• CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, it was also reactionary by Unity and they’ve since walked back their executable fee plan for legacy applications. If that didn’t happen I have no doubt Cult would have been pulled, because what indie can afford to pay PER INSTALL?

    I fully blame unity for the debacle and fall out, and don’t think it’s right to blame devs for backtracking after unity put new conditions on the table.

    • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure, but I don’t appreciate childish antics by devs, apparently for the sole purpose of catching a hype wave.

      I’ve written them off and will not be purchasing their game, as every time there’s a slight inconvenience it seems they’ll throw their hands up and threaten to stop developing their game. It’s not the industry they should be in imo. (See also fez)

      • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The industry backlash wasn’t about any hype wave. My game is nowhere near marketable yet, but I internally switched to using godot despite how much work I have to repeat because unity has declared hostile intent towards indie games. Even if they walked it back the threat of their whims is still there.

        • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not just the threat, unity clearly stated they are still moving forward with their plans, the fee just won’t apply retroactively. Of course, this is how it should have been from the initial announcement, but too little too late - it is the right decision to not use their tools for your future project.