this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
54 points (82.9% liked)
Out of the loop
10994 readers
2 users here now
A community that helps people stay up to date with things going on.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So that game developers don't have to rebuild all the rules for their game universes for every game, they use Unity which is one of several products that offers pre-built frameworks to build their games on top of.
This offers several advantages, the main ones being:
The way that Unity were paid historically was that you paid a subscription for each developer that was using it to write your game. There were several tiers of subscription, that met the needs of developers in small indies right through to huge multinationals.
It didn't matter how well your game sold, your cost was limited to the subscriptions you paid for. And you released your game bundled with the framework's 'run-time' from Unity that supported your in-game universe.
This changed recently when the executives at Unity had the spiffing idea of charging 20 US cents per installation of the run-time too, while also killing off the cheapest tier of the model subscription.
This meant that the indies suddenly have to pay more for each subscription, and they get to pay a fee for every installation of their game - not every sale - every installation. So every pirated copy - extra charge, every second install on the Steam Deck - extra charge...
What extra has Unity done to deserve the extra cash? In a nutshell - nothing. They just decided to unilaterally change their terms and take a bigger chunk of the pie for doing nothing more at the expense of the customers making the mistake of building on top of their product and being tied into their ecosystem.
As an analogy, imagine buying a season ticket to travel on the train to work each day, you pay €200/month for unlimited travel between the station closest to home and closest to work. This carries on for several years, and then suddenly the rail operator announces a 'communal rolling stock fee', every time you use your ticket there's a €1/passenger fee for each passenger boarding the same train as you whenever you travel! The more busy the train, the bigger the amount you have to pay!
What was a fixed monthly fee could be anything, you have no way to budget the cost, and you have to trust the same people screwing you to get the count right each time with no way of being certain they got it right...
What extra work is the rail operator doing, nothing they are just charging more for the same service.
And what did you do to deserve this? Nothing you just trusted the company you were dealing with to remain reasonable, and not invent bullshit charges.
Back to Unity...
As a result a lot of developers in late stage development plan to switch to a competitor for their next game. Those in early stages are looking at starting over. And there have been reports of publishers walking away from deals with developers because of the unknown risks of a new game because it was developed using Unity.
The easily predictable end result: many if not all of Unity's customers are vocally incandescent with justified rage.
TLDR: Software library company got greedy; they shat in the pool and tried to charge their customers a 'poop in the pool' fee, and every last one of their customers is very (very) loudly incredulous at such ass-hattery.
Curious what resources you've consulted that state Unity can or will charge for every pirated copy. How is the feasible and by what legal mechanisms would they enforce this?
I'm truly a neutral party, I don't play many games but I understand what's going on here a little bit.
You clearly have a jaded viewpoint to it for better or worse and I'm not sure that's warranted and is a bit disingenuous.
There wasn't an explicit comment stating they would charge for pirated copies, but it was inferred from their initial statements that their tracking didn't give them any information other than that the game was installed. When people brought up pirated copies and people purposely uninstalling and reinstalling the games to force the developer to pay outrageous amounts, Unity backtracked and said that their tracking DID give them enough info to identify and exclude pirated copies and reinstallations, but this was only after the backlash began.
There is a contingent of people who believe that Unity intentionally marked out this stark change with extremely unclear requirements so they could "listen to the community" and partially revert the changes to their original goal plan (possibly removing the lowest license tier and requiring Unity ads for this license, plus Unity taking lots of tracking info about your computer that they can sell on to 3rd parties) as a way to make everyone accept the changes more easily, in a similar method as what WOTC tried to do with their OGL changes last year.