starburst

7 ms·

31.
by starburst 3y ago
Yes but among those huge amount of smaller players a few gems popup that crawl their way to the top along side the big ones. But the thing is that it is not the smaller players that leave (technically only affect if you make 1M$+), it’s eve
32.
by starburst 3y ago
It doesn't always phone home, that's the thing, a lot of people assume that's the case and that every games built using their engine since the beginning does it but that's not the case. The way they calculate the install
33.
by starburst 3y ago
Definitely but Unity itself isn't really doing something "legal" here with their extortions, but I guess time will tell with the eventual legal battles.
34.
by starburst 3y ago
Well, they cannot really disabled it remotely (it's not like that functionality exists in the current code base atm, maybe in future Unity version). But they could kill your license so you won't be able to build your game using th
35.
by starburst 3y ago
Because they can, programming for many is not only a job but also a hobby and passion. Doing something like this you can learn a tons as well and it is a worthy challenge in itself to push your craft. People re-create classic games all the
36.
by starburst 3y ago
Every new version is bloatier, slower and buggier. When you have a Unity version that works for your project, you stick to it and hope you won't be forced to update because Apple / Google changed something that now requires a new
37.
by starburst 3y ago
Short term cash flow but with a potential future of 0 new projects ever being greenlight using Unity... I guess it is still better than going even deeper into debt short term but the thing is that there is so many more ways they could have
38.
by starburst 3y ago
I certainly hope that at least, legally speaking, they would be forced to back down on games built using older version of the unity engine so that previous and upcoming projects aren't affected.
39.
by starburst 3y ago
But that's the thing, it isn't, it's simply good enough, get the job done and is so popular that employing people that knows it is easy. I agree it is a good value proposition which is why it is the industry standard for mobi
40.
by starburst 3y ago
I don't think it could have been planned all along, the damage done seems irreversible. No one is going to propose Unity ever again for upcoming projects even if the fees are actually a much better deal than the competitions (like Unre
41.
by starburst 3y ago
Very true, for now, but the amount of tools / libraries / projects that will spawn / funded / contributions to move projects out of Unity is gonna make that more realistic eventually.
42.
by starburst 3y ago
Yeah I wonder if that will impact their partnership they have with their VisionOS...
43.
by starburst 3y ago
Technically there is UnrealCLR, so if you made a game with mostly Unity-agnostics code it's possible to keep a bunch of it. One of my game is multiplayer, the whole gameplay code is completely Unity-agnostics to run server-side without
44.
by starburst 3y ago
They didn't retroactively changed the TOS of their engine so that a game you made years ago means you now potentially receive monthly invoices from Unity (and what about ridiculous new fees they will think in the coming years). If Unit
45.
by starburst 3y ago
Or what about games made on previous version of the engine? They certainly didn't include a phone home to Unity but still according to the pricing on January 1st any new installs of old games is going to have a cost at that point... We
46.
by starburst 3y ago
I get that, but I feel like there must've been a much better way to do so than with this proposal that seems to have burn the last remaining goodwill that developers had left in Unity and making sure most future projects won't get
47.
by starburst 3y ago
> That's pretty much the only thing that matters. there is a huge difference whether they make $0.5, $1 or $2 etc My point is those numbers can vary GREATLY from games to games, and not only the revenue per user but the cost of user
48.
by starburst 3y ago
They will have the same problem trying to get them to pay per installs as well, whatever punishment can happens for not paying their cost to install tax they can do the same tactic for those not paying their revenue share.
49.
by starburst 3y ago
I'm going to use the Personal / Plus pricing instead of Pro, on a f2p mobile game, but let's say you made 200k$ on the first 200k install, but only 20k$ on the next 200k installs (for whatever reason, different market, whale
50.
by starburst 3y ago
Not sure I understand? I just made those number up to give you an example, be it realistic or not hardly matters. You get X per user and it cost you Y per user and Unity take Z per user. Now `X - Y` is profitable but `X - Y - Z` is not, tha
51.
by starburst 3y ago
You'd be surprise how HUGE that market is and also Unity's foothold as the engine of choices for those games. So this makes this decision even more baffling because instead of sharing the revenue these developers will just change
52.
by starburst 3y ago
Maybe you're not familiar with the economics of f2p mobile games, but basically, the game is free, you get maybe 100k installs and make back 25k$ (IAP, etc.) so revenue of 0.25$ per user. But then you have to pay for users acquisition
53.
by starburst 3y ago
That is the problem, and what is completely baffling, games that are sold at 70$ means they pay a ridiculously low fee (%) compared to cheap or free to play mobile games where that fee means it can render the game unprofitable and need to b
54.
by starburst 3y ago
Compared to unity, yes (especially for 2D stuff which is more the norm on those platforms). Unity is already imho pretty bloated but at least useable and a sensible choice for both, Unreal is just too massive and more suited for console 3D
55.
by starburst 3y ago
Easy to say to mobile games studios that have ben using Unity for the last 10 years (or where in the process of releasing a game after multiple years of development) and didn't have to pay that tax before. Also this will apply to every
56.
by starburst 3y ago
Don't forget Mobile or f2p gaming, Unity has a huge market share there and the margin are really low, adding ~0.20$ per user when most will makes you 0$ doesn't make sense at all. Going with % of profit does. Also it is quite unfa
57.
by starburst 3y ago
It is bad phrasing, I think they meant each month you need to pay X for the installs of the month. You pay only once per install. Also what is an install? Why not go with "user", someone installing the game 5 times is gonna cost 1
58.
by starburst 3y ago
Free with splash screen, or Plus / Pro subscription to remove splash screen. I don't disagree that Unity need to make money, but they should go the Unreal route with % of profit or something. Tons of games don't even make bac
59.
by starburst 3y ago
That's how Unreal does it, 5% over 1M or something. Installs tracking has it own problem in itself, like pirated copies or offline, etc.
60.
by starburst 3y ago
This cannot be right, how can this makes sense with mobile gaming? Unity has a HUGE market share there, so they know the number. How can free games ensure a 0.20$ per install? Why not go with X% of the revenue?

More ›