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

An open letter to our community

blog.unity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 223 posts

Re: An open letter to our community

#71

Post by generationP »

Macha wrote: post #61
generationP wrote: post #22

[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?

It says that they're trusting developer provided numbers, and they've basically moved from literal installs to basically a user count metric provided by the developer, so it seems there is no need for it to be DRMed or phone home.

Ah, I didn't spot that they no longer require counting installs. But you're right; this is probably what "the number of new people" means. And the "2.5% revenue share" variant means no hurdles for freeware. So a real improvement indeed. Thanks for the corrections!

Re: An open letter to our community

#73

Post by coldpie »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #67
dpkonofa wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's amazing to me how very smart people in corporations can convince themselves (and I mean, like really believe it) that the shit sandwich they are serving up is actually filet mignon. It's the whole "it's very hard for someone to understand something when their paycheck depends on not understanding it" issue. I've seen it a few times in person, where I'm like "How the f are we convincing ourselves of this?" 2 reco…

I haven't seen any evidence that anyone smart was involved in this decision. There's been some hints that the actual smart people (devs, customer support folks) were screaming bloody murder that it was a terrible idea, but the execs pushed it through anyway. This is yet another entry in the enormous list of evidence that becoming the head of a company does not require any intelligence. Quite the opposite, apparently.

Re: An open letter to our community

#74

Post by brucethemoose2 »

sounds wrote: post #68
the_snooze wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. If your project or organization is dependent on some external product or platform, that thing had better be boring and predictable . Busy people don't have the time or the patience to be jerked around by external surprises. Walk-back or not, Unity is demonstrably not boring and predictable anymore. That's done.

Oh they didn't walk it back. It's now one of two ways for them to get a percent of your revenue - that did change. (It also was only going to kick in once your revenue hit a certain point.) The CEO John R. didn't chime in here, and that would have meant him being accountable for this decision and its effect on Unity. His mask slipped here.

They did walk back charging per download/install.

There was no way they couldn't. Its literally not practical.

Re: An open letter to our community

#76

Post by brucethemoose2 »

dpkonofa wrote: post #28
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.

> most Unity developers

Most non mobile Unity developers?

Unity has cultivated this reputation as a provider for artsy indies and small studios, and now some larger AAs, but I think they want to be a provider for mobile casinos. That's where all the money is, and they are less likely to balk at more fees.

Re: An open letter to our community

#77

Post by tombert »

If they are willing to retroactively change the TOS once, why wouldn't they do it again once the smoke has settled?

I don't make games, I have nothing at stake in this fight, but this just feels like PR damage control and to be completely honest, I don't think most software engineers are so absolutely dependent on (proper noun) Unity to risk this company doing shady stuff again, and I suspect this entire ordeal will work as great marketing for engines like Unreal.

A part of me thinks that the CEO (and all the other executive morons who decided to make the installation fee) was sitting there thinking "what are they going to do? Move to Godot?", but if that was their line of thinking, and if they seriously did not think they were competing with Unreal, then I really do not see what business they have being multimillionaires in charge of any kind of decision-making process.

Re: An open letter to our community

#78

Post by VohuMana »

Too little too late, at least for me. I have been slowly working on some game ideas I want to make, in this process I have been checking out different game engines to see which one meets my needs best. With these changes I have removed Unity from my list of engines I am considering using. Granted I am just one dev and definitely don't represent the community as a whole so who knows maybe I am in the minority here.

Re: An open letter to our community

#79

Post by krapp »

dpkonofa wrote: post #23
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…

>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.

A lot of devs and studios are, they know they are, Unity knows they are, and there's little anyone can afford to do about it. I suspect most of the crowd that ostensibly abandoned Unity will return because they've already sunk too much time and energy into the platform, and that's the path of least resistance. They will tolerate whatever deal Unity gives them because they can't afford to do otherwise. Even if they liked the alternatives, the only reasonable business decision is to return to Unity and pretend this never happened.

Unfortunately this probably means much of the interest in Godot and other open source alternatives this debacle created is about to evaporate. Inertia is a harsh mistress.

Re: An open letter to our community

#80

Post by morrbo »

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…

I simply don't trust publicly traded companies these days. I genuinely can't think of an example where a private company in the tech space has become better since going public. I don't like to MBA bash, but it large tech companies genuinely seem filled with people who don't even like tech (let alone love it) and are just happy to squeeze everything and everyone at any opportunity. I'm genuinely concerned and waiting for the enshittification of the next round of companies - people like cloudflare - then I guess I'll just give up on anything mainstream and remain an indy Dev doing indy things for fun
Post reply on HN