4 ms·

Unity is the best game engine. People who will sacrifice that for ideological purity are a minority. I'm sure that will work out great for them.

by ta8645 3y ago

p1necone 3y ago
This is an awful analogy. People aren't dropping unity for ideological purity, they're dropping it because unity is making real changes that actively screw over their customers.
- ta8645 3y ago
  Wrong. The point is that you could have seen it coming. And you sow the seeds of it happening again when you think of opposition to Discord as an ideological stance, rather than one that promotes a practical structure which guards against a company deciding to screw you over.
- malermeister 3y ago
  That's exactly what parent is pointing out, it just flew over your head. People saying Unity was not a good choice because it's closed source and controlled by one private company were laughed off as ideologues. Then what they warned about happened. Now the same kind of people are getting the same kind of response. Maybe that "ideology" is based on practical considerations after all?
  - kelipso 3y ago
    Anything I don't like is ideology and contrarianism, sorry.
  - p1necone 3y ago
    > People saying Unity was not a good choice because it's closed source and controlled by one private company were laughed off as ideologues. I kinda feel like including what Unity pulled recently in your "private company threat model" is a bit overkill - I'm generally comfortable assuming that private companies aren't going to do something quite that self destructive and braindead. Based on prior behaviour I wouldn't trust anything google develops to not get canned within a year or two, I'm very weary of anyone trying to monetize open source projects, and building a business on top of someone else's saas product seems pretty risky. But commercially licensed development tooling that I'm using to produce my own binaries is pretty low on my list of concerns - most companies aren't as bugfuck insane as Unity's current management seems to be. And just using some closed source product for which the switching cost is effectively zero (for me - see other comment in this thread about chat being ephemeral) seems like a no brainer.

Unity is the best game engine. People who will sacrifice that for ideological purity are a minority. I'm sure that will work out great for them.

by ta8645 3y ago

Unity is the best game engine. People who will sacrifice that for ideological purity are a minority. I'm sure that will work out great for them.

p1necone 3y ago

This is an awful analogy. People aren't dropping unity for ideological purity, they're dropping it because unity is making real changes that actively screw over their customers.

ta8645 3y ago
Wrong. The point is that you could have seen it coming. And you sow the seeds of it happening again when you think of opposition to Discord as an ideological stance, rather than one that promotes a practical structure which guards against a company deciding to screw you over.
malermeister 3y ago
That's exactly what parent is pointing out, it just flew over your head. People saying Unity was not a good choice because it's closed source and controlled by one private company were laughed off as ideologues. Then what they warned about happened. Now the same kind of people are getting the same kind of response. Maybe that "ideology" is based on practical considerations after all?
- kelipso 3y ago
  Anything I don't like is ideology and contrarianism, sorry.
- p1necone 3y ago
  > People saying Unity was not a good choice because it's closed source and controlled by one private company were laughed off as ideologues. I kinda feel like including what Unity pulled recently in your "private company threat model" is a bit overkill - I'm generally comfortable assuming that private companies aren't going to do something quite that self destructive and braindead. Based on prior behaviour I wouldn't trust anything google develops to not get canned within a year or two, I'm very weary of anyone trying to monetize open source projects, and building a business on top of someone else's saas product seems pretty risky. But commercially licensed development tooling that I'm using to produce my own binaries is pretty low on my list of concerns - most companies aren't as bugfuck insane as Unity's current management seems to be. And just using some closed source product for which the switching cost is effectively zero (for me - see other comment in this thread about chat being ephemeral) seems like a no brainer.