Live data from Hacker News

Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

pocketgamer.biz

341–350 of 370 posts

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#341
post #17

This seems like a click bait title to me, he "technically" uses those words, but the article seems a lot more sensible to me than inflammatory. We should definitely be thinking through sales/marketing when building games just like we do when building software. Not sure why you wouldn't be. Edit to add: This rings true even when you decide "not a priority this time", that's still thinking it through

Nah - his behavior is bad.

Sure the concepts are also relevant / informative. However the impact is pro-bias, shaming people who don't think like he does.

It deserves a sincere apology.

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#342
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last call of duty game I played charged me $60 up front and then was largely free from all future costs, except some add-on dlc I chose to buy later. MTX was there but only as cosmetic items. This state of things was fine. However they eventually added overpowered weapons that could only be unlocked via expensive rng loot boxes and that's when I stopped playing.

that cod was one of their highest revenue microtransaction platforms to date

No, this was years ago. Black Ops 2 (or was it 3?). One of those. Haven't touched cod since they added p2w mechanics.

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#343

The link title doesn't match to the article title so I suspected the comment wouldn't look as audacious in context. But actually it doesn't look much better. Here's the relevant snippet: Interviewer: Implementing monetisation earlier in the process and conversation is certainly an angle that has seen pushback from some developers. Riccitiello: Ferrari and some of the other high-end car manufacturers still use clay an…

The paragraph after the f'ing sentence feels like clean-up to me, and IMO deserves a proper apology.

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#344

Compare to Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney's presentation on game development from ~2006 including, among other things, his thoughts on the merits of Haskell https://www.st.cs.uni-saarland.de/edu/seminare/2005/advanced... I'll put all my money on Sweeney over this asshole.

[deleted]

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#345
post #318
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think using the term “compulsion loop” when taking about monetization is a pretty clear sign that he means the latter. Making a game that can pay for itself doesn’t really need to trick people into it. Look at stardew valley for instance, or factorio, or minecraft

But Minecraft has a really solid compulsion loop, it’s what makes it so easy to start playing and then realize it’s nightfall. You never have to wait for anything because there’s always something else to do, you get mild gentle pressure from the environment to do things like hunger, night, mobs that inject variety. Every step of building something is set up as a reward, and there’s tiers of progress that reward basic…

I’m straight up talking about the connotations of using the term “compulsion”. Last I heard these described by game developers they were referred to as “game loops” or “core loop” if they were referring to the main part of the game.

Using the term “compulsion” to describe it instead comes from a certain mindset that I believe is centered around making skimmer boxes

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#346
post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He's saying every game needs to be an MTX riddled nightmare to be successful. Come on, that's clearly not what he's saying in that quote. I don't like microtransactions either, but it makes your position weaker to get hyperbolic. He's saying you have to include monetisation when planning for your game, rather than pretending it doesn't exist. To me this seems so obviously true that it's almost a product design axio…

> He's saying you have to include monetisation when planning for your game, rather than pretending it doesn't exist. What's wrong about monetizing your game by, I don't know, selling copies of it ?

That only gets you some of the customers’ money, not all of their money.

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ori runs on unity? Why don't we have a linux native build?

The vast majority of Unity/Unreal games don't have native Linux builds despite the engines ostensibly having native Linux support. Developers don't see it as worth the QA/support hassle, especially now that they can do nothing and still get Linux customers thanks to Proton. Valve are even pushing developers towards Proton by default because they'd rather have a well maintained Windows build running in a well maintain…

I seriously could not care less about proton, it is basically a gigantic and massive money sink hole and literaly disgusting software, actualy quite microsoft grade.

To make things even worse, proton is said to include a significant amount of software components directly copied from windows.

What actually worries me, is the devs from gcc and the glibc perfectly ignoring the fact that there has been games on "linux" for the last decade. The glibc devs have literaly a frenzy of GNU symbol versioning, breaking game binaries built on a recent glibc that on distro with a glibc no older that 1 year and half for no good reasons. Not to mention you still cannot properly libdl the libc itself, namely do a clean ELF dynamic load of it (maybe not true anymore, have to check). Unfortunately, many game devs have the c++ tantrum and the static libstdc++ from gcc does not "libdl" properly what it needs from the glibc/posix libs, and something tells me not to hold my breath at gcc devs fixing that.

So, I guess, I'll keep playing "linux" native games until windoz... I meant they force proton upon everybody for good, or until the glibc and gcc devs managed to make it near impossible to make reasonably robust in time and compatible across "linux" distros game binaries.

Actually, I got myself a simple C compiler and built a lean win64 with vulkan support from wine, useless, no windows game binaries are that clean, except maybe the ones from ID software.

Re: Gamedevs not baking in monetization are “fucking idiots”, says Unity CEO

#350
post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is Ironic? To be clear, I was making a comment and speculating on the publics attraction to blunt language. It seems like you are agreeing with me - you are sick of vapid and nonsensical PR bullshit. I don't think anyone is in favor of the PR bullshit, except the people who hide behind it. Wouldn't you prefer something more direct?

I guess so. My point was that neither Unity nor John Riccitiello can take credit for being particular direct in this whole affair - they produced the exact same vapid PR phrases just one submission earlier. Also, what another poster said still applies: "blunt" language may appear to be more honest, but it really isn't. You can lie or misrepresent while being blunt just as well as with twisted PR phrases. E.g., maybe…

I was making a comment more about the general reaction to Blunt discussion. not the company or the individual. That said companies and obviously speak more bluntly or less and are not consistent
Post reply on HN