Unity reveals plans to charge developers per game install - plans revoked and CEO fired, lol

[PlayerEmers]

even tho this will not directly affect most of the Unity's userbase (mostly hobbists or really small devs that will never earn enough money to get hit by the new plans),

But it will. Who do you think Unity will ask for money as soon as triple A devs leave that ship?

i was talking more about "certainty" of the current plan directly affecting them.
mostly because the majority of the Unity userbase (small time devs) will never hit the 200k USD revenue threshhold from the current plan.
this can (and probably will) change the moment Unity shits the bed again with another retarded idea of a new pricing plan.

 

[:Flash:]

In response to all of this, AppLovin (the competitor to Ironsource) has launched an OpenSource project with the goal of creating as easy a migration as possible (via AI, asset migration script,etc.) away from Unity and to Godot, Unreal Engine or Cocos.
https://www.applovin.com/blog/migrating-from-unity-to-other-game-engines/

 

[ADL]

 

[Azdul]

In response to all of this, AppLovin (the competitor to Ironsource) has launched an OpenSource project with the goal of creating as easy a migration as possible (via AI, asset migration script,etc.) away from Unity and to Godot, Unreal Engine or Cocos.
https://www.applovin.com/blog/migrating-from-unity-to-other-game-engines/

One thing intrigues me. Why engines use their own scripting languages (GDScript) and their own formats for assets ?

I can understand Bethesda - which uses NetImmerse and Nvidia formats and almost never licenses the engine. And I can understand Naughty Dog (GOAL language) - which were bought by Sony - which are even greater format freaks.

Epic gave up on UnrealScript - which was always thinly veiled C without semicolons. id never pretended that QuakeC is anything other than C.

Open source engines should have even greater incentive to follow open formats. And one day we could have standard APIs - e.g. for purely path-tracing based renderer - in which you could put any commercial or open-source solution - instead of Ogre3D renderer which injects itself into everything.

 

[negator2vc]

In response to all of this, AppLovin (the competitor to Ironsource) has launched an OpenSource project with the goal of creating as easy a migration as possible (via AI, asset migration script,etc.) away from Unity and to Godot, Unreal Engine or Cocos.
https://www.applovin.com/blog/migrating-from-unity-to-other-game-engines/

One thing intrigues me. Why engines use their own scripting languages (GDScript) and their own formats for assets ?

A specialized scripting language can be easier to integrate with the engine. In Godot case they even say that in the documentation (they said that the tried to use off the self scripting language first before going for a specialized one)
Also a specialized scripting language don't need to carry all the baggage off the self scripting language and can provide only what the engine's users need.
As a Godot game dev I love GDScript and I prefer it to for ex. C#. I use C# in my dayjob and I love the language but for Godot I only use GDScript.

Dropping UnrealScript was a big mistake. Unreal need a scripting language instead of forcing a choice between extremes (Blueprints vs C++).
I think Epic bought last year? a company implementing a scripting language for Unreal in order to integrate their language in Unreal but I haven't read any news lately about how the integration is progressing.

 

[Azdul]

In response to all of this, AppLovin (the competitor to Ironsource) has launched an OpenSource project with the goal of creating as easy a migration as possible (via AI, asset migration script,etc.) away from Unity and to Godot, Unreal Engine or Cocos.
https://www.applovin.com/blog/migrating-from-unity-to-other-game-engines/

One thing intrigues me. Why engines use their own scripting languages (GDScript) and their own formats for assets ?

A specialized scripting language can be easier to integrate with the engine. In Godot case they even say that in the documentation (they said that the tried to use off the self scripting language first before going for a specialized one)
Also a specialized scripting language don't need to carry all the baggage off the self scripting language and can provide only what the engine's users need.
As a Godot game dev I love GDScript and I prefer it to for ex. C#. I use C# in my dayjob and I love the language but for Godot I only use GDScript.

Dropping UnrealScript was a big mistake. Unreal need a scripting language instead of forcing a choice between extremes (Blueprints vs C++).
I think Epic bought last year? a company implementing a scripting language for Unreal in order to integrate their language in Unreal but I haven't read any news lately about how the integration is progressing.

