Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 277 posts

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#191

Post by bladedtoys »

ezekg wrote: post #37

> You may not directly or indirectly distribute the Unity Software, including the runtime portion of the Unity Software (the “Unity Runtime”), or your Project Content (if it incorporates the Unity Runtime) by means of streaming or broadcasting so that any portion of the Unity Software is primarily executed on or simulated by the cloud or a remote server and transmitted over the Internet or other network to end user d…

Just to confirm: does Unreal have any similar clause? Do they look like they might go that way too? (e.g. do they have "authorized" cloud partners)

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#192

Post by ignaloidas »

Arwill wrote: post #170
ignaloidas wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Native FBX support is not compatible by license, you are free to make a module that lets Godot use FBX, just with a FBX compatible license. Traditional ECS doesn't fit with Godot's philosophy, but you can make behaviors into nodes and just add these nodes as a child for ECS-like behavior. Honestly, I find Godot's way more natural and extendable.

Without a stable and widely used model format making a game is impossible. You can drag&drop FBX into Unity and Unreal, and its mostly ready for use. Having a broken FBX importer is just a waste of time. You start with a model format, something works, you build a workflow, a system for producing content en masse, and then at some point you must consider throwing away the model format, the workflow and/or the whole en…

Godot doesn't have any broken importers, yet alone FBX which it doesn't have completely for legal reasons. Looking at Collada(.dae) Blender has a super broken exporter, so broken that Godot folks wrote a better one from the frustration. GLTF2 doesn't have enough support, even though it's a good format.

The problem is that everyone is just sitting and using proprietary FBX format and don't work towards new open standards like Collada or GLTF2.

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#193

Post by galacticpony2 »

maxsilver wrote: post #128
bluescrn wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UE4 focuses on high-end console/PC. For rapid development of mobile games, Unity is basically the only choice.

> For rapid development of mobile games, Unity is basically the only choice. Why? Unreal Engine has targeted iOS + Android phones for 5+ years now, successfully. (Fortnite, PUBG, Dungeon Defenders, Horn, etc). More mobile developers are experienced with Unity over Unreal today , but that's largely inertia more than anything else.

> Why? Unreal Engine has targeted iOS + Android phones for 5+ years now, successfully. (Fortnite, PUBG, Dungeon Defenders, Horn, etc).

Dungeon Defenders and Horn are not UE4 titles, UE3 isn't available anymore. PUBG and Fortnite only work on higher-end phones. UE4 is going the "easy" route by not supporting older devices. With Unity, you could still target fixed-function hardware up until recently.

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#194

Post by akx »

Rychard wrote: post #146
dave_sullivan wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, UE4 is not FOSS as per GNU, it is open source in that you can see the code and there's a large community contributing fixes and additions with every new version. I think the distinction is pedantic for most users.

Isn't Unity similar in that regard? (well, as far as viewing the source-code, they don't accept patches to my understanding) https://blogs.unity3d.com/2018/03/26/releasing-the-unity-c-s...

That's just the C# code; not the native C++ bits which are the core of the renderer and engine.

UE4 is open to every last bit.

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#196

Post by Mikeb85 »

dave_sullivan wrote: post #107
reificator wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unity is not open source Important to note, neither is Unreal really. It's not a pedantic distinction here either, as it affects how far you can take a project that modifies the core engine. Not that I'm against Unreal in any way, it's just important to keep in mind.

Yes, UE4 is not FOSS as per GNU, it is open source in that you can see the code and there's a large community contributing fixes and additions with every new version. I think the distinction is pedantic for most users.

Shared source isn't open source. You may have access to it, but you don't own it.

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#197

Post by nacs »

bladedtoys wrote: post #191
ezekg wrote: post #37

> You may not directly or indirectly distribute the Unity Software, including the runtime portion of the Unity Software (the “Unity Runtime”), or your Project Content (if it incorporates the Unity Runtime) by means of streaming or broadcasting so that any portion of the Unity Software is primarily executed on or simulated by the cloud or a remote server and transmitted over the Internet or other network to end user d…

Just to confirm: does Unreal have any similar clause? Do they look like they might go that way too? (e.g. do they have "authorized" cloud partners)

Tom Sweeney, Epic's CEO tweeted about this saying no:

https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/108340746025221734...

Not only that but he points out that they intentionally made Unreal Engine's TOS "perpetual" specifically so they can't change it to do something like Unity has done here.

On top of that, Unreal Engine sourcecode is available to all Engine users on Github unlike Unity.

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#198

Post by SolarNet »

tcfunk wrote: post #45
mattigames wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes they are running unity runtime on their servers, there is nothing in the TOS against that, what is illegal is to share any of the data from that runtime online with other Unity instances. Which has nothing to do with "re-distributing" Unity has a SAAS.

Re-distributing was the wrong word to use. But it seems to me that the Unity Runtime is a part of the stack of their SaaS.

Yes it is specifically the part of their stack that one distributes to customers. It's like if the Java runtime or the DirectX runtime wasn't distributable to cloud machines.

Unity had a pretty clear model as providing a software stack that one pays for using, primarily containing a bunch of proprietary tools for creating applications for their runtime. And then one could package that runtime and their application and give it to whoever one wanted (as long as they followed the revenue share part of the contract).

So yes it's part of the stack. but it's the part of the stack that people are meant to redistribute with their game.

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#199

Post by nacs »

seanwilson wrote: post #120
ezekg wrote: post #37

> You may not directly or indirectly distribute the Unity Software, including the runtime portion of the Unity Software (the “Unity Runtime”), or your Project Content (if it incorporates the Unity Runtime) by means of streaming or broadcasting so that any portion of the Unity Software is primarily executed on or simulated by the cloud or a remote server and transmitted over the Internet or other network to end user d…

Doesn't Unreal require you to code in C++? That's a big reason why I'd avoid it when I don't require maximum performance.

It also supports C#/.net and Blueprints (their own node-based language).

Re: Unity Engine ToS change makes cloud-based SpatialOS games illegal

#200

Post by [deleted] »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #9
hesdeadjim wrote: post #8

I’m pretty aghast at this move by Unity. They have made it clear they have a managed cloud hosting infrastructure in the works, but explicitly blocking others from providing it as a service strikes me as a “we really need this revenue and will do anything to protect it” move. PlayFab is unmentioned but they will also be affected by this move as they offer a dedicated server hosting service among their offerings. Even…

It basically signals to me they don't give a fuck about you; it's Unity-first, and you can deal with it. Take it or leave it. After being burnt by the Source Engine, I'll never use Unity again after having read this.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN