4 ms·

Epic Games has a program called MegaGrants where they give a bunch of money to various projects. https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/megagrants https://www.unre

Epic Games has a program called MegaGrants where they give a bunch of money to various projects. https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/megagrants https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/megagrants For example they gave $250k to the Godot game engine project in 2020. https://godotengine.org/article/godot-engine-was-awarded-epic-megagrant/ https://godotengine.org/article/godot-engine-was-awarded-epi...

badrequest 10mo ago
Looks like they did literally nothing in 2024?
mjg2 10mo ago
I wouldn't call anything Epic Games does charity: it's all empire expansion for them.
- raincole 10mo ago
  So? What Valve does isn't charity either. It's weird that you even mention this word.
  - mjg2 10mo ago
    Why is Valve's behavior relevant? I mention charity because that's what donations are. It's no secret Epic Games follows Microsoft's patterns for control of the industry.
- closingreunion 10mo ago
  How does the Godot donation expand their empire? Other than get more people into game development?
  - mjg2 10mo ago
    It expands their empire like Microsoft pledging to "support" Open Source: it's disingenuous, self-serving, and develops a "claim" of authority over the sector. It allows them, the makers of Unreal Engine, to develop a business relationship with their competition and influence the trajectory on one of only major alternatives in order to control the market more. If Epic Games really cared about Godot, they would align more with their values in-house. Their M&A drives the organization like a propeller.
    - croes 10mo ago
      The other option is Epic is the same as now but Godot gets no money
      - mjg2 10mo ago
        It's all hypothetical for a transaction 5 years in the past. The future you propose is one where Epic is not actually the same: they have more liquid capital towards the mission their stakeholders decide, and less influence on Godot. However, their stakeholders decided circa 2019/2020 that they want to influence the development of Godot and spent their money that way. Corporate donations aren't at a whim like us individuals who spend $3/mo on Wikipedia or a food pantry, it's considered by the executive team, calculated and green-lit by their accounting team.
  - alexissantos 10mo ago
    I suspect they also hope developer choice gets reframed from "Unity or Unreal" to "Godot or Unreal." In other words: Unity gets bumped out of the picture since Godot can do what it does and is open source, while Unreal stays comfortably in the hyperrealism/high-end perch.
  - caspar 10mo ago
    Unity is Unreal Engine's biggest competitor by far. Godot competes with Unity (mostly for 2D games) but is at least a decade off being any threat to Unreal. So yes, funding Godot is A Nice Thing To Do but it also conveniently puts a bit of pressure on Unity, their biggest competitor, without impacting their own business. Also, if you believe Matthew Ball's take[0] then Epic is all-in on fostering as many gamedev-ish creators as it can so that it can loop them all into making content for its metaverse later. As you alluded to, in the long term funding a FOSS game engine which is focused on ease of use helps that too. [0]: https://www.matthewball.co/all/epicgamesprimermaster https://www.matthewball.co/all/epicgamesprimermaster
- madeofpalk 10mo ago
  All of this is self-serving, even from the Stardew Valley dev. It’s win-win.
  - mjg2 10mo ago
    I disagree. I think ConcernedApe is actually genuine with his charity and we should see this as a standard for corporations to follow.
    - sneak 10mo ago
      Charitable donations that are self-serving aren’t non-genuine. The money still spends the same.
      - rvnx 10mo ago
        Look, it's really nice that you maintained WooCommerce for so many years. I know you might be tempted to move on to do something else, but I really need my shop to keep working. So, here is the deal: I am going to send you a 'donation' of 500 USD now, and then a monthly recurring 'gift.' Contractually? You have no obligation to work, and I have no obligation to pay. But if you stop working on WooCommerce, I will obviously have to stop the donations. Sounds cool? == The output of that is rather positive here though, but it would be naive to not see the self-interest.
        _vertigo 10mo ago
        Every action is self-interested if you squint enough
        deleted 10mo ago
        [deleted]
    - squigz 10mo ago
      I'm confused. What exactly makes his charity genuine vs Epic's charity "disingenuous"?
- account42 9mo ago
  I don't like Epic overall either but their free software grants are exemplary. Sure, they are not doing this without self interest but it's still miles better than the average corporation.
mminer237 10mo ago
Also notably $1.2 million to the Blender Foundation.

