"Unity Technologies weighs its options, including a possible sale of the company"

So this just came up in my news feed...

http://venturebeat.com/2014/09/10/u...luding-a-possible-sale-of-the-company-for-2b/

Is Venture Beat a reliable source of news anyway?

 

What makes me sick is that MS is offering for Minecraft what Unity technologies is valued at in the article

 

Thats what happens when investors and venture capitalists enter a company ..... they look for exit strategies to sell when the company is hot so they can gain profits on their investment before the company loses steam and drops in value.

So it was bound to happen. Now its only a waiting game to see who will offer the most.

My guess is Autodesk.

 

I certainly hope not. Having just discovered Unity less than a year ago and getting to where I like it... would be a shame for some new company to come in and decide, for example, to throw out the free version entirely. Sure it is unlikely but certainly not beyond the realm of reason once investors start pushing for maximizing income. Guess we'll just have to wait and see if Unity themselves post anything about this.

 

I don't mind what they do behind the scenes regarding the sale of the company but what I do mind is if it all goes to S*** after they sell it. The founders ( Not the ones from Star Trek Deep Space Nine ) who helped make Unity the power house that it is right now need to think not only about their pockets but the people that bought Unity that helped fill them pockets.

 

Microsoft began releases of Visual Studio Express on October 2005. Unity was only a few months old at that point and it didn't get a free version until four years later in 2009.

The exact opposite is far more likely to occur. Microsoft may eliminate or reduce the Unity Pro price to make it more appealing over the competition.

 

Putting that aside, all it says is "exploring options", and that one of the options is a sale. It's exceptionally vague and doesn't actually say that they're considering pursuing a sale. The closest it gets is saying that one shareholder sold their shares and that this prompted an evaluation of their future... nothing about what the focus of that evaluation might have even been.

So I'd say it might be reliable, but not to let the key words in the headline spin the story's context.

 

Damn, that means I got duped into the clickbait headlines. I just wanted to post here in case someone knows more.

 

IMHO, any purchase of Unity Technologies in the near future(next six months) is unlikely based on pure financial factors.

It has not been that long since the system shock that was Unreal 4. Reasonable Price discovery can only be done once the full impact of this has been assessed.

Always possible that some buyer for whom immediate financial considerations are secondary might make an offer but I think that is less common

 

There is not a lot of company who can afford this price. Whoever buys it, "terrible" political decisions will be made (Apple would stop android, microsoft would kill IOS/Android, amazon would mean S***, etc).

I hope Unity will officially comment soon...

 

If anyone killed Android/IOS it would ruin the engine and make it worthless.

 

Everyone was quick to forget what happened to Renderware. As a developer, putting all your eggs in one middleware basket is dangerous.

More recently, we've seen Testflight rapidly drop Android support instantly after being bought by Apple, and we've seen OpenFeint killed as it was absorbed into Gree.

Unity is great, but there's always been the risk of it being utterly destroyed by a sale to, say, a platform holder.

Obviously, if Apple, MS, or Sony buy them, it's going to be devastating as they quickly kill/cripple support for other platforms. By comparison, a buyout by Autodesk or heck, even Facebook, doesn't seem so bad.

 

With Autodesk there would be a tiny chance of a Linux editor too, considering they still keep Maya up to date for that platform.

 

If Apple, MS or Sony buy one of the biggest engines in the world, they sure as hell won't do it just in order to kill off 90% of the userbase by dropping all the multi-platform support that makes Unity so appealing. Okay, Windows only is at least remotely plausible, but PS only or Apple only? That would be an economic trainwreck, I guess.

But why are we even discussing this when the only information we have is that UT might or might not do something at some point in the future?

 

let's the paranoia and speculation begin

 

The whole thing seems potentially dicey, but could be good for everyone.

Best case scenario: They get bought out and are allowed to stay on the successful course of focusing on stability and cross platform while injecting extra funds to develop more "out of the box " tools such as 3d modeler or a better terrain editor.

Worst case scenario: They get bought out by someone that makes Unity exclusive to their platform, missing the whole reason Unity works so well. Pours all of the funds into marketing and bullcrap. Overly monitor the community and kill threads like this one. Users get fed up and bail to Unreal. Then the company tanks and they fire off the staff.

Most likely scenario: Nothing happens.

 

Of course selling the company is an option, it always is; doesn't mean it's a very weighted one though.

 

Am I the only one around here who thinks UE4 is a pretty poor substitute for Unity? If you choose to go with it you're basically cutting your userbase in more than half because of the hardware requirements. Even in a scene with virtually no objects you're getting low framerates unless you have a powerful desktop pc with a new graphics card. I'm sure UE4 is great for next-gen AAA console and pc games, but how many indies have the resources to pull something like that off anyway?

