According to what Unity reps said elsewhere, they have no way of knowing what’s a bought install, what’s a demo, what’s a charity bundle, what’s a pirated install, and what is someone loading a webpage with a WebGL program integrated (every page view = 1 install).
Instead, they want to estimate how much people owe them. Using secret methods with no accountability.
“according to our extensive research, when we multiplied how much we like you by fuckall, you owe us 20000”
Exactly. To me, this explanation sounds like they’ll just magically estimate the numbers without really being able to prove it. And that sucks.
However, we can be sure that developers will have their own analytics, that are probably way more accurate and they know exactly how many people have played or installed their game. And I’m betting that this number will be a lot smaller than the Unity “estimation”, and people will get even more angry.
Now I can finally download a game 100000x to bankrupt a game company, just like they always said we could.
Well you would just have to download it once. But install it 1000000 times. Sounds like a lot of work.
Not if you automate it with a good script and run it on a few machines at a time.
Virtualization is the key. Multiple VMs, installing, uninstalling, reinstalling.
Doesn’t matter. Regardless of what Unity said their “Enterprise” plan was, it doesn’t matter.
B2B deals just work differently since both companies have more at stake. If a company like EA used Unity, there is no way Unity would want to lose that contract and EA couldn’t afford to drop Unity. Large companies will likely go through a few short renegotiation meetings, if that.
Plus, lawyers. If Unity even tries to force this on its larger customers, they are going to be hauled into court and most likely lose. When they lose, Unity will likely be liable for court costs as well.
No, they can not. This is just a standard PR response.
When crackers don’t patch out the phone line, they can.
Edit: Only in some cases, though. They can detect popular ways to crack games, like Steam DRM stubs. If the game has zero identifiable information about the buyer and no or an unsupported DRM, they’re SOL.
and how exactly is unity going to know whether it was gotten legitimately or not? the only way the developers wouldn’t get charged is if crackers patched it out
They can’t detect everything, but let’s look at Steam as an example. If the game detects Steam DRM, then the game knows that they should’ve bought the game on Steam. They can check whether the Steam DRM is a stub and therefore a crack, or get your local Steam account ID and cross-check whether you bought the game with a Steam API.
It would mean every Unity game was not-so-secretly shipped with code that phones home to the Unity company upon install.
Either they’ve been egregiously spying on gamers for years (and by extension, game developers using Unity have just been fine with that), or they’re lying through their teeth.
Unity includes telemetry for some time
I believe you can’t actually disable the telemetry (or Unity intro logo) in the “free” version
So then this falls under “devs didn’t care” because it was useful information for them and they didn’t see how it could be used negatively.
Probably the opposite actually. The devs who utilize the feature probably enjoy having some numbers to look at and analyze. They’re trying to make a game that people enjoy after all; the more info they have on how you’re playing the game, the better. The devs who don’t use it probably aren’t even aware that it exists. Additionally, I’m not sure if it requires a subscription to view the telemetry (the page suggests you have to sign up for it in some capacity), but if it does then it makes sense that devs might believe that it’s something that’s disabled until you manually enable it.
Personally, I know if I was a dev I’d be checking that shit every day. I like watching the funny numbers go up and down.
Unity jumped the shark.
Engine was trash anyway. Unreal for lyfe.
Proprietary software A is bad. Long live proprietary software B!
(Or maybe check out Godot)
Unreal is open source, although it isn’t free. I would certainly prefer it to unity though.
Nah, unity is/was a good engine. The reason why it has a bad reputation is for the same reason that Game maker used to have a bad reputation. Almost everyone who’s learning how to make games uses Unity because it’s easy to use, is extremely well documented, and has a massive store full of add-on scripts, programs, model sets, etc. As such, all the poorly optimized games and 0-effort asset flips end up being made in unity (though I’ve seen some unreal games that make even the most poorly optimized Unity game look good). The result? Even though there are a number of high-quality, highly-regarded games that use unity, it has a reputation for being a shitty engine.
Don’t believe me? Keep an eye on Godot or Unreal. If unity sticks to their new license, then it’s highly likely that one of those engines will become the new “newbie engine” and gain a reputation for being shitty.
I disagree. I’ve been/am working on several pretty large projects in Unity (some of them sold hundreds of thousands copies), and especially once you start porting to consoles, the experience goes to shit. Their support is vague, documentation is plainly wrong in some places - I’ve once spent few days figuring out how to use a documented and explained feature, only to find out later that there’s a closed few years old bug on their issue tracker that it’s actually not supported, and the documentation only does not explains it very well. (The feature was multiple hits per single Raycast in jobs, here are the docs. According to the bug resolution, only one hit per ray is supported, and the docs only don’t explain it very well. The docs are still the same.)
You also inevitably run into issues that you simply don’t have in other engines - it’s closed source. You have no idea how is something implemented, or whether something isn’t working because you are doing it wrong, or if it’s Unity bug/fault. In Unreal, if something doesn’t work, you can always just check the engine code, and either fix it yourself, or better understand why it’s not working. If you need to slightly modify some engine behavior, you’re out of luck with Unity - you have to resort to ugly hacks that sometimes work, but usually at a cost. In Unreal, you just modify the engine code and be done with it.
Trusting Unity with any feature is also a gamble. Have you started developing a multiplayer game on Unet? Tough, we don’t want to support that anymore. But, we will create a better multiplayer system, just wait for it! Then they removed Unet, and the new networking relacement is widely regarded as pretty much unusable - or at lest it was last time I checked. Thankfully, there are a few amazing open source networking addons.
In general, while Unity is an ok-ish game engine for smaller hobby projects (but for that, Godot is better), it’s really an awful and frustrating experience once your project size grows and you need to build bigger games, or if you start porting your games to consoles.
And it’s also really apparent from the way they communicate and threat you company that they don’t give a fuck and only want your money.
