Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

Np

 

Nodoby trusts epic they are almost as bad as unity management is right now.
And you are right. we are here because of lack of competition.
The problem is that for a serious game it's either unity or unreal...
either are too niche (cryengine etc) or too young (godot etc) to be used for a medium/large scale game.
sure if someone can contradict me I really love to see an alternative to unity that's not epic but for everything else than pretty small games i don't think we have any

 

Lol, i liked the last part hahaha, i would like to work with godot, just because i can not find a decent game engine that works with mobile, i tried flax but i can not make it export the apk, but i know godot is not exactly good on performance and i need that, also while godot can be c# now, the workflow is very different and weird, i hate it xD

 

I doubt most of those employees are working on Unity directly, there's probably quite a few in the various companies they've absorbed working on 'media stuff'.

 

Thats great and we think having at least some awareness of many tools is always a good idea.
Have a play with O3DE, Godot, etc. what you learn wont hurt and might help ... and it can be a lot of fun to crack open a new tool and see what it can do and how

 

It is, but Unity also has binding arbitration.

When dealing with a company that isn't acting in good faith (such as one that is sneakily editing the TOS), its can to be a huge pain in the ass getting it into a court room. If anyone tries, they'll almost certainly concede the point to that one company or individual under an NDA to avoid establishing any sort of binding decision for the broader community.

 

Why bothering with c#? Gdscript is equally good or better as c#. I know that you all use c# for a while, but trust me, Gdscript is created just for making games, not for general purpose.

 

Exactly my point, without an actual tangible provable counter you cant charge anything.

That is why i think Unity installs estimation will be extremely conservative or risk loose millions in lawsuits.

 

Can I sign up for a newsletter somewhere so that I can get information about when the Unity bosses have finished their hangover after the long cocaine party? In the meantime....is there a better alternative than Godot for 2D?

 

Why this is a sneak change ?

They both can change it by the current agreement and announced the new fee months before apply it.

 

Defold, gdevelop, game maker

 

ignore that guy, i think is a bot, that same mesage was posted before many times, i also on the first pages, he is creating new accounts, just ignore him

 

good point, thanks for providing a great reason for Unity users to draw a line in the sand right now.

 

i asked for a better, not another alternative.I know the things they exists

 

They removed the part about being to able to use an earlier version of the TOS without announcing it and deleted the TOS history on GitHub.

 

Exactly.

The proof of all this can be seen by seeing on YouTube that even the last idiot who has been using Unreal for a week is coming up with spatial graphics.

Apart Enemies belongs, the AAA Unity quality graphics work can be counted on the fingers of one hand even though Hdrp can "Theoretically" get there.

Unreal is aimed at making life easier for developers, while Unity does everything it can to ruin your day (Not to mention the millions of bugs that have been unsolved for years), which I never reported because they ask you to send the entire project (Madness).

 

Define better..game maker is de facto for 2d

 

So you are saying I should port my codebase grown over the last ten years just port to GDScript?? Do you know how much work that would be?

I understood that GDScript is good when using Godot, but for us who stuck to C# for years it is not just a matter to learn a new language but foremost to port our libraries.

 

Probably a lot but you will spend few weeks

 

To me the removing of the TOS history is the worst part, because it suggests they thought we just wouldn't remember without the GitHub log.

 

At this point, it may be best for the community if unity doesn’t change their pricing back, because this forces people to start developing more solutions like Godot that’s open source, and opens peoples eyes to what they’re really investing in when they support an individual company religiously. Time to go full boar in a new community..

 

BTW i send you links for stride and flax because my brain is burned trying to find a decent game engine for mobile, but idk which platform do you need... if you are making games for PCs you can also try Unigine which has animation for bones and all that stuffs

 

GDSript is an untyped language, which I wouldn't touch tbh. It is just too error-prone for my personal preference.

 

that is definitely not the reason why we are leaving

 

Yes!

The managers manage the company badly and instead of being kicked out they get very hight salaries and good millionaires every year.

