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

91–100 of 223 posts

Re: An open letter to our community

#91

Post by tombert »

jstarfish wrote: post #51
risingsubmarine wrote: post #15

A definite improvement but the CEO needs to go. It's the only way to begin restoring long term trust. Developers & publishers are extremely wary of unstable business partners.

Yeah. An apology isn't enough in this case-- words clearly mean nothing to them. We were always told C-level compensation is as absurd as it is because they're expected to fall on their sword for fucking up. Keeping your position after defrauding customers is not a sign of good faith, it's just another [social] contract broken.

Yeah, I really do not understand why these executives get such huge salaries. They get all the credit when something goes well (see: Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, probably a dozen other CEOs in big tech), but when their decisions lead to a drop in revenue they get to fire 12,000 people, get to keep their exorbitant salaries and/or stock options, and just blame everyone else for the problem, or blame a "bad market".

I really do not understand what it is that they actually do, outside of being an extremely overpriced and lazy spokesperson.

Re: An open letter to our community

#92

Post by drpossum »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #83
drpossum wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone breathing a sigh of relief on this isn't paying attention

If you have a game that has been X months/years in development, porting to a different platform was not a realistic option. Those people are mega relieved they can get the current project out the door. Greenfield development should do a significant amount of consideration before starting a Unity project.

Agreed and good point.

Re: An open letter to our community

#93

Post by tombert »

rhtgrg wrote: post #90
tombert wrote: post #77

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…

> If they are willing to retroactively change the TOS once, why wouldn't they do it again once the smoke has settled? I haven't seen any evidence they did that, it's mostly been FUD from Godot supporters. The initial communication was messy, but where are actual TOS changes that are being touted so loudly? https://unity.com/legal/terms-of-service https://unity.com/legal/terms-of-service-legacy

I have no skin in this game, but I read this article: https://gameworldobserver.com/2023/09/14/unity-license-terms...

ETA:

You updated your post with the TOS, but from what I read the concern was that the new TOS said it applied to any new distribution of the Unity Runtime, without specifying versions and the like.

Re: An open letter to our community

#94

Post by DonHopkins »

rybosworld wrote: post #8
rybosworld wrote: post #2

This is better than what they announced originally but it doesn't cure the breach of trust. I have no doubt that as long John R. and Tomar B. continue to run the show, that the company will behave unethically again in the future.

Also, there are still hints of them trying to play this off as a misunderstanding rather than what it really was: a predatory pricing scheme and an attempt to retroactively change ToS. "When we first introduced the Runtime Fee policy, we used the term “installs” which the community found to be unclear so we’re using the term "initial engagement" as the unit of measure." The community did not find this unclear. The or…

Here's where a professional NFT shilling tech influencer tried to carry the water for Unity by parroting their gaslighting that developers were bitchy little children who "misunderstood" the announcement, and the NFT shill's followers chimed in with how stupid and childish and demanding game developers are.

https://www.facebook.com/robert.tercek/posts/pfbid0RPPNvecme...

Including un-ironic replies like this one commenting "some insight into what the gamer peasants are talking about" and quoting one game developer's factual reaction, to which the NFT shill replied by calling it "unhinged conspiratorial speculating that poisons the whole atmosphere".

https://www.facebook.com/robert.tercek/posts/pfbid0RPPNvecme...

I took the NFT shill to task on that, with quotes and links and receipts. I pointed out that he and Unity were the ones "poisoning the whole atmosphere" by gaslighting, calling developers "confused" when they actually understood all too well, and if anyone was "poisoning the whole atmosphere" first and foremost, it was John Riccitiello literally and publically calling game developers "some of the biggest fucking idiots".

https://www.pocketgamer.biz/interview/79190/unity-ironsource...

Twice the NFT shill snarkily blamed game developers for the death threat. First he baselessly accused game developers of "often" making death threats, then he gleefully berated game developers for not condemning it (which they actually did, but he didn't bother to notice), demanding they condemn it without actually condemning it himself, when it was actually a Unity employee who made the death threat, not a game developer:

"Game developers often find colorful ways of making their disappointment known."

https://www.facebook.com/robert.tercek/posts/pfbid0RPPNvecme...