badrequest 10mo ago

Looks like they did literally nothing in 2024?

mjg2 10mo ago

I wouldn't call anything Epic Games does charity: it's all empire expansion for them.

raincole 10mo ago
So? What Valve does isn't charity either. It's weird that you even mention this word.
- mjg2 10mo ago
  Why is Valve's behavior relevant? I mention charity because that's what donations are. It's no secret Epic Games follows Microsoft's patterns for control of the industry.
closingreunion 10mo ago
How does the Godot donation expand their empire? Other than get more people into game development?
- mjg2 10mo ago
  It expands their empire like Microsoft pledging to "support" Open Source: it's disingenuous, self-serving, and develops a "claim" of authority over the sector. It allows them, the makers of Unreal Engine, to develop a business relationship with their competition and influence the trajectory on one of only major alternatives in order to control the market more. If Epic Games really cared about Godot, they would align more with their values in-house. Their M&A drives the organization like a propeller.
  - croes 10mo ago
    The other option is Epic is the same as now but Godot gets no money
    - mjg2 10mo ago
      It's all hypothetical for a transaction 5 years in the past. The future you propose is one where Epic is not actually the same: they have more liquid capital towards the mission their stakeholders decide, and less influence on Godot. However, their stakeholders decided circa 2019/2020 that they want to influence the development of Godot and spent their money that way. Corporate donations aren't at a whim like us individuals who spend $3/mo on Wikipedia or a food pantry, it's considered by the executive team, calculated and green-lit by their accounting team.
- alexissantos 10mo ago
  I suspect they also hope developer choice gets reframed from "Unity or Unreal" to "Godot or Unreal." In other words: Unity gets bumped out of the picture since Godot can do what it does and is open source, while Unreal stays comfortably in the hyperrealism/high-end perch.
- caspar 10mo ago
  Unity is Unreal Engine's biggest competitor by far. Godot competes with Unity (mostly for 2D games) but is at least a decade off being any threat to Unreal. So yes, funding Godot is A Nice Thing To Do but it also conveniently puts a bit of pressure on Unity, their biggest competitor, without impacting their own business. Also, if you believe Matthew Ball's take[0] then Epic is all-in on fostering as many gamedev-ish creators as it can so that it can loop them all into making content for its metaverse later. As you alluded to, in the long term funding a FOSS game engine which is focused on ease of use helps that too. [0]: https://www.matthewball.co/all/epicgamesprimermaster https://www.matthewball.co/all/epicgamesprimermaster
madeofpalk 10mo ago
All of this is self-serving, even from the Stardew Valley dev. It’s win-win.
- mjg2 10mo ago
  I disagree. I think ConcernedApe is actually genuine with his charity and we should see this as a standard for corporations to follow.
  - sneak 10mo ago
    Charitable donations that are self-serving aren’t non-genuine. The money still spends the same.
    - rvnx 10mo ago
      Look, it's really nice that you maintained WooCommerce for so many years. I know you might be tempted to move on to do something else, but I really need my shop to keep working. So, here is the deal: I am going to send you a 'donation' of 500 USD now, and then a monthly recurring 'gift.' Contractually? You have no obligation to work, and I have no obligation to pay. But if you stop working on WooCommerce, I will obviously have to stop the donations. Sounds cool? == The output of that is rather positive here though, but it would be naive to not see the self-interest.
      - _vertigo 10mo ago
        Every action is self-interested if you squint enough
        deleted 10mo ago
        [deleted]
  - squigz 10mo ago
    I'm confused. What exactly makes his charity genuine vs Epic's charity "disingenuous"?
account42 9mo ago
I don't like Epic overall either but their free software grants are exemplary. Sure, they are not doing this without self interest but it's still miles better than the average corporation.

mminer237 10mo ago

Also notably $1.2 million to the Blender Foundation.