8 ms·

Epic and Improbable's joint statement: https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/blog/epic-games-and-improbable-working-together-for-developers https://www.unrealengin

by Reedx 8y ago

Epic and Improbable's joint statement: https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/blog/epic-games-and-improbable-working-together-for-developers https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/blog/epic-games-and-impro... That was quick, wow. From Tim Sweeney: "Haha, actually though I first heard of this controversy at 1pm, Herman @ Improbable and I agreed on the fund at 6pm, live edited the announcement in Google docs till 7:30pm, released at 8pm." https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/1083600857806061568 https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/108360085780606156...

CreepGin 8y ago
I've been using Unity on and off since 2008. All I can say is that the whole day's events were just bizarre. There's this thread on the Unity Forum with close to 500 replies as of now. In the thread are mostly people lashing out at Unity. Mr. Sweeney also linked this thread on twitter saying this thread is "full of highly intelligent indie devs having an insightful debate about engine EULAs and their legal ramifications". I must have a very different set of eyes than Mr. Sweeney here. But the first 200 or so replies were made before Unity could even post a response. They were mostly speculations and mods asking people to calm down and wait for an official response. This is mostly because Improbable's first blog post did not give any specifics and made it sound like Unity pulled the plug overnight (later according to Unity, Improbable knew about the TOS violation for over a year). So then Unity made a response blog post. Improbable made a 2nd blog post. And Epic made their 25mil announcement. Then, that Unity thread has pretty much turned into a conspiracy thread fueled by the f#$@ed up timing of everything. "Highly intelligent" and "insightful debate" would not be my choice words to describe that thread. And lastly, I want to say, even if Mr. Sweeney had all the good intentions, it was really painful to see Epic capitalizing on Unity in such quick manner and intensity. I was actually in agreement with his tweets before he posted the lame thread link and announced the 25mil fund to help people transition from Unity to UE4. https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/1083580407541583872 https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/108358040754158387... https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/unity-blocks-spatialos https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/unity-blocks-s...
- Flenser 8y ago
  Unity's blog post refutes a lot of what Improbable claim about released and in production games: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improbables-blog-post-and-why-you-can-keep-working-on-your-spatialos-game/ https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improba...
  - reitzensteinm 8y ago
    No, it does not. Even if Unity grants an exception to the games already in development, they've nipped the longevity of the integration in the bud. Why would Improbable continue to support Unity long term when it's a dead end for them? Unity has just done something actively hostile to their users, and they're attempting to downplay it, poorly.
    - OCASM 8y ago
      Improbable could simply comply with the licensing or negotiate a deal. Instead they pretended it as if it was just Unity being evil for no reason at all. It's Improbable who acted badly here.
      - reitzensteinm 8y ago
        No deal should be needed. The TOS itself is Unity being evil to line its own pockets. Unity is trying to tell me, as a game developer using their product, where and how I can use the built executables generated from their editor. I have no interest in Improbable and this has been a major shot across the bow for me.
        OCASM 8y ago
        Such an evil TOS that the only affected party was a company that launches FUD campaigns when things don't go its way...
        8y ago
kayoone 8y ago
Whenever someone infringes the rights of independent developers to freely choose and combine engines, platforms, services (including, self-interestedly here, Epic’s own services!) the air raid sirens go off and we move quickly. I find that a bit dishonest tbh. Epic clearly sees the opportunity to gut punch it's competitor and use it to their advantage and lure devs away from Unity while getting good press in the process. Not so long ago Epic was selling their Engine for hundreds of thousands of USD while Unity was already way more accessible to indie devs. They are insanely rich from Fortnite fame right now, so for them this is peanuts.
- acoard 8y ago
  It's a false equivalency. Having high prices advertised transparently is not the same as what Unity has done.
  - kayoone 8y ago
    Of course it's not the same, but he's talking about "freely choosing and combining engines". UE was never even an option for indie devs a few years ago. Besides, Unity clearly stated that Improbable knew about their TOS violation for at least half a year and Unity's reasoning also makes some sense, as Improbable is bundling Unity's SDK in their product. Problem is, that it's too late now because Improbable blew this up from their perspective omitting important information about what was actually going on.
    - dkersten 8y ago
      Freely choosing does not mean getting things for free. You can freely choose to combine technologies/tools, but you must still have licenses for said tools. Unity’s terms out right prevent you from using some tools, regardless of if you have licenses or not. As an analogy, I have the right to live anywhere I want in my country (where I live is a free choice), that doesn’t mean I can afford to actually do so.
      - da_chicken 8y ago
blueboo 8y ago
Unity's statement today certainly adds some context: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improbables-blog-post-and-why-you-can-keep-working-on-your-spatialos-game/ https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improba... > More than a year ago, we told Improbable in person that they were in violation of our Terms of Service or EULA. Six months ago, we informed Improbable about the violation in writing. Recent actions did not come as a surprise to Improbable; in fact, they’ve known about this for many months. > Two weeks ago we took the action of turning off Improbable’s Unity Editor license keys. This is a unique case — and not a situation we take lightly — but Improbable left us no choice. This was the only course of action to protect the integrity and value of our technology and Unity developers. Yikes. Not exactly what Improbable was claiming... And then Improbable's statement today: https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/an-update-on-todays-events https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/an-update-on-t... > But honestly, we don’t believe that today was about Unity or for that matter Improbable. Yes, let's change the subject. Quickly, now!!
- talltimtom 8y ago
  So Unity alerted them that where in breach, they had an ongoing discussion in which unity finally came to the conclusion that they where in fact not in breach... and then they changed the conditions and punished them. Is that how that is to be understood? I mean otherwise why alert them if being in breach before the license change, or why no punish them under the old license but change it first and then punish them?
  - delphinius81 8y ago
    No, they were in breach before hand, and Unity attempted (poorly) to make it more clear why Improbable was in breach with the ToS update. According to devs knowledgeable of Improbable's tech, Improbable has been in breach of the Unity ToS for more than a year. Negotiations on licensing probably broke down (as in, Improbable refused to pay the fee Unity was asking for a license), and so Improbable decided to publicly vent and mislead devs. Regardless, the ToS are incredibly vague on what is/is not allowed, even for developers that have nothing to do with Improbable. Finally, the $25M comes from the already established Unreal dev grant fund - it's not "new" money, they just rebranded a portion of the fund in a PR stunt.

