• micka190@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Every indie dev I’m following on YouTube has basically made a “My thoughts on the situation”-type videos where they talk about how they’ve “won against Unity” despite Unity basically doing a textbook of the “Door in the face” technique to pass changes that would’ve been unpopular before this whole mess.

    Edit: Fixed typo.

    • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Claiming it’s “door in the face” is a little crazy here. If this is where they wanted to be, the “bait” changes could have been much much less bad than they were, and they still could’ve walked back to this.

      Hell, they could have announced a 10% revenue split and it would’ve looked much better than what they pitched. And they could still walk back to 2.5% and looked like heroes. And it wouldn’t have lost them nearly as much trust. Nor made them look as bad.

      If this was what they were trying to do, they’d have to have been even dumber to have made it this bad.

      I’m more willing to bet they’re just fucking stupid. Or that a few people on the board had this as a fucking moronic idea, and the rest managed to take back control after it went totally sideways.

      But claiming that it’s a door in the face requires them to be evil enough to do it, stupid enough to not realize they’re overdoing it, crazy enough to think it’d work, etc. It seems way too contrived.

      • delcake@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agreed, this whole Unity thing seemed more like they were surprised the peasants were revolting. Completely unaware of the danger of putting developer bills directly in to the hands of the end users, and not considering that a “trust me bro I counted how much you owe me” blackbox accounting method was too much to ask.

    • JonEFive@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      As soon as I heard Unity was back pedaling, I thought “there’s part 2 of the plan”

      1: release abusive payment scheme to see just how much push back they get. If push back is minimal or losses are acceptable, end here and enjoy the profit.

      2: if push back is strong, implement the actual payment policy that is still a significant increase, but less significant than the one above. And wait until the controversy blows over, which it will.

      Yes, lots of developers will leave, lots of developers will choose a different engine for their new games, but there are a ton that will decide that it isn’t feasible to switch engines and plenty that will just eat the added cost. The thing that remains to be seen is just how much damage Unity has done in terms of new projects choosing other engines over theirs.