At least Unreal is source-available and you only need to use the license for the version of Unreal you use. If Epic changes their license, you don't need to agree to it and can still ship under the older license.

Godot is a great engine but it isn't a silver bullet. It can get there, though.

MudMan

•

I don't think people realize how horrifying these addendums are.

Not only do they not really fix the issue, but they prove that no, yeah, they hadn't thought about the possibility of "install bombing" at all until just now and it would totally have triggered massive fees.

I mean, the announcement was terribly worded, and some of the stuff (like wha't a "monthly fee" or a "retroactive fee") were very unclear, so you could hold out hope that they knew what they wanted to do and were just bad at explaining it.

But nope, that ship has sailed. They clearly didn't give this any amount of thought.

So yeah, I'm more worried about it now than I was yesterday, believe it or not. Like, a LOT more.

visor841

•

Yeah this feels like Wizard of the Coast's first response to the OGL drama. Make some changes that are technically better than the first terrible system, but is ultimately still completely unacceptable. WotC eventually had to walk back everything, we'll see if Unity does the same.

MudMan

•

I mean, they have to.

But honestly at this point that's not even enough. You know they tried, you know whatever need for cash they were trying to fulfill remains. It's one thing to let that go when buying a piece of software that you just... have, but building an entire business on top of this middleware and knowing you have a business relationship with them indefinitely as a result?

At this point it's a dealbreaker. You can't trust them again. If I start a new dev studio tomorrow Unity would not even be in the running to start choosing an engine. They made themselves into a liability overnight. It's stunning. I don't know what the hell they're putting in the filtered, flavored water they sell to executives, but this year has been an endless chain of self-immolation I had never witnessed before.

Adalast

•

Not to mention the OGL stuff was only a risk to 3PP as a lawsuit of WoTC decided to act on it. This debacle is a direct attack on the bottom lines of games publishers that will kill independent development and seriously hamper even AAA companies. I know I'm not going to waste my time learning it.

fluxion

•

I'm sure the CEO put plenty of thought in how much they could cash out before destroying the company and moving on to the next company to destroy

Lemminary

•

He comes from EA, I'm not surprised

shasta

•

This is exactly what I said to my friend today as we were discussing it. The only times I've seen companies make a crazy move like this that will make them more money in the short term but screw themselves in the long term is when they're trying to sell the company. The new company won't care much about the bad publicity because they'll just come in after the sale and tome down some of the changes and suddenly everyone thinks they're the good guys.

stopthatgirl7

•

I was reading a Forbes article on this mess today, and the writer speculated they were hoping to make bank from Genshin Impact, since it uses Unity.

SSUPII

•

Still an enormous nope. Both for the developers and the users. How do you check if a game has already been installed once? What data are you gonna steal to check if it has been installed already?

tony

•

They'd have to get steam to tell them each time a game was downloaded to a different device so they could invoice. And apple.. and google... and random websites..

Or they make the client phone home each time it's run, which is going to cause its own mess of issues (firewalls, that kind of thing.. some of the corporate firewalls we run our app behind would raise lots of alarm bells at something like that).

MudMan

•

The announcement says they'll still charge per device, so I'd guess they either hash your hardware and send it over or leave some garbage data in your registry on uninstall.

Either way, not a solution to the problem at all. In that even with a single per-user fee this is still bad.

Buddahriffic

•

That still wouldn't prevent malicious driving up of the install count. You wouldn't even need to actually install it, you could just figure out how they communicate a new install and then either block it if you want to say "fuck unity" or send fake ones to say "fuck this dev using unity".

And how will it work for devs that think they can handle it but then change their minds and drop unity but some older versions of their installers are still out there?

MudMan

•

All the debate about the hypothetical hostile uses of the scheme are... more valid than I'd like, given that it's clear they hadn't thought about any of them, but it's missing the forest for the trees.

The forest is that even if this worked as intended it'd be a dealbreaker. That's the forest.

NekkoDroid

•

But they also confirmed that every new/reinstall on the same device counts as a different install, aka another 20ct

MudMan

•

I think that's the bit they just rolled back, according to the OP's link.

eek2121

•

They would have to have a home grown solution since Valve is unlikely to help them and other platforms like gamepass exist.

I can’t wait to write a script to install Windows and install shitty publisher’s Unity game repeatedly in VMs, old hardware, etc.

trustnoone

•

Lol get this, I don't know if I heard right, but the install count was based on their own telemetry added to the game. SO if someone pirated your game, it could still count as an install.

pennomi

•

Yep. Unity gets to decide how much you owe them. And there’s no way you can verify that they’re telling the truth.

Buddahriffic

•

It would be a shitty crack if it allowed a pirated game to still phone home during/after install.

anlumo

•

It’s not phoning home to the developer, but Unity.

anteaters

•

Unity is an application to spy on users and show them ads. Often there is some sort of game involved, but I think that is just coincidence.

