As someone who has lived in three different boroughs in NYC, I am so thrilled by this. I loved the NYC of the first one but didn’t like that it was just Manhattan, when comics Spider-Man lives in Queens and sometimes goes to Brooklyn. Great decision to expand it.
Unfortunately with the length and cost of dev time these days, basically every studio is only one less than massively successful game away from mass layoffs and/or bankruptcy.
Not good for this studio, but the game was a mess from everything I saw.
It doesn’t need to be that way though. In this case, it looks like they shot for the moon and missed, when they probably should’ve started with a less aggressive title. Not every game has to be AAA, making a solid AA or indie game is totally fine too. If they did that, they could’ve released multiple games in that same time and budget and spread out the risk.
Much like Darkest Dungeon, game development is a dynamic and challenging effort where tough choices must be made using imperfect information. Making and releasing a game is an uncertain endeavor, with treasures never guaranteed. But that uncertainty should lie in the marketplace, not with fundamental business terms around which a project was built.
We believe Unity has made a grave misstep in introducing a poorly thought out fee mechanic and then compounded that threefold by making it apply to games that have already been released. We are sympathetic to the idea that companies must sometimes change how they operate, but these changes should be carefully planned, communicated, and enacted in such a way that partners may choose whether they wish to accept these new rules for their next projects.
We built Darkest Dungeon II using Unity, and a large part of our decision to do so was the relative cost certainty around the license and subscription model. We’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on licenses, and far more than that in engaging Unity to help us with parts of development. It is hard for us to imagine building another game with Unity unless we know we are protected from the possibility of massive changes to how we pay for that technology being introduced at the whims of executive management.
Part of game development is knowing when a mechanic is not working and then having the courage to swallow your ego and undo the mistake. We call on Unity to recant this blunder.
We at Red Hook know something about madness… Much like Darkest Dungeon, game development is a dynamic and challenging effort where tough choices must be made using imperfect information. Making and releasing a game is an uncertain endeavor, with treasures never guaranteed. But that uncertainty should lie in the marketplace, not with fundamental business terms around which a project was built. We believe Unity has made a grave misstep in introducing a poorly thought out fee mechanic and then compounded that threefold by making it apply to games that have already been released. We are sympathetic to the idea that companies must sometimes change how they operate, but these changes should be carefully planned, communicated, and enacted in such a way that partners may choose whether they wish to accept these new rules for their next projects. We built Darkest Dungeon using Unity, and a large part ofour decision to do so was the relative cost certainty around the license and subscription model. We’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on licenses, and far more than that in engaging Unity to help us with parts of deve lopment. It is hard for us to imagine building another game with Unity unless we know we are protected from the possibility of massive changes to how we pay for that technology being introduced at the whims of executive management. Part of game development is knowing when a mechanic is not working and then having the courage to swallowyour ego and undo the mistake. We call on Unity to recant this blunder.
(used Google’s text detection to copy/paste, so may not be perfect)
We at Red Hook know something about madness… Much like Darkest Dungeon, game development is a dynamic and challenging effort where tough choices must be made using imperfect information. Making and releasing a game is an uncertain endeavor, with treasures never guaranteed. But that uncertainty should lie in the marketplace, not with fundamental business terms around which a project was built. We believe Unity has made a grave misstep in introducing a poorly thought out fee mechanic and then compounded that threefold by making it apply to games that have already been released We are sympathetic to the idea that companies must sometimes change how they operate, but these changes should be carefully planned, communicated, and enacted in such a way that partners may choose whether they wish to accept these new rules for their next projects. We built Darkest Dungeon I using Unity, and a large part of our decision to do so was the relative cost certainty around the license and subscription model. We’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on licenses, and far more than that in engaging Unity to help us with parts of development. It is hard for us to imagine building another game with Unity unless we know we are protected from the possibility of massive changes to how we pay for that technology being introduced at the whims of executive management. Part of game development is knowing when a mechanic is not working and then having the courage to swallow your ego and undo the mistake. We call on Unity to recant this blunder. Red Hook
ETA: Ah, shit sorry I didn’t see someone else had already posted
Apple engineer here, from what I understand most of Unity’s competitors in the we space are significantly better paying and performing. We keep hearing from developers that nobody wants to use Unity’s product because of that. AppLovin, the one named here, outperforms Unity Ads by as much as 800% in some titles, according to a contact of mine at a game studio. With a difference like that it’s hardly surprising nobody is choosing Unity Ads.
This reeks of desperation, but one wonders how effective it could be - because this demand to drop AppLovin is basically cutting off the revenue faucet for these same developers they’re now trying to extort. No Unity fees but no good income either…
There’s this one guy on youtube(www.youtube.com/), who said about business: [paraphrasing] “Sometimes things go well, and sometimes, you dry to get the change stuck between the couch cushions”. And you’re right, this pretty much does seem like a desperate move if you think about it.
Yeah, I love that analogy. When companies deviate from their core business model to try to increase revenue, it’s a symptom that the company is dying. If they’re having profit issues (which I doubt), a healthy company would innovate to attract customers, not to lock them in.
I’m a massive FFVII fan, and that 2 year wait ALMOST lost my interest. I finally picked it up, where it remained the most expensive game I had purchased for a good long while. I was happy with that, because I heard “the other installments will be included!”
Guess I heard them wrong. They lost me. I won’t pay 90 bucks again for another chapter of a 2 year old remake of a 30 year old game.
games
Gorące
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.