Sorry if I'm coming off as annoyed, but I'm just puzzled that people seem to assume UE4 can be a substitute for Unity when this actually isn't true at all for a lot of developers.

I wish no matter what happens to Unity, it will continue to be the simple and versatile game development tool it has always been.

 

Second.

And if the day comes that Unity has their CEO go on stage at E3 in designer jeans holding a chainsaw gun is the day I go back to Torque.

 

I hope two of those shaders are...

a.) Unity's built-in water shader
b.) The Uber PBR shader

 

@blobinabottle, how would Unity being acquired by Amazon be sh**? They recently just bought Twitch which would most likely be integrated with Unity somehow and Amazons servers would likely mean very affordable Unity Cloud Build prices. Amazon is also "platform" independent in comparison to Microsoft who would most definitely restrict development to Windows/Xbox etc if not keep the existing platforms while mostly favoring their own direct x platforms similar to their XNA framework .

Although the article only mentions Amazon and Microsoft, perhaps Facebook would be another possible option, now that they own Oculus and will likely be developing their own platform for that, it may possibly be in their interest, not to mention they have Carmack who could eventually start working on the Unity engine if not serve as a technical adviser or something of that nature.

Autodesk is another possible option, though they already purchased Bitsquid game engine earlier this year which they will probably integrate with some secret game engine framework they have had under development:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/218983/Autodesk_acquires_Bitsquid_3D_game_engine.php

Anyone else have any speculations about this?

 

"Later this year, Autodesk will introduce a modern and flexible 3D game engine based on the Bitsquid engine. By introducing a game engine, Autodesk can offer game makers a more complete game creation workflow from concept to release." http://www.autodesk.com/campaigns/bitsquid

It seems like Autodesk has its own "Big" plans for entering the Game Engine SDK space, which means even more competition for Unity.

Also, Project Anarchy released another Game Engine SDK earlier this year which is also changing the dynamics of the space.

I am very curious to see how Unity will respond to the competition because they have being losing more and more developers since Unreal Engine 4 made their announcement at the GDC earlier this year, and with Autodesk's SDK on the horizon its only a matter of time before Unity makes a response to the changing market.

So far 2014 has being a very exciting year for game development, and I would presume 2015 is going to be even more so with the upcoming Steam Box, Oculus Rift, Android TV, etc.

 

Steam's hardware survey paints a different picture. A quick glance over the figures for actual graphics card models shows most users are within the range of UE4's system requirements.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

My processor is an AMD Phenom II X4 965 and was released in 2009. My graphics card is a GTX 460 and was released in 2010.

Lowest frame rate I've seen has been 20 FPS with maximum settings running Effects Cave in the editor. Running inside the editor is always a fair drop in frame rate.

You must have pretty low standards for "powerful".

 

lol also saw it on my news feed and you beat me to posting it here.

Anywho, I just hope if it does get sold, that it isn't sold to Microsoft. I've only had bad experience with Microsoft. And they ruined Skype enough. Don't even get me started on Windows 8, which I'll still have no choice but use/endure if I wanna publish on the Windows Store or Windows Phone Store.

No idea how Amazon buying it would be bad, or good, I don't have much experience with them, but I never had problems with Autodesk. Just please not Microsoft, unless they'll keep things as they are and not change roadmaps in some crazy ways like removing the freaking "send" button from skype, and FORCING you to update to keep using Skype since there's pretty much nothing else, or making a Windows primarily made for touchscreen computers or computer tables, forcing you to have a microsoft account to even use your Windows 8, changing the boot of your computer, sneaking in cloud and other syncing into your windows unless you click the "Custom - not recommended" path of installation, and the list goes on but I'll stop here...

 

Ok a serious question now, I always wondered. Why would a company sell if they're doing good and progressing? Wouldn't that mean working on something new and starting over for the founders/sellers?

 

Going by Autodesk's past behavior they might not be satisfied with owning just one game engine.
Remember this is the company that wouldn't rest until it was able to buy most of the 3d modelling programs. It never was satisfied with owning just one.

Just for the record though, I don't put much importance in the venture beat story. So far I haven't found any other source to this. This story itself quotes multiple anonymous sources(not surprising in a story of this nature) but this makes it very difficult to assess the credibility of the story. Anonymous sources could be anyone from some newbie 2 months into his job to some oldie looking to move to another company to... well anything.

 

Sometimes - pretty commonly, in fact - the kind of people who like starting and building businesses lose interest in them after they're stable and established. The interesting part for them is the building moreso than the housekeeping. So starting over could be the whole point.