SSUPII

•

Not every Unity game is a generic free mobile game

TimeSquirrel

•

Kerbal Space Program, an awesome game that simulates the construction of space vehicles and the physics of an entire solar system hyper-realistically, was developed in Unity. I am waiting on their dev team's word on this.

anteaters

•

I know KSP. I also know KSP 2 which has the same physics bugs and limitations KSP 1 had with Unity. I know there are many "proper" games made in Unity but if the Unity company can detect your customers installing the game it is a huge red privacy flag.

Fishandchips321

•

Ngl I was expecting them to walk it back a bit. It's a tactic to announce something so absolutely absurd that it makes what you actually want to do look more reasonable. I'm still not gonna touch unity again

Bobito

•

its a toss up that theyll even do that these days though.

companies are so bold now knowing theres a strong chance theyll get away with whatever bullshit while losing minimal consumers.

Buddahriffic

•

Yeah, it's not a great tactic because even if you walk it back and always intended to. People who take what you say at face value are left thinking that's what you wanted to do and might still want to do it if you can manage the PR better in the future. And the people who figure out what you were really doing see that you will lie to manipulate the reaction to what you really want to do.

Targeting installs (which based on another article with their wording they still intend to do, just with an asterisk now) was a bad approach. They should set up different payment options for the new subscription service model rather than try to fit one solution to two wildly different customer models.

Lemminary

•

This is absolutely true. I was left with a disgusted feeling towards Unity that translates to disgust and disappointment. I don't think I can trust them again after this.

driving_crooner

•

That is used in politics all the time, want to rise the retirement age to 65? Just propose it to raise it to 70 and the compromise in 65.

Wootz

•

It doesn't matter, they've shown their hand.

If not now, then when?

sickday

•

What an interesting year. This has to be the 4th or 5th large tech-centric company that's

introduced some really shitty policy
pissed off it's consumers
then backtracks to some degree after backlash

Just like every other company that's done this, the backtrack is likely meant to appease the consumers before the policy gets re-introduced later. Perhaps with slightly different wording.

InternetCitizen2

•

This is what libertarians call innovation.

Pons_Aelius

•

Sounds like standard rent seeking capitalism to me: "Extract every dollar the market will bear."

Lemminary

•

I'm so, so tired of them, tbh.

jballs

•

The back tracking isn't even a reversal. They just said they were going to keep the charges but try to reduce the impact of "install bombing".

orizuru

•

For the studios releasing a game in a few months, it's probably too late to ditch unity, but would make sense to start looking at alternatives for their next projects.

Wouldn't be surprised if Godot explodes in popularity in the next 5 years.

pennomi

•

I’m just about to launch my f2p Unity game after about 2 years of development and I’m going to be forced to simply shut down the project… There’s no way we don’t go negative with these install fees.

Hard to tell your development team all their work will be wasted.

orizuru

•

Damn... that's rough.

Hopefully they'll backpedal on this decision for now (they are already getting a lot of flack). But I guess the message has been sent. Wouldn't be surprised if Unity starts bleeding users after this.

Best of luck!

Lemminary

•

Same here. My little side project has the potential to put me into debt if I choose to monetize. I guess it'll be a free release as a labor of love. After this, goodbye Unity, hello Godot.

Kichae

•

It's too late. Cat's out of the bag. It's crystal clear to everyone now what kind of people run the company, and they're not content to fish for whales anymore.

Pons_Aelius

•

My first thought was:

This can only apply to games that begin development after this announcement...right? Otherwise it fells like a massive bait and switch.

banana_meccanica

•

Some companies are already announcing the elimination of their games starting in January. Cult of the lamb, for example.

Vupperware

•

I don’t see the announcement

Pons_Aelius

•

Indie developers react to "astonishing scumbag move" of Unity's new install charge

Quote:

Massive Monster, creator of Cult of the Lamb, shared a typically amusing post including a frog from its game pooping a Unity turd. "Quit being stinky Unity," it said.

"So, what's the impact on us? Well, we have future projects in the pipeline that were initially planned to be developed in Unity. This change would result in significant delays since our team would need to acquire an entirely new skill set.

JasSmith

•

Which blows my mind. So the developer, Massive Monster, had an open-ended agreement with Unity which allowed them to unilaterally increase prices. That's easily one of the dumbest business decisions I've seen in the gaming space. How can they build a game around an engine which gives the owner carte blanche to take whatever share of revenue they wish? While I think this is a crazy pricing strategy, I'm struggling to sympathise with Massive Monster. At minimum they should have had a lawyer browse their agreement prior to signing. I wouldn't be surprised if other gems were hidden in there about IP rights.

buddhabound

•

Every Unity developer is under the same agreement. The changes were not announced to be "moving forward". It's a change to existing licenses to use Unity. For everyone. Everywhere.

