Unity Pulls an Adobe! No more permanent licenses and 4x the price

[J1M]

Seems like a great chance for Unreal to corner the engine market. But they'd have to ditch blueprints and let people use UnrealScript again.

 

[Davaris]

The author is trying to make it seem like Unity is the only answer and that they're holding people's projects hostage. They're not. In reality he's just bitching about the inconvenience the Unity team is putting him through.

He does not use Unity has always used his own code. He is warning about making your company's future dependent on the whims of other companies. Its the same reason Swen Vincke gave for making his own engine.

Seems like a great chance for Unreal to corner the engine market. But they'd have to ditch blueprints and let people use UnrealScript again.

They will never give them up. Too much money invested in it. People are attaching scripts to it anyway. C# will be in soon so I hear and they already have Java working in it.

 

[Bustamonte]

Unity isn't quite RPG maker but you are starting from scratch with the code to move to another engine. Which is about the same as starting over. It's not exactly pleasant for moving art assets to a new engine, either.

 

[Mustawd]

He does not use Unity has always used his own code. He is warning about making your company's future dependent on the whims of other companies. Its the same reason Swen Vincke gave for making his own engine.

I agreed with a lot of what he said. I just disagreed with the free market comment. Just because it is painful does not mean people cannot move on to something different. Eventually one or a combination of multiple products will fill the vacuum that unity is leaving behind as it basically sheds customers who weren't making them much money to begin with.

In the meantime..yeah this would suck for someone mid project. I don't deny that.

 

[Immortal]

Unity isn't quite RPG maker but you are starting from scratch with the code to move to another engine. Which is about the same as starting over. It's not exactly pleasant for moving art assets to a new engine, either.

Moving art assets is a lot easier then porting C# code that is tightly coupled to an API that you don't have source for and doesn't exist anywhere except in that engine.

 

[Bester]

My Oh my.. How times have changed..

I wrote a post explaining why Unity is dead and Unreal is the future not a long time ago. Ignore the first two quotes and replies in the post.

It doesn't cancel what I said about UE's bugs, but UE4 won the race. Last time we were talking, things weren't so grim for Unity.

 

[Immortal]

My Oh my.. How times have changed..

I wrote a post explaining why Unity is dead and Unreal is the future not a long time ago. Ignore the first two quotes and replies in the post.

It doesn't cancel what I said about UE's bugs, but UE4 won the race. Last time we were talking, things weren't so grim for Unity.

I don't religiously follow every post you make.

I just think it's hilarious that an entire thread spawned called Unity vs Unreal because you couldn't accept the fact that Unreal was a viable engine for indies.
Your complaints were born of ignorance, your unwavering love of Unity was hilarious and sad.

Now they went full SJW and you flip flop faster than a pair of womans slippers.

Directing people to a "REAL" engine... the one you were shitting on 4 months ago because C PLOXPLOX is HAcker Shit! Can't make a game in that! And my friend who made a shitty MMO used it so I'm an expert now.

 

[Bester]

I just think it's hilarious that an entire thread spawned called Unity vs Unreal because you couldn't accept the fact that Unreal was a viable engine for indies.

You misunderstand now as you misunderstood then. I never said Unreal wasn't a viable engine, I said it had its problems. It still does.

Your complaints were born of ignorance,

Here we go again. I freelanced both as UE4 dev and as Unity dev for a while, I know both engines. I released a code plugin on unreal marketplace recently too. I love your ignorance complaints, keep them coming.

 

[Immortal]

I just think it's hilarious that an entire thread spawned called Unity vs Unreal because you couldn't accept the fact that Unreal was a viable engine for indies.

You misunderstand now as you misunderstood then. I never said Unreal wasn't a viable engine, I said it had its problems. It still does.

Your complaints were born of ignorance,

Here we go again. I freelanced both as UE4 dev and as Unity dev for a while, I know both engines. I released a code plugin on unreal marketplace recently too. I love your ignorance complaints, keep them coming.

You can't be this fucking retarded... Are you so afraid to admit you were wrong?


Like this back pedalling is glorious..
Seriously go re-read your posts in that Unity Vs Unreal thread.. then come back here and say you were a ~moderate~ who was just pointing out a few flaws with Unreal at the time.