Running your own business chews up a bucketload of time, too, and it can be really stressful. Not everything is about money. Who cares if you're rich if you can't hang out with your loved ones?

Or, it can be somewhat like a career change. Doing or starting something new can be refreshing. Or, you want to retire. Or, your life priorities/desires change and being a business owner / your particular business may no longer be a fit. Or... well, there's plenty of reasons, really, just like any other change someone could make in their lives.

 

@Mr.T, The author seems pretty credible but the fact that there aren't any other sources verifying this makes me think that it could just be a rumor. Either way its likely Unity will have to react soon, mainly by lowering the upfront costs of using the pro features, because as of now UE4 is definitely the best solution all around for indie studios.

 

Oh, I am not questioning the integrity of the journalist at all. Sometimes it is quite possible that even good journalists get stories wrong because of the nature of their sources

 

Btw, Once gain let me quote Mr.Helgason directly here

from here

That does not at all appear to be a man intent on selling anywhere in the near future

 

Except it doesn't.

http://i6.minus.com/iernaIlhILGEs.png

32.36% would be able to run.
30.44% would not be able to run.
(37% unknown)

I think I was very generous. If we go by the system requirements outlined on the UE website, those unable to run would be far greater.

It depends of course what kind of application you're making. If you're developing for oculus rift then not even two Radeon 7990 in crossfire would suffice.

 

What does the story say that it could even be wrong about? It's deliciously vague, using evocative language to make readers think about the possibility of a sale... and that's it.

It doesn't actually say anywhere that Unity is pursuing a sale or in any form of sale negotiations. All it says is that they've considered options (a routine part of any business's long term planning) and that selling is one of them (true of virtually any successful business and, as shown by your quote, one that's been publicly discussed in the past).

 

But what if Epic is trying to buy Unity?!

 

Alright. That is another way of putting it and probably a better way

 

Except if you're developing for Oculus Rift then you're already developing for a very niche user base. Most users of it will understand you need better hardware.

Also keep in mind that Crossfire and SLI do not always result in a speed increase. Some games actually perform better with them disabled.

 

"the kind of people who like starting and building businesses lose interest in them after they're stable and established" But but but, Unity 5 is just starting! There's a whole lot new things coming and its just getting interesting!

"Running your own business chews up a bucketload of time" I don't know, to me it looks like if you're on top you have less to do and more time, while if you're the worker and just starting and making something out of your self, you have a lot more to do.

"Or, it can be somewhat like a career change. Doing or starting something new can be refreshing. Or, you want to retire." Ok that one I completely understand. xD

 

We'll see about that. Facebook don't do small, and I think you're underestimating the coming VR revolution. But anyway, out of curtesy for OT we shouldn't continue this discussion here (though I'd like to).

 

I'd have had more faith if Facebook was not the owner. I think you're overestimating VR. It is an expensive gimmick.

 

Even the article author isn't entirely sure of himself

 

I was standing by the sideline, eating popcorn, during the previous VR revolution. That was hilarious

 

The article is full of speculations. Nothing more.

 

Can't imagine Unity being worth even close to $1 billion. We are talking about a retro indie engine not something ground breaking like OR.

 

Oh, dear God no.
"Import from .blend? Screw that." *Cut*
"Haha, free version? No, nonononono! No commercial license for the free version." *Cut*
"The hell is 'uGUI'? They should be using Scaleform." *Cut*
"We don't do perpetual licenses anymore, subscription-only" *Cut*

Unity 5.1 Update:
"....Pretty good where it is. Added, uh... particle... emitters? I don't know, it's better than the old one. We're still keeping the old one too though. Figure it out."

 

YUP!

Not to mention that something like 1/3 of people get sick from it.

VR is the new 3d.

No one really cares.

 

let's hope nobody buys them

else microsoft would be nice...

 

It may not be up to him. It all depends on how many shares the investors have vs. the founders have. So if the investors have 49% of the shares, and if they all are wanting UT to be sold it will be a lot of pressure on the founders to do so. But if the investors hold more than 50% of shares then its absolutely their decision.

 

I'm not betting on VR. I fell for the hype 15 years ago, and earlier this year, I found a vendor and tried on the Rift. It made me ill, it was heavy, and it definitely wouldn't be fun to use for 2-4 hours of game time. Tack on a $200-$400 price tag, and you're back up to an expensive toy for a niche audience.

Now, Google glass (and competitors)? That's has possibility...

Gigi

 

I hope UT is bought by McDonald's and one out of six Asset Store packages will come with each Happy Meal.