4 ms·
"who operates their own game store and is courting developers aggressively with generous revenue split" Yeah, I wonder why, almost like they're trying to slowl
by darklycan51 3y ago
"who operates their own game store and is courting developers aggressively with generous revenue split"
Yeah, I wonder why, almost like they're trying to slowly gain market share lead to then have a monopoly.
Arguing that just because right now there's alternatives that don't seem like they'll do that, right now. Is not a good argument against open source.
if any of those engines can retroactively destroy your livelihood, or make games unavailable forever for users because of $ reasons, then that is a huge enough reason to simply drop the engine.
Unreal will get eventually damage from this unity move as well, if I was a game dev I would seriously consider Godot right now, luckily I am a software dev not a game dev, only game dev I do is modding warcraft 3 so I don't have to bother about that stuff
- gochi 3y agoEpic will never have a monopoly as long as Steam exists. They aren't complete fools here, they realize this but are aware that even having a slice of that massive pie is enough to fuel numerous positions in the future.
- autoexec 3y agoA duopoly isn't much better
- johnnyanmac 3y agoIt's actually a lot better. At least the two companies check and balance each other naturally. Not ideal, but better. The big issue is if those two companies collude, but for storefronts there's less incentive than other industries.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- darklycan51 3y agoWhen I was talking about monopoly, I was talking about 3rd party engines, not storefronts.
- gochi 3y agoThey still wouldn't be a monopoly engine-wise, even excluding Unity you have Godot and O3DE as popular open source options. Ignoring that a lot of studios are now sharing internal custom engines, like Sony's studios with the Decima engine.