Funds for the program and the developers are in short supply and instead of leaving, these leech and parasites ask more money from their customers.

 

I understand your pain, but, what's better for you, to continue using unity, or to switch to something else.. nothing will live forever

 

Yes, I'm also evaluating unigine, and graphically it seems to reach good quality.

 

You are wrong..check documentation :
https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/tutorials/scripting/gdscript/static_typing.html

 

Vanguard has its hands on all sides of everything, but these aren't THAT Vanguard, these are some of their publicly investable funds.

 

I pity all the time and money inwasted (pun intended) into Unity. Evaluating Godot and Unreal Engine now.

Unity has spent BILLIONS of $ for purchase of "crappy" companies, now they suddenly realize they lack money and normal users should pay the bill? If that is the company policy on how to treat their customers we better don't be customers any more. This whole move and how it is handled is the last step of mistreatment for me. First the stock market launch so that greedy investors rule the company. Second 1.5 years of complete radio silence about ECS. And now a retroactive change on terms and conditions? The word "fraud" comes to mind.

I'm sorry for all people too deep in a project to jump ship now. But you should deeply consider if you stick to Unity after that. Unity has started as a dream, but like most successful companies they got arrogant and reversed the things which made them great. I expect this whole thing to backfire heavily and that they make less money with this change than before. It's just a shortsighted and stupid move. Not even mentioning legal implications.

Since UT seems heavily resistant to common sense and what their community wants, I don't expect them to change their mind. And even if they do now, they will try again to screw us over in another form later. Trust is lost and cannot be regained. It was a huge mistake for me to invest my time and energy into Unity, what became more and more clear in the last few years. I will not repeat that mistake. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me ..., you can't fool me 3 times.

Bye.

 

Are we sure that it is not John Riccitiello spreading these conspiracies about Vanguard?

 

Being 7 years into a large PC game project near completion this is a major kick in the balls, porting to Unreal just isn't practical no matter how much the team wants to yet these new changes could bankrupt us, feel so trapped and helpless

 

Of course you can. It literally happens. People do get charged a million bucks for their utilities bill.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...k-in-error-after-edf-sent-1m-electricity-bill

The difference is that those people can point to the meter and say 'there's the proof that we dont owe that.' And here at least, there's a regulatory body to step in on behalf of them, instead of individuals having to pursue a lengthy and expensive court case to prove they dont owe that money.
Because the person billed has to prove they dont owe the charge.

With Unity, since there is no meter, the developer has no way to disprove, and there's no regulatory body to appeal to.

Over here, the average court case costs £2700 per day. For a B2B contract dispute you okay for budgeting for sr 10 days minimum, each time you want to contest a bill?

 

As heinous as JR seems, he's innocuous in comparison to a good portion of the board setting his agendas and objectives.

 

hahahahaha huh you see? now everybody loves unity - we don't know what we got until we lose it because of greedy men

 

WTF? How did Vanguard get pulled into this?

 

Indeed!

The concern that drives us to change the engine is not so much this decision (also because it doesn't affect many of us personally), but the fact that if the CEO and the board of directors of the company remain, this will only be the first of many crazy ideas.

After all, what do you expect if you put a CEO who wanted to make the players pay for the bullets on Battelfield.

Either these people leave (But I doubt it), or we find other engines (Almost certain).

 

More baseless conspiracy. He stacked the board with his puppets. He is even paying some of their salaries.

 

As part of the processes trying to find objectives and directional imperatives that make sense of what's going on.

 

Real action we can take is to report Unity to our national competition regulators. In the UK that's the CMA and I reported Unity a couple of days ago. Of particular note is the change of TOS, deleting the old TOS, and waiving fees for using Unity's own Ad platform over the competition. The latter is very likely anticompetitive and in need of regulation.

Across the EU, there are some legal securities considered for platform providers who's reach isn't just a product but a backbone of a large swathe of people's livelihoods, so there's good reason for the EU to step in here based on their public values.

