251–260 of 277 posts
Does anyone know of any cases where this new clause was used to shut down existing games using the unity runtime in their servers? This ToS change has been around for about a month so I figured that there might have been previous activity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait do they? I wasn't aware that UE4 supported C#.
Via a plugin developed by some Microsoft employees: https://mono-ue.github.io/
Either way it's not something I'd trust enough to use for a commercial project, so I definitely wouldn't say UE supports C#.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I've used both extensively, and they are good at different things. Unreal is far better IF you fit cleanly into one of their templates (first person, third person, etc). Superior renderer with great built-in post effects, FAR better multiplayer support, better materials/shader editor. However, if you try to do something substantially different than they have imagined, it can get ugly very fast. The C++ used is…
Re: scripting Ue4 has the source available, so you definitely can integrate your preferred scripting language.
So right now we know the "what", but not the "why". What Improbable really has, or claims to have, is a way to scale massively multiplayer games where everyone is in the same world. They have a back end which is basically a synching system for small data elements between computers in a data center. Think of it as being like the way a shared memory multiprocessor synchs its memory system. Some data items belong to a s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL but really, is this enforceable, for code already downloaded, used and deployed in compliance with the license at that time?
According to Crytek, it should be. Their engine license[0] is, if I am reading it correctly, similar in this respect. > By doing so, you, the Licensee, agree to all terms and conditions of this Agreement or in the accompanying documentation. You should read this Agreement carefully before the Start Date. If you do not agree with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement you are not authorized to use the CR…
I always thought a contract had to include "a meeting of the minds," and I cannot see how that is possible if one party can change their mind for any reason at any time without any discussion or renewed agreement.
SpatialOS streaming Unity seems broadly equivalent to AWS hosting MongoDB. Especially in that it undermines Unity’s (i.e. Mongo’s) ability to sell a hosted equivalent product (whether or not that exists yet) and it leverages some of Unity’s value into rent for Improbable. Now there’s a difference in that SpatialOS is adding meaningful value - but it’s not necessarily their’s to take. Ultimately this is Unity’s platfo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I've used both extensively, and they are good at different things. Unreal is far better IF you fit cleanly into one of their templates (first person, third person, etc). Superior renderer with great built-in post effects, FAR better multiplayer support, better materials/shader editor. However, if you try to do something substantially different than they have imagined, it can get ugly very fast. The C++ used is…
The kind of sad thing to me is that I’ve talked to several people who hold UE4 up as a shining example of “modern C++ done right”. ...but it’s really quite a mess when you look closely. A successful project and “good code” aren’t necessarily the same thing.
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.
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.
You're wrong, users of software libraries care whether they're allowed to fork the library or not.
The reason it's not open source is the royalty clause, not lack of ability to see/edit/modify/fork the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That change seems to be in line with the FOSS ethos. I imagine that from the perspective of the FOSS community, using FOSS software in a SaaS product without releasing the code that drives the service is just a loophole.
IIRC, the uproar was less about the principle, and more about how it is defined: > If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge [...] Making the functionality of the Program or modified version available to third parties as a service includes, without limitation,…
No reasonable person would ever say that your website derives its value primarily from the database engine.
But lawsuits aren't forced to be reasonable.