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

Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

farewell.bostonunitygroup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 465 posts

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#201

Post by Karellen »

musicale wrote: post #81
kdottt wrote: post #5

"More importantly, we've seen how easily and flippantly an executive-led business decision can risk bankrupting the studios we've worked so hard to build, threaten our livelihoods as professionals, and challenge the longevity of our industry. The Unity of today isn't the same company that it was when the group was founded, and the trust we used to have in the company has been completely eroded." Profoundly sad, and c…

> Have never seen a company so quickly and completely just throw away all of their public good will. Over the past year Docker and D&D/Wizards of the Coast come to mind...

And tumblr, when they announced they would no longer support creators of "adult" content.

And (nearly) OnlyFans, when they announced they would no longer support creators of "adult" content (aka, "did a tumblr"). They just about backpedalled quickly enough, and had enough stickyness (no pun intended) from followers, to contain most of the damage.

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#202

Post by JohnFen »

jimmaswell wrote: post #20
soulbadguy wrote: post #9

like getting blood from a stone... Most of those open-source companies turn "evil" stories (like IBM/redhat ) seems to follow the same pattern. IMO, there is a limit of the amount of value one can extract from those venture. Trying to increase revenue beyond a certain limit will always result very bad outcome. But i also think it's a lesson for the gaming industry. Why is something as core are a game engine, not some…

Redhat is evil now?

I've considered Red Hat a bad actor for a number of years now.

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#203

Post by ketzo »

shmatt wrote: post #62
kdottt wrote: post #5

"More importantly, we've seen how easily and flippantly an executive-led business decision can risk bankrupting the studios we've worked so hard to build, threaten our livelihoods as professionals, and challenge the longevity of our industry. The Unity of today isn't the same company that it was when the group was founded, and the trust we used to have in the company has been completely eroded." Profoundly sad, and c…

I don't know how much people know or have heard about ironSource. It's kind of an open secret in Israel on how they built a company to profit by building what is essentially malware (installers disguised as OEM while they're really adding extra trackers to your computer). They always paid 25% more than most of the other tech companies, but still had issues recruiting because it takes a special kind of person to be wi…

The merger makes a ton of sense — Unity was super late to the game building their own Demand-Side Platform for ads, and that’s how you make money in mobile games now, so they had to buy their way out of the problem.

I mean, it’s horrible for consumers/gamers/developers, obviously, but from a business perspective it was the correct move.

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#204

Post by amrocha »

JohnFen wrote: post #198
amrocha wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the other comments in this thread, the reason is more complicated than that. Open source tools might be fine but game engines can't be open source if they want to support console builds because that would disclose proprietary information.

> game engines can't be open source if they want to support console builds because that would disclose proprietary information. Technically, they could . It would require someone who hasn't actually licensed the SDK, and so aren't subjected to an NDA, to reverse-engineer things and produce their own implementation under an open source license. Certainly would be an enormous project, but it is well within the realm of…

We're talking about a viable alternative to proprietary game engines.

Yes, I know it's possible to reverse engineer the consoles, but that doesn't make it a viable alternative for the games industry.

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#205

Post by [deleted] »

musicale wrote: post #81
kdottt wrote: post #5

"More importantly, we've seen how easily and flippantly an executive-led business decision can risk bankrupting the studios we've worked so hard to build, threaten our livelihoods as professionals, and challenge the longevity of our industry. The Unity of today isn't the same company that it was when the group was founded, and the trust we used to have in the company has been completely eroded." Profoundly sad, and c…

> Have never seen a company so quickly and completely just throw away all of their public good will. Over the past year Docker and D&D/Wizards of the Coast come to mind...

[deleted]

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#206

Post by rmbyrro »

troymc wrote: post #170
rmbyrro wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expect MBAs to show up here condemning the derogatory use of MBA

Main-belt asteroids don't have a very cohesive lobby group.

MBA asteroids are well motivated on their own. No need for asteroid cohesion to complain on HN

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#207

Post by JohnFen »

amrocha wrote: post #204
JohnFen wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> game engines can't be open source if they want to support console builds because that would disclose proprietary information. Technically, they could . It would require someone who hasn't actually licensed the SDK, and so aren't subjected to an NDA, to reverse-engineer things and produce their own implementation under an open source license. Certainly would be an enormous project, but it is well within the realm of…

We're talking about a viable alternative to proprietary game engines. Yes, I know it's possible to reverse engineer the consoles, but that doesn't make it a viable alternative for the games industry.

> that doesn't make it a viable alternative for the games industry.

It makes it legally viable, in that it would allow the production of an SDK that isn't restricted by any NDA, and therefore could be incorporated into opens source projects.

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#208

Post by nitwit005 »

berniedurfee wrote: post #190
nitwit005 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, I just assume that no company can be trusted these days. It wasn't too long ago that the leadership of companies was often fairly stable. Now you see people rotating through every couple of years, rarely having to face the fallout of their bad decisions.

There are a few. Cockos makes an amazing Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) that competes with the top names in the industry. While much of the rest of the industry is moving to subscriptions or jacking prices, Cockos has kept their prices extremely low and push new releases consistently.

A history of doing the right thing doesn't matter in the slightest, unless you can somehow guarantee their leadership won't change (or is unlikely to, at least).

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#209

Post by lovich »

aetherspawn wrote: post #178
ChicagoDave wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got food poisoning from a very well known fast food chain about 25 years ago. I haven’t eaten there since. Unity just gave every one of their developers food poisoning. I suspect similar results.

I’ve been food poisoned from KFC probably 10 times, but I still eat there once or twice a fortnight for the last IDK 20 years. Because they have the cheap crispy chicken.

I guess that’s the opposite problem of having an overly sensitive sense of pattern recognition

Re: Unity's oldest community announces dissolution

#210

Post by asynchronous »

indymike wrote: post #150
asynchronous wrote: post #2

Unity really showing the world how to tank a business by letting a few MBA’s at the top make a decision for profit.

> letting a few MBA’s at the top make a decision for profit. I'm not sure the profit part will work out for them in the long run.

Really I should have stated “short term profits”
Post reply on HN