power to make that call also have the power to hide themselves until the threat blows over, but it's not entirely inconceivable that a genuine threat could be telegraphed like that.

On a side note, I could 100% believe that the threat was staged to try and win the company sympathy points and diffuse the backlash.

Unity stock appears to be coming down at the moment. I'm hoping noon (Pacific) tomorrow will be a good time to cash in on my current position. >:3

adjl posted...

On a side note, I could 100% believe that the threat was staged to try and win the company sympathy points and diffuse the backlash.

How? People are perfectly capable of seeing when both sides are in the wrong.

Nichtcrawler-X posted...

How? People are perfectly capable of seeing when both sides are in the wrong.

But people in general are morons, and Internet outrage mongers generally only hold the last thing they remember in their brain at one time.

So the later "bad thing" displaces some of the outrage for the original "bad thing".

It's why so many companies these days rely on "Keep your head down and wait for the controversy to blow over" as their go-to response to any negative situation. Because they know someone else is going to screw up eventually, and when they do it'll pull most of the attention away from their screw up.

If you can stand your ground long enough and keep your mouth shut, you can get away with a lot more than you'd think.

adjl posted...

On a side note, I could 100% believe that the threat was staged to try and win the company sympathy points and diffuse the backlash.

I would also say that but that would be extremely illegal and they could very easily be caught for making terroristic threats to their employees, and also I don't think getting death threats necessarily makes you look good

Yellow posted...

I would also say that but that would be extremely illegal and they could very easily be caught for making terroristic threats to their employees, and also I don't think getting death threats necessarily makes you look good

Because, as we all know, companies are always above board, and nothing illegal, dangerous, or shady ever occurs, right?

Entity13 posted...

Because, as we all know, companies are always above board, and nothing illegal, dangerous, or shady ever occurs, right?

That's a conspiracy that involves a bomb threat against thousands of their own employees lives, the FBI will get involved and would not let them get away with that.

It was an employee who made the threat.

https://twitter.com/sweetpotatoes/status/1702468790829629900

That just gives me even more reason to believe that they're intentionally tanking the company, if their own employees are distraught enough about the fallout to threaten the company.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/8/6/AAZslrAAE19S.jpg

This somehow gets even uglier every moment. That's pretty impressive.

following the Elon Musk model, intentionally tank your only source of income

Judgmenl posted...

It's completely legal. No reason why you cannot charge per-install for the use of your software assuming the software licensing agreement includes this in it at time of purchase or the software licensing agreement is updated and the customer agrees to the updated agreement.

So, Mr. Professional Lawyer.
Thought I'd share some new revelations w/ you! Not only did the executives dump a ton of shares before making this announcement in a blatant example of insider trading, but also....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBXdRNTYlYQ

They also sneakily changed their EULA a few months ago to remove language that would specifically protect those who had already paid for a license from being subjected to this!
AND they're engaging in monopoly tactics (honestly, borderline mob tactics, "nice store you got here, be a shame if anything were to happen to it...") where they'll graciously waive these runtime fees if you use LevelPlay (which they acquired) instead of their competitors, like AppLovin.

End of video has a statement by a UK law firm of all the EU laws they're clearly breaking just upon a cursory glance.

Lokarin posted...

following the Elon Musk model, intentionally tank your only source of income

Elon at least has other companies. Honestly I'm surprised there hasn't been a shareholder revolt at this point. Only a small percentage of stock is held by company insiders, the bulk is owned by financial institutions and I'm surprised they are still putting up with this shit show.

rjsilverthorn posted...

Elon at least has other companies. Honestly I'm surprised there hasn't been a shareholder revolt at this point. Only a small percentage of stock is held by company insiders, the bulk is owned by financial institutions and I'm surprised they are still putting up with this shit show.

Elon inflated Tesla >50 times by creating a cult following, that's why

If you thought Twitter was entertaining, just wait until Tesla corrects.

LinkPizza posted...

https://www.polygon.com/23873727/unity-credible-death-threat-offices-closed-pricing-change

I bet they made it up.

they didn't make it up, but it was actually employees that called them in

actually read the update in the article

Update: San Francisco police told Polygon that officers responded to Unitys San Francisco office regarding a threats incident. A reporting party told police that an employee made a threat towards his employer using social media. The employee that made the threat works in an office outside of California, according to the police statement.
Heres the full statement provided by San Francisco public information officer Kathryn Winters:
On September 14, 2023, at approximately 0930am, San Francisco Police Officers assigned to Central Station responded to the unit block of 3rd Street regarding a threats incident.
When officers arrived on scene, they met with a reporting party who informed them that an employee made a threat towards his employer using social media. The reporting party also said that the employee works at an out of state location for the company, but that they had been unable to reach the outside jurisdiction to make a report.
The reporting party was advised to contact the jurisdiction in which the incident occurred, and officers took a courtesy report.

Shrek posted...

they didn't make it up, but it was actually employees that called them in

actually read the update in the article

You mean to tell me people don't lie to the police!?

I am absolutely shocked to learn that.

...you don't lie about it coming from your company, fool.

https://twitter.com/unity/status/1703547752205218265

"Honest and critical feedback."

That's... an understatement.

I take it the executive team has bought back their shares and are now entering the "damage control and good PR moves to inflate stock prices" phase of their plan?

Damage already done

Imagine getting a bill from some collection agency 30 years from now because you weren't paying close attention to Unity's ToS changes and they can apparently just retroactively change the deal you made with them.

Won't happen if I use Godot!

adjl posted...

"Honest and critical feedback."

That's... an understatement.

I take it the executive team has bought back their shares and are now entering the "damage control and good PR moves to inflate stock prices" phase of their plan?

Don't think they have a master plan, I still think you're mistaking stupidity for intentional malice.

An idiot CEO walks in the room and says the dumbest thing imaginable, and 50 engineers try to talk them out of jumping off the ledge, and every now and then they fail to do that. It's an example of why CEO's shouldn't exist.

From my experience, even in a startup, CEOs are fucking unbearable and have to be treated like toddlers ready to scream in a grocery store. It's like you went outside and found the first teenager you saw and made them your boss, except the teenager would probably be more reasonable.

Yellow posted...

Don't think they have a master plan, I still think you're mistaking stupidity for intentional malice.

The fact that they dumped their shares shortly before unveiling this idea gives me reason to believe that there's at least a little intentional malice and it's not just being completely clueless. Obviously, some degree of backlash was expected.

It was probably a fine mixture of both tbh.

Yellow posted...

It was probably a fine mixture of both tbh.

Indeed. A deliberate plan that grossly underestimated just how catastrophically this would destroy Unity's reputation.

adjl posted...

The fact that they dumped their shares shortly before unveiling this idea gives me reason to believe that there's at least a little intentional malice and it's not just being completely clueless. Obviously, some degree of backlash was expected.

intentional malice or not, it's not unusual for the c suite to engage in their own insider trading

obviously they knew that this would be met with backlash, but i think that they didn't understand the actual scope of their backlash.

if they didn't retroactively change the tos, and said that "starting xx moving forward these changes will take place" would have gone over a lot better than "we changed our tos before this happened to make it easier for us to do this and fuck everyone over even more, pray we don't alter the tos further to give us your soul, sorry you caught that."