I agree that specialized scripting language can be easier to integrate with the engine. But at this point you take a long, hard look at the engine - and ask yourself - why ANY Turing-complete language cannot be integrated with the engine.

If AppLovin can make attempt at ChatGPT-assisted integration - it means that either the reasons were bogus - or the engine has inherent problems that will hinder ANY Turing-complete language.

From the bird's eye view - or ChatGPT non-human perspective - Turing-complete languages on von Neumann architecture are pretty much interchangeable.

 

[Ialda]

From the bird's eye view - or ChatGPT non-human perspective - Turing-complete languages on von Neumann architecture are pretty much interchangeable.

Excel is Turing complete.

The pertinent criteria when choosing a language is how relevant it is for the task at hand.

 

[Azdul]

From the bird's eye view - or ChatGPT non-human perspective - Turing-complete languages on von Neumann architecture are pretty much interchangeable.

Excel is Turing complete.

The pertinent criteria when choosing a language is how relevant it is for the task at hand.

From human perspective.

In the end - it is all machine code. There are no high level language syntax concepts that could not be expressed in C / C++ in more efficient way on typical von Neumann machine. You don't even need to go to the assembly language.

 

[PlayerEmers]

big if true
one of the biggest weeb gacha developers looking to ditch unity

 

[Ravielsk]

It would be immensely funny if this cashgrab by Unity forced studios back into the 2000s era mindset of making their own engines(or at least their own forks of open source ones). Having a borderline monopoly only to then unravel it wholly with a single shitty monetization change would be the absolute peak of comedy.

 

[karoliner]

The massive income from Honkai: Star Rail and Genshin Impact can totally fund a new engine. It would be fantastic if more studios do that instead of relying on Unreal and Unity for everything.

 

[PlayerEmers]

It would be immensely funny if this cashgrab by Unity forced studios back into the 2000s era mindset of making their own engines(or at least their own forks of open source ones). Having a borderline monopoly only to then unravel it wholly with a single shitty monetization change would be the absolute peak of comedy.

imagine all the jank given the current state of the developers and current year peformance on games

 

[what am i doing]

It would be immensely funny if this cashgrab by Unity forced studios back into the 2000s era mindset of making their own engines(or at least their own forks of open source ones). Having a borderline monopoly only to then unravel it wholly with a single shitty monetization change would be the absolute peak of comedy.

I hope so. Almost all of my favourite games were made on in-house engines.

 

[thesecret1]

In-house engines mean you're spending a massive chunk of money on something that is a financial dead-weight - sooner or later, a suit will come and axe it in favour of using something on the market.

The future is in engines made for public use, where the company working on it manages to actually turn a profit from it. Not only will it make more financial sense, but it will lead to a better engine overall, as the engine will have more users and thus more feedback, and will compete for customers with other engines on the market, rather than servicing just a single solitary studio.

 

[0wca]

Good. Maybe this piece of shit engine will finally disappear from the face of the earth.

 

[Caim]

It would be immensely funny if this cashgrab by Unity forced studios back into the 2000s era mindset of making their own engines(or at least their own forks of open source ones). Having a borderline monopoly only to then unravel it wholly with a single shitty monetization change would be the absolute peak of comedy.

It'd be even funnier if Hoyoverse ends up buying out Unity because it's just cheaper that way. Now all the indies have to pay to their landlord the gacha giant.

 

[scytheavatar]

It would be immensely funny if this cashgrab by Unity forced studios back into the 2000s era mindset of making their own engines(or at least their own forks of open source ones). Having a borderline monopoly only to then unravel it wholly with a single shitty monetization change would be the absolute peak of comedy.

It'd be even funnier if Hoyoverse ends up buying out Unity because it's just cheaper that way. Now all the indies have to pay to their landlord the gacha giant.

Buying out Unity will cost 10B, there is no game engine in this world which is worth that much. Don't forget AppLovin tried to buy Unity for $17.54 billion last year and Unity said no.

