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

(+) Yeah! (+)

Trolls who hate a game company can now uninstall and reinstall a game infinitely and cost devs money
This is insane bullshit

That... sounds like an excellent way to ensure nobody uses Unity ever again.

Apparently they're saying this applies retroactively to games already released?
LMAO they are so fucked. No way is that legal.

Keep in mind this is the company that produces actual malware (EAC) so I guarantee you they have the kernel level telemetry to do this.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/unity-software-incs-president-ceo-050515124.html

Hmmmmmm

nvm I mixed up Unity and Epic again. Anyways, I would not be surprised if this is possible.

I'm sure it's possible, but retroactively applying a fee like this that wasn't in the initial license agreement definitely won't pass legal muster.

shadowsword87 posted...

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/unity-software-incs-president-ceo-050515124.html

Hmmmmmm

And now he waits a week, buys back every share he sold for a fraction of the price, then walks back this idea for a PR boost that drives up their value. Classic.

https://twitter.com/stephentotilo/status/1701767079697740115

still a horrific idea

Whoever made that decision is actually a moron.

I'm sure Microsoft will just LOVE being on the hook for Game Pass

Why would they say install instead of purchase? Reeks of genius CEO activity, coming at problems from a new angle.

Zareth posted...

Apparently they're saying this applies retroactively to games already released?
LMAO they are so fucked. No way is that legal.

Yeah that would definitely not be legal.

So if you uninstall something and reinstall it, that's a fee? If you install it on a new computer with the same account is that a fee? Can the fee grow past the purchase amount of the game?

Yellow posted...

So if you uninstall something and reinstall it, that's a fee? If you install it on a new computer with the same account is that a fee? Can the fee grow past the purchase amount of the game?

First one no second one yes.

Revelation34 posted...

First one no second one yes.

There was a really simple solution that everyone was happy with, charge a fee per purchase.

Publicly traded company and golden parachutes mean nonsense like this. Burn the company down for short term gains.

This is so flagrantly fucking illegal, especially the retroactive part.
They need to be sued into the ground.
Apparently the CEO was the same guy that did really shady shit at EA and got fired there, too. And just before making this announcement, sold off a ton of Unity shares in what is so-totally-not-insider-trading.
But we can't jail criminal CEOs for...unspecified reasons....

I hope Team Cherry threatens to just not release Silksong unless Unity gets their heads out of their asses

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

A) The devs are, unless it's on the same computer B) Rev specified only after I had posted that.

I'm looking at Godot and they unfortunately still use Mono instead of properly supporting .NET. But I see the way the winds are blowing.

Literally leaves devs the incentive to take old games down.

streamofthesky posted...

This is so flagrantly fucking illegal, especially the retroactive part.
They need to be sued into the ground.
Apparently the CEO was the same guy that did really shady shit at EA and got fired there, too. And just before making this announcement, sold off a ton of Unity shares in what is so-totally-not-insider-trading.
But we can't jail criminal CEOs for...unspecified reasons....

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.

Godot seems fine, I enjoy playing Dome Keeper.

shadowsword87 posted...

Godot seems fine, I enjoy playing Dome Keeper.

If we had .NET instead of Mono we could start using Microsoft's ML.NET, which is machine learning that doesn't rely on the Python tumor.

Imagine actually releasing a game on steam that uses machine learning. Should have been possible by now, right?

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.

When the devs originally bought Unity to develop for their games, it wasn't in the contract. You cannot retroactively change a business agreement on a whim and force the other party to adhere to it. That completely destroys the entire basis of doing business and has dire implications and precedents for all business transactions.

Also gentle reminder that EULA have never been validated in any court and just b/c some scum bag company slips something blatantly illegal in there and you unwittingly "agree" does not make it legally binding.

Yellow posted...

If we had .NET instead of Mono we could start using Microsoft's ML.NET, which is machine learning that doesn't rely on the Python tumor.

Imagine actually releasing a game on steam that uses machine learning. Should have been possible by now, right?

I'm personally not interested in any of the suggested machine learning for videogames, so it's all whatever to me.
Infinite pointless dialogue just doesn't spark imagination.

shadowsword87 posted...

I'm personally not interested in any of the suggested machine learning for videogames, so it's all whatever to me.
Infinite pointless dialogue just doesn't spark imagination.

AI is useful for more than paywalled websites running on GPU farms. Examples;

An enemy that fights and learns from you the more you play against it.

Enemies that fight each other and create complex societies/strategies.

We can't create these things because there's no way to deploy Python programs to users, and for some awful reason all ML is tied to Python.

Oh, Godot actually uses .NET. Ok... my new engine of choice?

https://godotengine.org/article/whats-new-in-csharp-for-godot-4-0/

I'm going back to QBasic... no game needs to be more than 45kb anyways

Lokarin posted...

I'm going back to QBasic... no game needs to be more than 45kb anyways

I wrote a pokemon fangame in BASIC, lol. Global variables only, one file.

I was able to learn OOP despite all of that. Meanwhile, every Mac-using C purist out there is still clinging to their one man army trust issues, mocking OOP and maybe one day managing to make a short 2D game

Yellow posted...