by Reedx 8y ago

CreepGin 8y ago

I've been using Unity on and off since 2008. All I can say is that the whole day's events were just bizarre. There's this thread on the Unity Forum with close to 500 replies as of now. In the thread are mostly people lashing out at Unity. Mr. Sweeney also linked this thread on twitter saying this thread is "full of highly intelligent indie devs having an insightful debate about engine EULAs and their legal ramifications". I must have a very different set of eyes than Mr. Sweeney here. But the first 200 or so replies were made before Unity could even post a response. They were mostly speculations and mods asking people to calm down and wait for an official response. This is mostly because Improbable's first blog post did not give any specifics and made it sound like Unity pulled the plug overnight (later according to Unity, Improbable knew about the TOS violation for over a year). So then Unity made a response blog post. Improbable made a 2nd blog post. And Epic made their 25mil announcement. Then, that Unity thread has pretty much turned into a conspiracy thread fueled by the f#$@ed up timing of everything. "Highly intelligent" and "insightful debate" would not be my choice words to describe that thread. And lastly, I want to say, even if Mr. Sweeney had all the good intentions, it was really painful to see Epic capitalizing on Unity in such quick manner and intensity. I was actually in agreement with his tweets before he posted the lame thread link and announced the 25mil fund to help people transition from Unity to UE4. https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/1083580407541583872 https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/108358040754158387... https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/unity-blocks-spatialos https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/unity-blocks-s...

