An open letter to our community • Hacker News Board

Re: An open letter to our community

#21

Post by gmjosack » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:52 PM UTC

alexb_ wrote: post #16

People are going to continue to complain, but I honestly think this is a pretty good walk back. It addresses all of the more legitimate things people were upset about: - $1,000,000 income floor for a trailing 12 months - Doesn't apply to old versions - Billed a lesser amount of 2.5% revenue if available, so low-cost indie games don't get destroyed Not to mention, removing the requirement to have "Made with Unity" on…

I'm in a lot of gamedev communities and I'm not seeing any complaints. Everyone agrees this is fine. I believe if they announced this initially people probably would have complained but nothing close to the backlash there was. Most people just don't trust Unity after this. This is after all the second time we're getting a promise not to change the terms on an existing engine version as a result of backlash. How long until the third?

Re: An open letter to our community

#22

Post by generationP » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:54 PM UTC

[EDIT: False; see comments.]

From a viewpoint of "will it be compatible with a DRM-free release that doesn't phone home" (i.e., playing by GOG rules), this doesn't seem to solve the problem at all. What is in it for them? Why per install and not per sale?

Re: An open letter to our community

#23

Post by dpkonofa » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:54 PM UTC

cmcaleer wrote: post #4

I think it might be too little too late. I do wonder if this was always the plan with classic door-in-the-face technique, but I can't imagine they would have anticipated the absolute magnitude of backlash. Their product certainly isn't as special as they clearly think it is, and the fact that they attempted to unilaterally change the contract in as egregious as way as they did is unacceptable and not behaviour I woul…

This is it, in a nutshell. People don't want the apology. They want to know that a decision like this doesn't have a chance of happening because the people in charge know it's a bad idea before it leaves the door. No one wants to be stuck in a cycle of getting fucked and then boycotting to get what they want, especially for something that their livelihood depends on. They want a product made by people they trust who are making decisions in the best interest of the users/creators and not only decisions that are in the best interest of the company.

Re: An open letter to our community

#24

Post by pixl97 » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:55 PM UTC

alexb_ wrote: post #16

People are going to continue to complain, but I honestly think this is a pretty good walk back. It addresses all of the more legitimate things people were upset about: - $1,000,000 income floor for a trailing 12 months - Doesn't apply to old versions - Billed a lesser amount of 2.5% revenue if available, so low-cost indie games don't get destroyed Not to mention, removing the requirement to have "Made with Unity" on…

>People are going to continue to complain, but I honestly think this is a pretty good walk back.

If you come up to someone, point a gun at their head, and scream you're going to murder them it's very likely there is no walking back even if you put the gun away and then state more reasonable demands. Everyone knows you have a gun in your back pocket and you're insane enough to use it.

Re: An open letter to our community

#25

Post by dangerwill » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:55 PM UTC

JohnMakin wrote: post #17

alexb_ wrote: post #16

People are going to continue to complain, but I honestly think this is a pretty good walk back. It addresses all of the more legitimate things people were upset about: - $1,000,000 income floor for a trailing 12 months - Doesn't apply to old versions - Billed a lesser amount of 2.5% revenue if available, so low-cost indie games don't get destroyed Not to mention, removing the requirement to have "Made with Unity" on…

> - Doesn't apply to old versions It's not beyond the realm of reasonable belief to assume they can or will roll out some breaking change eventually that forces upgrades.

That isn't really a thing they can do for already shipped games, unless your game has an online component with dedicated servers and you need to update unity on the server side for a security fix. Most games don't upgrade their engine post launch, unless they are a live service game intended to get constant, significant updates for a long time.

Re: An open letter to our community

#26

Post by LanceH » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:55 PM UTC

JohnMakin wrote: post #17

alexb_ wrote: post #16

People are going to continue to complain, but I honestly think this is a pretty good walk back. It addresses all of the more legitimate things people were upset about: - $1,000,000 income floor for a trailing 12 months - Doesn't apply to old versions - Billed a lesser amount of 2.5% revenue if available, so low-cost indie games don't get destroyed Not to mention, removing the requirement to have "Made with Unity" on…

> - Doesn't apply to old versions It's not beyond the realm of reasonable belief to assume they can or will roll out some breaking change eventually that forces upgrades.

Or shift other (possibly not yet existent) assets between versions.

The goodwill has been burned and now everything needs to be contractually spelled out.

Or, for a good number of people, they can bail out to Godot for 2D or Unreal for 3D or consoles.

Re: An open letter to our community

#27

Post by drpossum » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:56 PM UTC

markhaslam wrote: post #3

This seems very reasonable actually? Being able to choose 2.5% revenue share (half of Unreal) does not sound bad to me. And very glad they removed the retroactivity of the new fees.

It may be reasonable and this is nothing but an attempt to stop the bleeding. There is no reason to trust them or their leadership again. The fact the CEO wasn't booted immediately shows they still want that style of leadership. The fact the CEO is not the one making this statement shows the fact Unity not interested to hold him accountable. They did this last year making dumb statements about monetization and then pulled this out this year. They deserve no trust and anyone that continues business with them gets what they deserve.

Re: An open letter to our community

#28

Post by dpkonofa » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:56 PM UTC

gmjosack wrote: post #7

This is basically everything policy wise they needed to do to quell the storm. This is honestly what should have just been announced originally. So much reputational damage just to arrive at a reasonable model weeks later. I'm happy for all the Unity developers out there that are breathing a sigh of relief. Hopefully they can ship their ongoing projects but I'd be hesitant about a continued long term relationship wit…

Ever since the mobile ad-first approach that's been a result of their buyout/merger/whatever it was, I think most Unity developers are bouncing. No one in their right might would leave their potential income in the hands of these sycophants.

Re: An open letter to our community

#29

Post by alexb_ » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:57 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #24

alexb_ wrote: post #16

People are going to continue to complain, but I honestly think this is a pretty good walk back. It addresses all of the more legitimate things people were upset about: - $1,000,000 income floor for a trailing 12 months - Doesn't apply to old versions - Billed a lesser amount of 2.5% revenue if available, so low-cost indie games don't get destroyed Not to mention, removing the requirement to have "Made with Unity" on…

>People are going to continue to complain, but I honestly think this is a pretty good walk back. If you come up to someone, point a gun at their head, and scream you're going to murder them it's very likely there is no walking back even if you put the gun away and then state more reasonable demands. Everyone knows you have a gun in your back pocket and you're insane enough to use it.

I agree - like I said at the end of my comment, the trust being broken is why the original pricing plan was such a disaster, and it's going to take a lot to build that back up.

Re: An open letter to our community

#30

Post by misnome » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:59 PM UTC

gmjosack wrote: post #7

This is basically everything policy wise they needed to do to quell the storm. This is honestly what should have just been announced originally. So much reputational damage just to arrive at a reasonable model weeks later. I'm happy for all the Unity developers out there that are breathing a sigh of relief. Hopefully they can ship their ongoing projects but I'd be hesitant about a continued long term relationship wit…

How does this help anything when they have already demonstrated their willingness to alter terms and retrospectively add fees or alter licensing conditions. They already walked back changes once before saying “Okay you can keep the terms you agreed on your version” and went back on that promise for this clusterfuck.

They burned the trust bridge and nothing they _ever_ do or can say will bring that trust back.