Would be massively surprised if this means anything else other than CoD which they got regulators worried about a little bit. they just want to reduce the eyeballs.
Their games were rough around the edges but sure as hell showed a lot of passion. The lore and attention to detail that went into their worlds were unparalleled, especially in the open world genre where lots of content is just generic copy-pasted fetch quests or mindlessly following the Ubisoft formula.
Definitely won’t be all of them. Probably just a small set that are not huge money makers. They already publish some titles as third party, like Minecraft, Ori, and Lucky’s Tale.
Guessing we just get ports of, like, Hi-Fi Rush and Psychonauts, and continued support of some Activision titles that are 3rd party like Diablo 4, Spyro, Crash, and a token Call of Duty game.
Man, I hope the lawyers at the Big Three are getting ready to send Christmas cards to Riccitielo cause, uh, he's pretty much going to be signing their paychecks if he keeps going
Because it would be hilarious to see all the platforms say fuck it and ban Unity games over this ridiculous cash grab they're very obviously not entitled to.
Unity is so ubiquitous that it would have unimaginable consequences.
For example, 90% of vr games are made in Unity. So that's one segment of gaming completely wiped off the map.
Things are not much better in desktop and mobile gaming either, as Unity has close to 50% market share.
It would be a literal Thanos snap.
The CEO of Unity did sell off most of his own stock in the company shortly before the original announcement. It’s an open-and-shut case for insider trading charges if ever I had heard one.
Jesus. This is just a circus of incompetence. Doesn't matter who is footing the bill. If you push the bill on the distributor/install service it means those streams will be less likely to embrace indie devs and especially new indie devs without a hit under their belt. So same chilling result.
The answer seems to be no. I'm anticipating Sony, MS, and Nintendo's response on this. Did they even know about it? I'm very curious to see how this pans out because at this viewpoint it seems like an entire shit show.
Steam is just a storefront, not a publisher. And traditionally Valve only publishes their own games. While Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony are more broad game publishers. Imagine Casio trying to charge the watch store for every time you look at the time in the watch you bought there. Complete bonkers.
They are trying to make a power play against these companies to strike out a deal due to their market share
A problem I see with it is that games that push console sales are made on Unreal (or internal engine) not Unity
However the amount of negative press is overblown as they are starting far in order to give things up during negotiations. And despite saying it’s only charged on first install; I’ve seen people claim it will bankrupt devs
I support devs switching from Unity to Godot but I feel like in a year’s time it won’t really matter as people are more likely to get hired for Unity
However the amount of negative press is overblown as they are starting far in order to give things up during negotiations. And despite saying it’s only charged on first install; I’ve seen people claim it will bankrupt devs
It’s charged on ever reinstall, not only on the first.
Whitten told Axios that the company would actually only charge for an initial installation.
Unity’s free tier of development services would owe Unity $0.20 per installation once their game hit thresholds of 200,000 downloads and earn $200,000 in revenue.
With pro plans having lower fees and a higher threshold, the majority of devs aren’t going to feel this
twistedvoxel.com
Aktywne