Part of me believes this was just a bad faith bargaining tactic. The execs knew this would never fly as-is and would generate a huge outrage, so that they can then say "We heard you" and look charitable in walking back to the actual fees they planned to introduce. It's either that, or sheer stupidity and incompetence.
Unity: We Have Heard You
21–30 of 105 posts
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#22> We apologize for the confusion
Confusion? Nope pretty sure everyone was 100% clear that this was a money grab & giant f you to the devs.
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#23>> We have heard you. We apologize for the confusion and angst the runtime fee policy we announced on Tuesday caused. We are listening, talking to our team members, community, customers, and partners, and will be making changes to the policy. We will share an update in a couple of days. Thank you for your honest and critical feedback. I have no involvement and I'm not a game developer (except for small weekend projec…
The best outcome if you're a Godot supporter and a developer supporter is Unity backs off the installation fees AND then everyone goes to Godot anyways.
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#24How about you fire the CEO that allowed such a boneheaded decision? With them in charge, how could one ever trust your company to not make such moves again?
Even Apple did similar with their proposed CSAM scanning, and after the uproar, walked that decision back. So at least Unity is at least giving a head nod towards decency. It could definitely be worse. Imagine if Musk was in charge.
If Musk was in charge of Unity, he'd cut 90% of the staff and just charge $8/mo for a blue sign on your game.
PS: for those without a sense of humor, this is a joke.
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#25I wonder if this is a real walk-back, or just one of those where they do the same thing anyways in a few months once the scandal dies down. It would not be below Unity, I think that has been communicated clearly.
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#26I love watching capitalists crash and burn their companies.
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#27Changing the policy is not a complete u-turn on the policy. The trust is gone.
A short term memory is an acceptable substitute for trust
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#28"Hear" is a slippery word.
Hearing is not listening. First you hear, but you do not listen. Then you want to listen. Then you can listen. Finally, with effort, you listen. In addition to intent there must be theory of mind, and inter-subjectivity, some one to listen to. Then, say back what you really think you heard - acknowledge the reality not your own lens;
"We hear that you feel we were greedy, took our users for granted and treated you with disrespect."
Is different from;
"We are frightened and reacting to your signals of disengagement" (expect more manipulative acting-out as we try to "fix you")
Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#29Re: Unity: We Have Heard You
#30How about you fire the CEO that allowed such a boneheaded decision? With them in charge, how could one ever trust your company to not make such moves again?
The problem is not really the CEO, though he's the one getting the attention here. It's the new board that got 3 new heads from IronSource and Sequoia VC (who pushed for the IronSource merger).
Sequoia, the same geniuses that backed SBF: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33571734