I don't know that licensing changes have been retroactive in the past. How do lawyers prevent companies from retroactively changing licensing? My guess would be to sue after the fact, which is probably why these developers are hinting that they're going to suffer economic harm if Unity follows through with this. This statement may be their lawyers doing the work they'd normally do in this kind of circumstance.

Natanael

•

A lot of those licenses are "subject to change" precisely to let the developers bait and switch like that. At best you have a specified time frame from announcement to enforcement, making it not legally speaking retroactive since the old license expires and gets replaced for all licensed material.

VentraSqwal

•

I think that was one of the many issues with Wizard's original OGL debacle is that it was going to be retroactive.

JasSmith

•

Then anyone using Unity is crazy. For commercial use, Epic pens deals with each developer as needed for Unreal. Terms include specific duration and royalties for the period, and the version used. All of this is agreed up front so there aren’t any surprises later. I can’t imagine signing an agreement which effectively gives control of revenue to Unity. At that point you don’t have a business. Unity owns your business.

visor841

•

It even applies to new installs of existing games.

envis10n

•

The original announcement stated it was retroactive

SkyeStarfall

•

If that isn't a massive red flag, nothing else is.

Drinvictus

•

Proprietary software always leads to this. Open source is the future

DarkenLM

•

The only problem with open source is you can't really make a profit from it. If someone wants it, they can just spin up their own local copy of the original, and you can't do shit about it.

chaogomu

•

That's true if the entire project is open source, but if just the engine is, you can still charge for the game. And Godot has a special closed license that you can get, so that you can sell your game on consoles.

kensand

•

Yup, as a software dev, I would love to be able to devote all my time to writing open source, but I gotta make money to live as well. Switching to working on OSS would be a huge leap of faith that there is someone out there willing pay/donate for my work. As it is, I think it will be my way of giving back once I have saved up enough money from my proprietary work, and hopefully I will be able to switch over sooner rather than later.

Maybe I'll go take a look at what the process is for getting grants from the government or non-profit orgs like Apache foundation...

SkyeStarfall

•

Many organizations writing open source stuff are hiring people to work full-time. You might not earn as much as other places, but just because they are non-profits doesn't mean they don't have money or an income.

kensand

•

Yup, that's true, and I am always open to and looking for new opportunities, but that also requires them to be interested in hiring me - not a trivial feat, especially in the current job market.

I'd also wager that the number of job positions writing OSS for organizations like that is much lower than proprietary job positions.

But you know what, I'll go shop around a little in my free time the next week or two. I'd love for (more of) my work to be publicly accessible and not locked up in a proprietary codebase.

jack

•

Why not work for Godot? Or KDE, or LibreOffice,... They need full-time workers too

kittykabal

•

i see this as an absolute win.

tabular

•

Not in the same way but earning money at the point of distribution is not the only way, there's various patronage methods.

mrsgreenpotato

•

Installed Godot yesterday and it's starting to grow on me, I like it. Looking forward to a huge movement of studios over to Godot, which will hopefully speed up the development of Godot through further support. Is there any reliable source of data about which game engines are popular at the moment? I want to see that sweet sweet decline in Unity user base over to Godot.

envis10n

•

If we could only use some sort of... identifier to know when a game has been installed... like some kind of... serial number or key that is unique per copy...

Railcar8095

•

That's not always the case. GOG games have no serial, the installer is the same for everybody. Charging "by install" is quite impossible of they really mean that a single user would not create two charges.

Also, games will need to ping unity servers? Are they already doing that...? This all gets weirder the more you think about it

envis10n

•

No no, they have proprietary methods of aggregating install data so they will know.

cybersandwich

•

I wonder if this coincides with the Apple thing on Tuesday where they highlighted gaming. Obviously, Apple isn't using the unreal engine after the Epic debacle (pun intended). So they will have to appeal to Unity devs.

Maybe Unity is trying to cut into some of, what they think, will be a boom in sales because of the new Apple lineup.

That's just the first thing I thought.

Lemminary

•

after the Epic debacle

*Tongue pop* Noice

tabular

•

This issue exists with all proprietary software; if they make changes you dislike then either you put up with it or stop using it. They have unjust power of their users and even the most moral devs cannot forever resist temptation to use that power to earn money at the user's expense.

TigrisMorte

•

Anyone that uses unity is as foolish as any that use java. Just begging for meritless lawsuits to extract rent.

computergeek125

•

You know how OpenJDK works right? Not every runtime requires payment to Oracle.

TigrisMorte

•

You know how Oracle works right? Not every license is adhered to by Oracle.
They sued over copyright of the function names my dude. The fact that that was insane did not stop them and did not stop google from paying massive amounts of money to Lawyers to get the License terms enforced.
https://www.eff.org/cases/oracle-v-google

Never have anything to do with Oracle. Not even tangentially.