 

[negator2vc]

In-house engines mean you're spending a massive chunk of money on something that is a financial dead-weight - sooner or later, a suit will come and axe it in favour of using something on the market.

The future is in engines made for public use, where the company working on it manages to actually turn a profit from it. Not only will it make more financial sense, but it will lead to a better engine overall, as the engine will have more users and thus more feedback, and will compete for customers with other engines on the market, rather than servicing just a single solitary studio.

It depends. For 3D especially photorealistic 3D an in-house engine can be a serious burden usually not worth the extra weight.
For 2D on the other hand an in-house can be a better option.

Public engines can easily become bloated with features including semi-abandoned features or even features kept just for compatibility purposes that complicate further maintenance of the engine.
Unity in some way is an example of those problems.

 

[Hellraiser]

It's just fabulously optimistic to expect that developers who couldn't hack away solutions to decent performance in Unity (for example HBS' Battletech and its abysmal loading times) will suddenly start making engines.

Truth is the vast majority of them is just going to jump ship to the next best low-barrier of entry solution, and this will simply see Unity replaced with something else that will take its crown of "crappy low-performing engine every hack developer, unfinished early access shovelware etc. uses". This is especially true for the run of the mill stereotypical indie that has some (crappy) artistic type doing the (even crappier) coding because someone has to do it to make a game rather than because he's competent at it, making generic indie shit #87121 with his generic artistic vision, they'll just use whatever has the most youtube tutorials.

The competent ones (former AAA devs like the Rimworld Dev IIRC, the occasional autists doing something like My Summer Car) who were using Unity, will probably pick something else they were anyway contemplating already due to the pet peeves they have with Unity as a framework after years of using it.

Finally any dev who would be fine with making their own engine probably wouldn't be using Unity in the first place and either doing their own engine for a few years now or using something less newb friendly and more open sourced.

Game development has switched to middleware a long time ago for good reason. Japanese devs did their own engines for a long time after the rest of the world switched, and eventually even they saw it is wasteful in most cases.

 

[negator2vc]

It would be immensely funny if this cashgrab by Unity forced studios back into the 2000s era mindset of making their own engines(or at least their own forks of open source ones). Having a borderline monopoly only to then unravel it wholly with a single shitty monetization change would be the absolute peak of comedy.

It'd be even funnier if Hoyoverse ends up buying out Unity because it's just cheaper that way. Now all the indies have to pay to their landlord the gacha giant.

Buying out Unity will cost 10B, there is no game engine in this world which is worth that much. Don't forget AppLovin tried to buy Unity for $17.54 billion last year and Unity said no.

That was before all this crap.
If enough devs abandon Unity (especially big ones) Unity monetary value cοuld easily decrease

 

[Aemar]

Easily decrease? The harm has been done, and all that it took was an intention statement. The company will be sold for scrap within a year.

 

[thesecret1]

In-house engines mean you're spending a massive chunk of money on something that is a financial dead-weight - sooner or later, a suit will come and axe it in favour of using something on the market.

The future is in engines made for public use, where the company working on it manages to actually turn a profit from it. Not only will it make more financial sense, but it will lead to a better engine overall, as the engine will have more users and thus more feedback, and will compete for customers with other engines on the market, rather than servicing just a single solitary studio.

It depends. For 3D especially photorealistic 3D an in-house engine can be a serious burden usually not worth the extra weight.
For 2D on the other hand an in-house can be a better option.

Public engines can easily become bloated with features including semi-abandoned features or even features kept just for compatibility purposes that complicate further maintenance of the engine.
Unity in some way is an example of those problems.

Is there any major studio that pumps out 2D games at this point?

 

[negator2vc]

thesecret1
Western studio - no (except mobile)
Eastern studio - yes
2D is common in indie games (and not just the small ones for ex. Supergiant Games)

 

[thesecret1]

thesecret1
Western studio - no (except mobile)
Eastern studio - yes
2D is common in indie games (and not just the small ones for ex. Supergiant Games)

I find it doubtful that an indie studio, usually struggling just to fund the game, would find the money to develop an in-house engine.

 

[Gammer]