this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
484 points (98.2% liked)

Games

16838 readers
659 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
484
Devs on Unity Runtime Fee: "The trust is gone forever" (www.gamesindustry.biz)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It's been almost a full week since Unity announced its controversial Runtime Fee, and the developer backlash continues.

Studios around the world have expressed concerns that the new fee – charging them every time their game is installed after January 1, 2024, providing they meet certain thresholds – threatens to jeopardise the health, or even existence, of their business. And despite subsequent statements from Unity, it's still not entirely apparent how badly these businesses will be affected.

"The most ridiculous part of this fiasco is that the full effects of Unity's decision on the business aren't even clear," says Ustwo Games chief creative officer Danny Gray. "We're left astounded that an operation of that size can move forward with such ill-thought-out plans and are now scrambling to make amendments."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] commissar_whiskers@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Didn't they see Hasbro trying the same thing? Sure, DnD itself is doing fine, but they lost the trust of third party publishers.

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Could I get a digestible version of the dnd drama? I could never parse what was happening.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 43 points 1 year ago (2 children)

DnD 5e had a license for use that allowed 3rd party companies to make stuff for the game following specific rules, and they did so which of course helped with increasing the popularity of the brand. This license existed due to the backlash from players and 3rd party developers who did not like the 4e licensing which was ridiculously restrictive.

Then WotC/Hasbro decided they wanted more control and put out a draconian revision and also tried to invalidate the existing license using questionable legal logic that wouldn't stand up in court, but would be cost prohibitive for the 3rd party companies to fight in court. This revision also included licensing costs that would drive 3rd party companies out of business. Then they did a revision that tried to make creating a virtual tabletop that could be used with DnD a violation to try and corner the market for WotC's completely non-existent virtual tabletop.

Basically they tried to stop doing the thing they had in place for like a decade to milk an unrealistically high amount of money out of companies that were working with them and tried to force this on extremely short notice. So same thing as reddit and now Unity are doing.

Expect the next version of DnD to be a walled garden again like 4e was and most likely fade out of the public view again.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The true irony here is that TSR went bankrupt because they tried to mess with the community content licenses that were basically gentleman's agreements at the time, allowing WotC to purchase D&D in the first place with 3rd edition. I hope they sell the property to someone that understands how to run that golden goose, without expecting unlimited growth.

[–] friek@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Paizo. Been playing Pathfinder for years.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Paizo wouldn't exist for over a decade when TSR sold D&D to WotC. Try again.

[–] commissar_whiskers@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago

And it's not just me right? This is similar. Revising existing licensing to squeeze more money out of people who already use their back end.