Flenser 8y ago
Unity's blog post refutes a lot of what Improbable claim about released and in production games: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improbables-blog-post-and-why-you-can-keep-working-on-your-spatialos-game/ https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improba...
- reitzensteinm 8y ago
  No, it does not. Even if Unity grants an exception to the games already in development, they've nipped the longevity of the integration in the bud. Why would Improbable continue to support Unity long term when it's a dead end for them? Unity has just done something actively hostile to their users, and they're attempting to downplay it, poorly.
  - OCASM 8y ago
    Improbable could simply comply with the licensing or negotiate a deal. Instead they pretended it as if it was just Unity being evil for no reason at all. It's Improbable who acted badly here.
    - reitzensteinm 8y ago
      No deal should be needed. The TOS itself is Unity being evil to line its own pockets. Unity is trying to tell me, as a game developer using their product, where and how I can use the built executables generated from their editor. I have no interest in Improbable and this has been a major shot across the bow for me.
      - OCASM 8y ago
        Such an evil TOS that the only affected party was a company that launches FUD campaigns when things don't go its way...
        8y ago

kayoone 8y ago

Whenever someone infringes the rights of independent developers to freely choose and combine engines, platforms, services (including, self-interestedly here, Epic’s own services!) the air raid sirens go off and we move quickly. I find that a bit dishonest tbh. Epic clearly sees the opportunity to gut punch it's competitor and use it to their advantage and lure devs away from Unity while getting good press in the process. Not so long ago Epic was selling their Engine for hundreds of thousands of USD while Unity was already way more accessible to indie devs. They are insanely rich from Fortnite fame right now, so for them this is peanuts.

acoard 8y ago
It's a false equivalency. Having high prices advertised transparently is not the same as what Unity has done.
- kayoone 8y ago
  Of course it's not the same, but he's talking about "freely choosing and combining engines". UE was never even an option for indie devs a few years ago. Besides, Unity clearly stated that Improbable knew about their TOS violation for at least half a year and Unity's reasoning also makes some sense, as Improbable is bundling Unity's SDK in their product. Problem is, that it's too late now because Improbable blew this up from their perspective omitting important information about what was actually going on.
  - dkersten 8y ago
    Freely choosing does not mean getting things for free. You can freely choose to combine technologies/tools, but you must still have licenses for said tools. Unity’s terms out right prevent you from using some tools, regardless of if you have licenses or not. As an analogy, I have the right to live anywhere I want in my country (where I live is a free choice), that doesn’t mean I can afford to actually do so.
    - da_chicken 8y ago

blueboo 8y ago

Unity's statement today certainly adds some context: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improbables-blog-post-and-why-you-can-keep-working-on-your-spatialos-game/ https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improba... > More than a year ago, we told Improbable in person that they were in violation of our Terms of Service or EULA. Six months ago, we informed Improbable about the violation in writing. Recent actions did not come as a surprise to Improbable; in fact, they’ve known about this for many months. > Two weeks ago we took the action of turning off Improbable’s Unity Editor license keys. This is a unique case — and not a situation we take lightly — but Improbable left us no choice. This was the only course of action to protect the integrity and value of our technology and Unity developers. Yikes. Not exactly what Improbable was claiming... And then Improbable's statement today: https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/an-update-on-todays-events https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/an-update-on-t... > But honestly, we don’t believe that today was about Unity or for that matter Improbable. Yes, let's change the subject. Quickly, now!!

talltimtom 8y ago
So Unity alerted them that where in breach, they had an ongoing discussion in which unity finally came to the conclusion that they where in fact not in breach... and then they changed the conditions and punished them. Is that how that is to be understood? I mean otherwise why alert them if being in breach before the license change, or why no punish them under the old license but change it first and then punish them?
- delphinius81 8y ago
  No, they were in breach before hand, and Unity attempted (poorly) to make it more clear why Improbable was in breach with the ToS update. According to devs knowledgeable of Improbable's tech, Improbable has been in breach of the Unity ToS for more than a year. Negotiations on licensing probably broke down (as in, Improbable refused to pay the fee Unity was asking for a license), and so Improbable decided to publicly vent and mislead devs. Regardless, the ToS are incredibly vague on what is/is not allowed, even for developers that have nothing to do with Improbable. Finally, the $25M comes from the already established Unreal dev grant fund - it's not "new" money, they just rebranded a portion of the fund in a PR stunt.