A fresh report into Unity’s hugely-controversial decision to start charging developers when their games are downloaded has thrown fresh light on the situation.

MobileGamer sources say Unity has already offered some studios a 100% fee waiver - if they switch over to Unity’s own LevelPlay ad platform.

The report quotes industry consultants that say this move is an “attempt to destroy” Unity’s main competitior in this field: AppLovin.

  • @NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1392 years ago

    Don’t you just love when a company creates a problem just to go and try to sell the solution?

    • frustratedphagocytosis
      link
      fedilink
      252 years ago

      It looks like a protection racket with extra steps. An unpleasant solution presented by the problem creator. Why is this not banned?

      • cthonctic
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        IBM sure does suck donkey balls but I really don’t think that particular thing is their fault.

        • @Krackalot@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          I wasn’t blaming any single entity. And really the first smart phone wouldn’t be accurate either, probably the first iPhone. Not so much brand, but popularity. Once the market became so large, and they started to realize they could get people addicted, regular games were over.

    • @lobut@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      162 years ago

      I’d imagine that game devs, just like Unity’s shareholders, like predictability in profits. Even if it’s more expensive overall for them to move to Unreal for their next game, it could be worth it to avoid future calamity.

  • Poggervania
    link
    fedilink
    602 years ago

    The conspiracy theorist in me says Unity planned this whole thing out to get less resistance on this thing they actually wanted to roll out; announce a super shit change that will intentionally outrage everybody, then say “ok, we won’t do it if you agree to use this other shitty model instead”.

    Anyways, big shoutout to Godot for existing as an open-source alternative.

    • drphungky
      link
      fedilink
      English
      362 years ago

      That’s not a conspiracy theory that’s like entry level MBA stuff.

  • Ms. ArmoredThirteen
    link
    fedilink
    English
    532 years ago

    Hey remember that time Unity bought IronSource so they could integrate ads more aggressively? Unity stopped being a game engine at some point they’re just an ads company now

  • LazaroFilm
    link
    fedilink
    English
    482 years ago

    There should be a law against offering something for free for a long time, until many other businesses rely on it then make it pay to a point of breaking all those businesses. It’s one thing changing the price of a product that’s customer facing but if you market to other businesses that’s not okay. I guess it’s up to businesses to look in the contract for a clause that states that the product will be free forever or that they need X time warning before making it pay.

    • geosocoOP
      link
      fedilink
      19
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Tech companies wouldn’t exist. It’s literally most of their business plans.

    • @chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      102 years ago

      Changing from free to paid is fine. Doing it retroactively is not.

      Once a game is in development using their product the terms need to stay the same.

    • @hddsx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -42 years ago

      I disagree. If you state that it’s free until X bench make and you make the change after that benchmark it’s fine. If you don’t, then users should be able to seek compensation

      • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        10
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        The vast majority of “new” tech companies operate at a loss.

        This is a bullshit hypothetical that has no relevance for Unity. Unity is a well established company, that has been very successful after they revised their model to be more Indie friendly. This is a money grab attempt pure and simple. And it’s a money grab that is so bad it might actually kill Unity.

        • @jaaval@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          Unity technologies has never made a profit since it was founded. It’s still a company aiming at growth by burning money. Their losses have only increased since they went public.

          • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            I’m pretty sure that when Unity was headquartered in Denmark it made a profit. But I may be mistaken, because it was hyped as a danish enterprise success.

            When they changed the license to be more Indie friendly a few years back, that too was hyped as a huge success.

            But I can see on Wikipedia that Unity Software Inc. has a negative net income of $921 million on revenue of $1.4 billion.

            That’s an insane loss, meaning that they basically operate at 50% loss! How or Why they ended up that badly is beyond me. It’s so bad it smells like something is not quite right with those numbers.

              • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                2
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                They work with you to make your code more performant

                I wasn’t talking about whether they have expenses, If I recall correctly they have about 7000+ employees.

                Generally that kind of company only collaborate on huge projects, smaller projects don’t get that level of service, bust are generally referred to a developer forum, where their questions may be answered by in-house personel. This is as I understand it common, but I’m not a pro gaming programmer, although I used to know a few decades ago.

                Fun fact, the story now is that it was a Unity employee who made the death threat!?

            • @jaaval@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              22 years ago

              It was a private company back then so I don’t think there is financial info available. But at least it seems that the reports they filed for IPO indicated they had made loss for a few years prior.

      • @MrCharles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        My problem with it is not monetizing; it is the changing of your monetization to affect games that were sold under a different model. If this was just the new TOS, ok fine. It would suck, but it’s their right to make whatever shitty monetization they want. But retroactively inflicting this on games? Shocking the development world with only a few months warning when game development takes years? No, that is not ok.

  • @BURN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    372 years ago

    I’m pretty sure this is just unequivocally worse. This is how Ads end up in paid games. Unity is speed running their complete collapse as the dominant player in the market.

  • @foggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    212 years ago

    Time to polish off my unreal dev skills, something tells me those jobs about to be hot.

  • Ertebolle
    link
    fedilink
    172 years ago

    How many times are developers going to put up with being used as sticks for one group of rich assholes to whack a different group of rich assholes with before we start supporting open platforms?

  • sebinspace
    link
    fedilink
    English
    172 years ago

    Unity have yet to discover that nothing happens quietly on the internet.