 

You've got an upside down view of how power works at the money level. Investors control things whenever debt is involved.

 

and even if your meters say you used 2000 units of gas or electric.. after all its a bit like a calorie.. you cant see them.. you cant gather them all in a box and count them, this does feel a good analogy for unitys install count guestimations.. we decided you used x cos our magic box said so

 

Well yeah but if you follow a river far enough downstream eventually you are going to hit an ocean... Vanguard probably holds a piece of just about every major company involved with gaming somewhere in its mutual funds.

 

Good point - a physical disc/etc. can be sold and resold used countless times in its lifetime over many years. Each person who buys it would be an install at least once plus each time their console or system breaks down or needs an upgrade if determined by hardware identifiers etc. and they have to install it again. That's beyond the usual multi-device and cross-platform release issues with install counts.

 

Which is exactly what I said! And this isn't THAT Vanguard, these are merely funds.

 

You hit the nail on the head "None of these entities (company, group or otherwise) can be trusted"

By that we are saying the limits of trust are down to business factors and Unity has shown its willingness and ability to drastically change overnight the fundamentals unit economics of partnering with them.

Now Epic's CEO is an insufferable prick IMO, I hate the business they do with PC Exclusives and all I can just keep going on about how I wouldn't piss on them if they where on fire (old southern expression meaning I have less than no care for them personally)

But

And its a really big but

Epic has verbiage that mitigates the risk of exactly what Unity has done ... that overnight retroactive change. So while its just a different deal with a different devil its a devil whose deal is more robust and guarded and thus less volatile. I don't think Epic is a good guy and Unity is a bad guy

I think Epic's terms and track record is a safer more stable option than Unity's and being a small company with tight margins that safer option is FAR more attractive than anything Unity is offering.

Even if Epic wasn't the option Unity scares me to be partnered with on a game project. There are edge cases where they can be what causes us to fold. And that is just unacceptable, I would sooner go home grown than release a game on Unity and that will be true now for a few years even if they turn it all around today ... it will take time to recover a level of trust because it has to be proven if work done e.g. history. So this next project will not be on Unity there is no way that happens. We chose Unreal because it was the most robust tool with the best resources that we have some minor exp in and its terms have guardrails that mitigate against it eating our lunch and they have a history of ... yes being a prick ... but being a prick that does what they say and they say they cant change the terms, they release new terms we can stay on the terms for the version we agreed to... that makes us feel safe and happy to do business with them despite needing a hot shower to scrub the PC Excluvie and Tencent stank off us

For note, Tencent is also invested in Unity as I recall ... my point is that these are business partners not lovers
We aren't here to judge their character traits and moral fibre beyond whether are they a fit-for-purpose business partner and Unity is not at this point due to the breach of trust.

 

Just out of interest, if Unity told you that, (beyond some threshold retrospectively applied to when you started selling assets), they were going to start charging you a fee every time they think someone installed something containing one of your assets, would you be okay with that on the basis that you theoretically could take them to court to try and prove that their numbers were wrong?

 

well, there is many ways to achieve success. unity's strategy was clearly gather MASSES of customers by keeping prices very reasonable, or even cheap. of course, that burned their own cash. but it was acceptable, as long as there were lucrative upside and growth in the future. BIG money can't be made with handful of customers. and getting MASSES of customers can't be achieved by being highly profitable.

they took a risk, burned billions to get decent customer base and now try to exploit it. this is not a new business model, it's actually more common than one might think.

some say, that "they need to be profitable to continue r&d" ... no, they chose this path. they could be profitable by sacrificing market share. we don't own them anything. in companies like this, the board is silent part of the management. they know what's going on. this may very well be their idea. management is there to take the heat if necessary, so that the board won't have to.

 

I'm not him but nope

I would pull our assets off UAS that day
The risk of being nuked by predatory royalty vs the risk of not finding an alt market ... Alt market it is

 

The hell is up with the sales and marketing that high? Are they inviting random ceos for drugs and hookers every day?