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

Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

creativebloq.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 123 posts

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#71

Post by [deleted] »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #68
ezekg wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the headline is blatantly trying to elicit a negative response towards Unreal i.r.t. Unity's recent pricing change.

Blatantly! Please explain how this headline connects to Unity at all? Yes we can assume a lot of people reading the headline will know about it... but I don't see this blatant connection. Would they have to explicitly say it's not like Unity in the headline to escape this? They even put "non-gaming creatives" in the subheading. Maybe whoever posted should have copied that? If you post the link on most social media yo…

[deleted]

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#73

Post by Dylan16807 »

pests wrote: post #70
Dylan16807 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity. Also what I said in my previous comment is relevant here. > Unreal was never "free for all". I accept that it's bad wording, bu…

> If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity. Things don't happen in a vaccuum. The Unity fiasco is still fresh on everyone's mind. For any company anywhere in the gaming sphere to change their prices so soon - is going to draw comparisons to Unity. The fact multiple people are discussing this with you should prove that.

Do they need to explicitly contrast the situation with Unity in the headline to avoid being misleading?

Headlines don't have a lot of space!

And as I said in a different comment, the subheading seems to address the main complaints, and in most situations you'd see the headline and the subheading together.

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#74

Post by pests »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #73
pests wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity. Things don't happen in a vaccuum. The Unity fiasco is still fresh on everyone's mind. For any company anywhere in the gaming sphere to change their prices so soon - is going to draw comparisons to Unity. The fact multiple people are discussing this with you should prove that.

Do they need to explicitly contrast the situation with Unity in the headline to avoid being misleading? Headlines don't have a lot of space! And as I said in a different comment, the subheading seems to address the main complaints, and in most situations you'd see the headline and the subheading together.

I think the mere fact this is an engine license change happening so close to the Unity fiasco that yes, it is impossible to talk about this without automatically invoking thoughts of what Unity did. Some news and blogs will take advantage of this association and use it for clicks.

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#75

Post by taway1237 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #66
lholden wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. Unreal was never "free for all". For game development, there has always been revenue thresholds. The new licensing is around commercial use outside of game development, and will also be revenue threshold based. Meaning, just like with game development, if your…

> The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity. Also what I said in my previous comment is relevant here. > Unreal was never "free for all". I accept that it's bad wording, bu…

> I don't see how that misleads anyone unless you thought the engine was completely free.

That's how i understood it, was surprised, clicked the thread to find out more.

Sample size of 1, but I was (maybe accidentally) misled.

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#76

Post by lholden »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #66
lholden wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. Unreal was never "free for all". For game development, there has always been revenue thresholds. The new licensing is around commercial use outside of game development, and will also be revenue threshold based. Meaning, just like with game development, if your…

> The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity. Also what I said in my previous comment is relevant here. > Unreal was never "free for all". I accept that it's bad wording, bu…

"no longer free for all" implies that it was "free for all" and the change is making it no longer "free for all". In other words, the title is presenting information to the reader that is literally not true.

For your personal reference, here is how the dictionary defines the word "misleading". (Cambridge and Merriam Webster, respectively)

> causing someone to believe something that is not true

> to lead in a wrong direction or into a mistaken action or belief often by deliberate deceit

> to lead astray : give a wrong impression

I would say that the title manages to hit on all 3 of these definitions, with a possible note that perhaps the author "misspoke" rather than intentionally creating a deliberate deceit.

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#77

Post by Dylan16807 »

pests wrote: post #74
Dylan16807 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they need to explicitly contrast the situation with Unity in the headline to avoid being misleading? Headlines don't have a lot of space! And as I said in a different comment, the subheading seems to address the main complaints, and in most situations you'd see the headline and the subheading together.

I think the mere fact this is an engine license change happening so close to the Unity fiasco that yes, it is impossible to talk about this without automatically invoking thoughts of what Unity did. Some news and blogs will take advantage of this association and use it for clicks.

Are you suggesting it's impossible to avoid being misleading, or do you have a solution in mind? Since you didn't really answer my question.

If it's the former then I think that absolves the author.

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#79

Post by starttoaster »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #66
lholden wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. Unreal was never "free for all". For game development, there has always been revenue thresholds. The new licensing is around commercial use outside of game development, and will also be revenue threshold based. Meaning, just like with game development, if your…

> The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity. Also what I said in my previous comment is relevant here. > Unreal was never "free for all". I accept that it's bad wording, bu…

> If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity.

Being aware of current events and how they may shape how people come to conclusions is a skill that not everybody possesses I suppose.

The headline is most definitely misleading and poorly worded. A better headline would be "Unreal licensing change targets tv production use cases" or something like that.

As the other user pointed out, Unreal Engine was never free for all. So wording it like this misleads the reader into thinking about the most commonly talked about use-case, video game development. And when they read "no longer be free for all" it leads them to believe that people that currently don't pay for Unreal Engine may now have to. Hence the title being "misleading." But hey, journalism is a skill that you work on over time. The editor should have caught this.

Re: Unreal Engine will no longer be free for all

#80

Post by Dylan16807 »

lholden wrote: post #76
Dylan16807 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The title, especially in light of the stuff that went on with Unity, makes one think that this will affect a much wider group of people than it actually does. If you look at the title and think of a different company, that's not the headline's fault. It doesn't even try to reference Unity. Also what I said in my previous comment is relevant here. > Unreal was never "free for all". I accept that it's bad wording, bu…

"no longer free for all" implies that it was "free for all" and the change is making it no longer "free for all". In other words, the title is presenting information to the reader that is literally not true. For your personal reference, here is how the dictionary defines the word "misleading". (Cambridge and Merriam Webster, respectively) > causing someone to believe something that is not true > to lead in a wrong di…

I think the sense in which the title is being criticized for being misleading is not the interpretation where the engine was completely and entirely free. I'm sure a few people thought that by accident but it's not what people are talking about when they bring up comparisons to Unity. That particular wording issue is not something that gets a top comment callout. There isn't any motive to cause that particular confusion on purpose.
Post reply on HN