2y ago

John Riccitiello steps down as CEO of Unity after pricing battle

venturebeat.com John Riccitiello steps down as CEO of Unity after pricing battle

John Riccitiello, CEO of Unity, has resigned from the company in the wake of the pricing controversy.

The news isn’t a surprise as Unity angered a lot of its loyal game developers a few weeks ago after pushing through a price increase based on numbers of downloads — and then retracted it after an uproar.

Gaming @lemmy.zip

John Riccitiello steps down as CEO of Unity after pricing battle

venturebeat.com /games/john-riccitiello-steps-down-as-ceo-of-unity-after-pricing-battle/

34 0

Hacker News @derp.foo

John Riccitiello steps down as CEO of Unity after pricing battle

venturebeat.com /games/john-riccitiello-steps-down-as-ceo-of-unity-after-pricing-battle/

22 3

TechNews @radiation.party

John Riccitiello steps down as CEO of Unity after pricing battle

venturebeat.com /games/john-riccitiello-steps-down-as-ceo-of-unity-after-pricing-battle/

9 0

You're viewing a single thread.

34 comments

As a consumer I will not buy newly made Unity games anymore. Whatever they might do now does not matter, because with the new TOS they can walk back on this at any time. Asking fees for installs on games that were made with a recent enough version of Unity that will prompt the developers to remove them from the stores.
If they wanted to regain trust, they would rectify the TOS that allows for garbage like this, but I don't see that happening..
- The problem is that this hurts developers more than it hurts Unity. And many developers just can't afford switching engines mid-development.
  
  While unfortunate, as a consumer it's the only recourse we have. We don't buy unity, we buy games. I won't buy a game that might just suddenly disappear from a store where I bought it, cause the developer can't or won't carry install fees that may or may not come at any point.
  Yes, it hurts developers. Yes, he shouldn't have to suddenly have to pay that fee, but that is out of my control. But I'm still not taking the risk with my money. Unity clearly wants to do this, eventually they probably will.
  Let's stop buying games with unity so they have no customers left that can slam with install fees after-the-fact. All we can do.
  
  This right here.
  The only way to hurt Untiy is for devs to stop using it. And the only way to force devs to stop using it is to stop buying the games they make with it. I'm sorry it hurts the devs, but there's no way around it. And if you keep giving money to it, then you're supporting what Unity is doing.
  
  So all the effort and money they spent in developing their games, before knowing about this movement from Unity, should be punished?
  I understand your intentions, but indie devs don't have the capacity to switch engines, let alone redevelop everything when it's already or almost finished. I'd understand if you do it at the start of 2024.
  Also, this is speculation, but I've seen devs provide alternatives to get their games. A lot of developers have already declared their intentions to switch engines from now on and they can't do that if they don't have a budget.
  
  If we buy games from devs so they can afford to switch engines, won't that mean we'll end up with games that won't get updated because the Unity codebase will become obsolete when they switch?
  Or is the thinking that devs need to swear that existing licences will work with the game once it's ported to some new engine?
  I'd support existing Unity-based games if the devs declared they will port, and that my license will still work once ported. If the particular devs aren't going to leave Unity, I'm not sure I'd be happy to keep supporting them, because that will keep Unity in business, and I think an example needs to be made.
  Also, I understand switching platforms will be horribly work intensive, but it's not like it's starting from scratch. If the code can't be ported directly, the logic still can (providing the new platform supports the necessary functionality), and the assets also exist.
  
  Imagine writting a pitch to your publisher trying to explain that you need more money (you know, to survive because we live in a society) because players feel entitled enough to demand you port your game to another engine. That's pretty much how horrible it is. The hard truth is game development is an awful industry for workers which are often expected to work for free. It is really depressing.
  
  They can finish up those projects and then move on to another engine. We shouldn't encourage a hostage situation where we have to stay with an untrustworthy platform just because they have a metaphorical gun to some developers' heads.
  
  They can finish up those projects and then move on to another engine.
  So you're saying for them to finish their current unity projects, then for nobody to buy those games so they go out of business before they can start using a different engine for their next game?
- Don't do this, it absolutely hurts Devs more than big bad Unity. Devs should make the choice to move away from Unity if they can, but as a consumer it's not your call.
  
  It will be easier for devs to justify moving away from Unity if there's more consumer demand for non-unity games.
  And presumably @Sina isn't going to stop buying games entirely - they can still buy the same number of games and continue to support indie developers as much as they otherwise would.
  Proprietary game engines like Unity are a dead end. The company behind them is always going to extract as much revenue as they possibly can from the industry and that hurts indie developers. A lot. The sooner devs rip off the bandaid and switch to Godot/etc the better.
  If Godot is missing a feature you need... it's open source and you're a developer. Simply add that feature to the engine.
  
  If Godot is missing a feature you need... it's open source and you're a developer. Simply add that feature to the engine.
  That's... that's not as easy as you make it sound, lol.
- You're hurting indie devs more than Unity.
  Lots of indie devs have been working on their games for years and have no choice but to release on their current version of Unity. If everybody did what you're doing, they would all fail and go out of business.
- But they reinstated it

34 comments