I wrote a pokemon fangame in BASIC, lol. Global variables only, one file.

samesies! and bomberman

Lokarin posted...

samesies! and bomberman

Link?

Yellow posted...

Link?

Ancient. I do have the floppy disks but I don't have a 3.5" reader

Yellow posted...

Why would they say install instead of purchase? Reeks of genius CEO activity, coming at problems from a new angle.

Personally it feels like they're targeting F2P with this.

Installs would include F2P games with microtransactions, where as purchases I imagine wouldn't unless you made some sort of sub-clause to rope them in. Not to mention the majority of F2P player base doesn't ever do any purchases, so using installs could produce a significantly larger revenue stream.

Lokarin posted...

Ancient. I do have the floppy disks but I don't have a 3.5" reader

Assuming there's anything still on them. I came across some old floppies a few years ago with some random junk on them that I tried to transfer while I still had access to a floppy drive and about 90% of them had already lost everything that was on them.

Yellow posted...

A) The devs are, unless it's on the same computer B) Rev specified only after I had posted that.

I'm looking at Godot and they unfortunately still use Mono instead of properly supporting .NET. But I see the way the winds are blowing.

Literally leaves devs the incentive to take old games down.

Godot 4 moved over to .NET

https://godotengine.org/article/godot-4-0-sets-sail/#c

I really like Godot btw, use C# too just did the port for 4 and they've made a lot of really nice improvements

and just in general I like the Node structure of everything. it's a nice community too! thinking of going to the conference in Munich this November

Yellow posted...

Oh, Godot actually uses .NET. Ok... my new engine of choice?

https://godotengine.org/article/whats-new-in-csharp-for-godot-4-0/

oh lol I see you got there

grimhilde00 posted...

oh lol I see you got there

Yeah I'm really happy with it, it's what Unity should have done for a while. I won't know how much I like it until I try it out.

It's not unthinkable that I release a free game that goes viral and 200,000+ people download it (that's kind of the goal), so I'd rather not have to worry about suddenly owing $20,000 out of nowhere

sveksii posted...

Personally it feels like they're targeting F2P with this.

Installs would include F2P games with microtransactions, where as purchases I imagine wouldn't unless you made some sort of sub-clause to rope them in. Not to mention the majority of F2P player base doesn't ever do any purchases, so using installs could produce a significantly larger revenue stream.

Even then, updating the terms of use to claim residuals from all revenue instead of just the initial sale would likely make them more money than a per-install fee. Games are F2P for a reason: they stand to make more money from a small number of whales spending a large amount of money on a recurring basis than from all players paying a small entry fee. I would expect that to extend to residuals as well, if they're a percentage of revenue.

Zareth posted...

Trolls who hate a game company can now uninstall and reinstall a game infinitely and cost devs money
This is insane bullshit

I can finally get revenge at Niantic for increasing the cost of remote raid passes :)

Yellow posted...

An enemy that fights and learns from you the more you play against it.

The game Echo sort of did something similar Thar said, other than that game, enemies learning wouldnt be my cup of tea

Yellow posted...

Yeah I'm really happy with it, it's what Unity should have done for a while. I won't know how much I like it until I try it out.

It's not unthinkable that I release a free game that goes viral and 200,000+ people download it (that's kind of the goal), so I'd rather not have to worry about suddenly owing $20,000 out of nowhere

https://youtu.be/YQ4OBc1-oCI?si=h-RIhVovQmtqt8o7

I can foresee people just reverse engineering the signal that tells Unity of each install and then just set up bot farms to just keep sending that signal.

This is just such an easy to exploit concept, that I cannot imagine anyone at Unity would not foresee it...

Nichtcrawler-X posted...

This is just such an easy to exploit concept, that I cannot imagine anyone at Unity would not foresee it...

I fully expect quite a few people at Unity foresaw the issues. The executive team, however, either doesn't include those people or doesn't care (in the particular example you presented, they aren't the ones being hurt, so they have little incentive to see it as a problem).

adjl posted...

they aren't the ones being hurt, so they have little incentive to see it as a problem

They are opening the doors for accusations of false inflated install numbers and making it so outside forces can actually artificially inflate those numbers, is just asking to have your reputation destroyed.

Nichtcrawler-X posted...

They are opening the doors for accusations of false inflated install numbers and making it so outside forces can actually artificially inflate those numbers, is just asking to have your reputation destroyed.

Given that the CEO has been selling off a bunch of his shares lately, I think a destroyed reputation might be exactly what they're going for.

adjl posted...

Given that the CEO has been selling off a bunch of his shares lately, I think a destroyed reputation might be exactly what they're going for.

Honestly, torpedoing your own company, kinda feels like it should be considered insider information trading to me.

Oh, it absolutely is. But it's pretty rare for particularly wealthy corporations and executives to actually see consequences for insider trading, especially in a case like this where anyone who understands the medium at all knows why it's a bad idea, but the technologically-illiterate justice system might not see it the same way.

@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.

And they actually use overrides instead of vague "void Update()"...

I feel like I walked out of crazy town, this was for the best everyone. Unity had to be put down.