General Gaming News

[Alan]

I’m just glad its not the Borg!

[Sly Boots]

Looks like Unity has pulled a "Wizards of the Coast" and won this month's self-inclicted bullet wound to the foot award:

https://www.pcgamer.com/an-astonishing- ... g-changes/

[Wrathbone]

The more I think about it, the scummier it gets. If the fee is per install, does that mean that a customer who buys the game and then installs it on their desktop PC, their laptop and then probably a future PC will result in the fee being charged three times?

They may discover that Unity is an ironically bad name for them when developers organise their response.

[Sly Boots]

The more I think about it, the scummier it gets. If the fee is per install, does that mean that a customer who buys the game and then installs it on their desktop PC, their laptop and then probably a future PC will result in the fee being charged three times?

They may discover that Unity is an ironically bad name for them when developers organise their response.

Yeah, even when they later clarified it/walked back on it, it's still the case that installing games on multiple devices would incur multiple charges.

Even WotC had an effective monopoly on tabletop RPGs, but there are other established game engines devs can use instead, this could well be Unity's Gerald Ratner moment.

[Wrathbone]

I've just seen this quoted on Eurogamer:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/unity-so ... iPj6XeYraI

On September 6, 2023, John Riccitiello, President and CEO of Unity Software Inc (NYSE:U), sold 2,000 shares of the company. This move is part of a larger trend for the insider, who over the past year has sold a total of 50,610 shares and purchased none.

Not suspicious at all!

[DjchunKfunK]

It's a right mess. There has been further clarification overnight around Game Pass, bundles and demoes and it will only count the one install, not reinstalls although it will count installs on multiple devices. But it isn't much clearer how this is meant to work especially around how they will know about an install. Rightly a lot of indie devs are up in arms over this change.

[Mantis]

IPOs absolutely ruin companies. As soon as there's a significant shareholder interest in seeing some returns all drive to be a good company for their consumers is replaced by short sighted profit chasing.

This will do so much damage to their userbase if they don't roll back on the announcement.

Applying it retrospectively to games already released using Unity is the absolute scummiest part of it.

[DjchunKfunK]

Even if they do roll it back I think they have already done a lot of damage to the brand. Many developers will be considering whether it is worth sticking with an engine from a company that acts in this haphazard way.

[Hatredsheart]

https://www.dsogaming.com/news/tomb-rai ... ore-174439

[Alan]

https://www.pcgamer.com/out-of-the-blue ... MASGQapWCE


Also its 2.50 on steam right now.

[Sly Boots]

Deja vu time as Unity declares it has listened to feedback and will be making changes to its announced policy:

https://www.ign.com/articles/unity-has- ... nges-to-it

Remains to be seen though whether it has permanently destroyed its reputation and customer goodwill...

[Raid]

You do have to wonder if this was the plan all along, and they're changing from an extremely unpalatable option to one that's still unpalatable, but in saying they've "listened to feedback" it makes the unpalatable option seem more reasonable. It just seems odd that two games companies (albeit different genres) would make the same mistake in the space of six months.

[Sly Boots]

You do have to wonder if this was the plan all along, and they're changing from an extremely unpalatable option to one that's still unpalatable, but in saying they've "listened to feedback" it makes the unpalatable option seem more reasonable. It just seems odd that two games companies (albeit different genres) would make the same mistake in the space of six months.

I did wonder this, but I feel like the spectacularly bad press and feeling this has generated is surely more self-harming than coming out initially with a more reasonable plan, if that was their intention all along.

I think it will take their brand a long time to recover from this, assuming it ever does. They've destroyed the trust of almost their entire customer base.

[Raid]

I'd hate to think it was actually the case. I always like to think if I were running a business that honestly with my customers would be essential, but then I've never been responsible for entire teams of peoples' livelihoods, and I suppose people might just make bad decisions.

Either way it feels like competitors might try and capitalise on this. As with WotC, it feels like the damage is irreparable without both backtracking entirely and offering incentives instead.

[Wrathbone]

You do have to wonder if this was the plan all along, and they're changing from an extremely unpalatable option to one that's still unpalatable, but in saying they've "listened to feedback" it makes the unpalatable option seem more reasonable. It just seems odd that two games companies (albeit different genres) would make the same mistake in the space of six months.

With WotC, piecing the whole debacle together from various sources, I think it boiled down to Hasbro execs having a vastly incomplete understanding of the OGL which resulted in them demanding it to be monetised. It sounds like there were internal protests and warnings, but the execs kept coming back to "we have a licence used by most of the industry and we're NOT getting money from it?!"

I can easily imagine that some suit at Unity had a similar thought and insisted on monetisation despite those who understand the situation issuing drastic warnings. I guess the stance from both Hasbro and Unity was that their dominance in the market meant they'd get away with it.