"I notice that none of game developers who shared their righteous indignation last week had the courage to speak up and condemn the cowards who phoned in death threats to Unity offices. Keep it classy, game developers."

https://www.facebook.com/robert.tercek/posts/pfbid0RPPNvecme...

>Here are the Godot folks, who have greatly benefited from this fiasco through no fault of their own, condemning the bomb threat, and proving you wrong. No, Robert Tercek, you are wrong when you blame game developers for the bomb threat with no evidence, when the police say it was a Unity employee, and when you falsely claim that game developers "OFTEN find colorful ways of making their disappointment known" like making bomb threats.

>Godot Engine @godotengine

>We extend our sincere solidarity and support to the Unity workers. The recent reactions have left us profoundly disappointed. Threats of violence should have no place in the gamedev community.

https://twitter.com/godotengine/status/1702413121086705951

The truth behind the Unity "Death Threats":

https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/16j21jg/the_truth_...

>Update: San Francisco police told Polygon that officers responded to Unity’s San Francisco office “regarding a threats incident.” A “reporting party” told police that “an employee made a threat towards his employer using social media.” The employee that made the threat works in an office outside of California, according to the police statement.

The PacMan Fever / NFT Shilling thread:

https://www.facebook.com/robert.tercek/posts/pfbid0RPPNvecme...

Re: An open letter to our community

#95

Post by ASalazarMX »

misnome wrote: post #30
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.

Compared to how other companies behave, Reddit for example, it's a good signal to their customers that they've come to their senses and reached a reasonable compromise. Also, a second mistake like this would be devastating, so hopefully Unity will handle changes better from now on.

Re: An open letter to our community

#96

Post by squeaky-clean »

endisneigh wrote: post #33

It’s interesting how some complain companies don’t listen to them, and others say that it doesn’t matter if changes are made after (rightful) complaints. I have absolutely no stake in this and I’m sure these aren’t the same people, but it is interesting. From reading the original proposal and this new one, they should’ve gone first with this one. I’m sure unity developers will hesitatingly continue their work.

Just because they listened once when their profits were seriously on the line, doesn't mean they listen generally.

If you file for divorce, and in reaction they buy you flowers and other gifts, it doesn't mean they're suddenly fixed and have always been a good partner.

It's also very likely they got some legal letters from Pokémon Go or other similarly large Unity based games, and they still don't care about what the online community has to say.

Re: An open letter to our community

#98

Post by peteforde »

risingsubmarine wrote: post #15

A definite improvement but the CEO needs to go. It's the only way to begin restoring long term trust. Developers & publishers are extremely wary of unstable business partners.

The fact that it wasn't written by the CEO is the strongest indication that Riccitello might be out.

Re: An open letter to our community

#99

Post by rhtgrg »

tombert wrote: post #93
rhtgrg wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they are willing to retroactively change the TOS once, why wouldn't they do it again once the smoke has settled? I haven't seen any evidence they did that, it's mostly been FUD from Godot supporters. The initial communication was messy, but where are actual TOS changes that are being touted so loudly? https://unity.com/legal/terms-of-service https://unity.com/legal/terms-of-service-legacy

I have no skin in this game, but I read this article: https://gameworldobserver.com/2023/09/14/unity-license-terms... ETA: You updated your post with the TOS, but from what I read the concern was that the new TOS said it applied to any new distribution of the Unity Runtime, without specifying versions and the like.

I have never seen a Unity TOS that specified versions as seen in the screenshot of the link you shared. Where did they get that screenshot from? They need to share their source. For all we know this is a change from 2020 (latest version referred to in their screenshot).

In which case I think you will agree that is plenty of notice and most likely unrelated to be maliciously related to what's being announced now. They've even walked back the applicability to old versions as seen in GP.

Re: An open letter to our community

#100

Post by drra »

Unity attempt at cash grab is nothing new but since it backfired they are using their sweetest words to walk it back. This is happening all the time in ecosystems where businesses are built completely relying on a single vendor or platform. The difference is hardly anybody hears or cares about it.

You are not doing good job if your company or business model can be killed by anyone else than you or your customers.

Post reply on HN