EDIT:

Let me get the ball rolling for you - the post that started that entire thread:

[Unreal's] licensing is now very very competitive with Unity. (better)

Better how? What exactly is "very very competitive" in real terms? What the fk are you talking about?

- Unity is $75 per seat per month or buy a license for ~100k for the entire company.

- Unreal is "free", plus 5% of gross sales, plus ~$25,000/year for access to UDN. UDN is an answerhub behind a paywall. LoL. Or you can ask for a tailor made deal, which will cost you depending on what amount of money they think they can get out of you. In case of PoE, it would've been perhaps 100k, perhaps 300k? Nobody knows, certainly not you.

Now in case of PoE, they would've had to pay ~375k bucks for UE4 without a tailor made deal (or less with one) and ~100k for Unity.

Bottom line is, those licenses either cost more or less the same, or UE4 may cost more, but it's certainly not the other way around.

Now apparently there's something I don't know. So how about you tell me something that makes UE4 "very very competitive" or even "(better)".

UNREAL IS THE FUTURE OF GAMING!!!

 

[Bester]

Let me get the ball rolling for you - the post that started that entire thread:

That post started the thread? That post was absolutely correct. Unreal would've cost Obsidian much more and wouldn't have provided them with any significant edge.

For single player isometric RPGs it's a matter of personal preference whether to choose Unreal or Unity:
- Backgrounds are prerendered, which mitigates Unity's graphics problems.

But:
- Unity allows easier development of asset handling tools - for spells, items, etc.
- Unity costs much less.

Voila.
In this case, and in this particular case only, Unreal couldn't compete. Reread the post, that's what it said.

I'm having a deja vu. You're not going full retard on me again, are you?

 

[Burning Bridges]

After they drove little engine makers out of business with their bullshits, they are upping their prices again.

I keep telling myself I should go back to SDL, as commercial software has a short attention span. I've been burned by three companies now.

It's funny you mention SDL. I was going to use glfw but they don't really support my IDE any more and they suck anyway.

So I finally decided on SDL just yesterday. I am giving up on my old game idea "for now" even though it was far enough along for a halfassed alpha. I've just been fucked over by engine collapses and similar issues so much the project is in a total mess state at this point. I will do something a little more simple which doesn't have as big of engine requirements instead.

SDL is one possibility, but for a strategy game I would rather be going without a game engine at all, i.e. dotNET or Delphi plus sound. If you need something slicker, there also Qt.

 

[Immortal]

I'm having a deja vu. You're not going full retard on me again, are you?

You really are a one trick pony aren't you?

That guy is an idiot.

He's been profitable as an indie for a very long time, when the majority fail. How about you?

Oh I'm sorry.. He made a few dialogue box games. I guess he's actually a genius beyond critique..??

Is he forgetting the second part of the equation.. the whole "Free Market - People don't need your shit". If Unity wants to hemorrhage userbase to other engines, go ahead.
Nobody loses by not using Unity.. except Unity.

There are costs associated with changing engines. Did you think of that or are you an idiot?

The personal plight of developers stuck on Unity today is largely irrelevant.
I was talking about the long term end game plan of Unity as a company.. In the long term they will lose customers.
My argument was that in most cases competition will keep businesses honest and if Unity wants to go down that road it's not only a stupid choice by them but also a stupid assumption to make that all companies will go that way.

For example, In the world of Mr.Pro-Indie-Developer-Who-Is-So-Smart-And-Davaris-Loves, We should never rely on any software we have to pay for or don't have source for.
In his hypothetical - Microsoft might buy Steam and charge a MILLION DOLLARY DOO's to upload games - so should we all probably stop supporting Windows then?
I mean.. what if one day Windows 10 starts charging a billion dollars to install a game. WHAT IF?! You Okay NOW?!?

Most companies want your money and won't make stupid decisions that lose them business.

 

[Declinator]

After they drove little engine makers out of business with their bullshits, they are upping their prices again.

I keep telling myself I should go back to SDL, as commercial software has a short attention span. I've been burned by three companies now.

It's funny you mention SDL. I was going to use glfw but they don't really support my IDE any more and they suck anyway.

So I finally decided on SDL just yesterday. I am giving up on my old game idea "for now" even though it was far enough along for a halfassed alpha. I've just been fucked over by engine collapses and similar issues so much the project is in a total mess state at this point. I will do something a little more simple which doesn't have as big of engine requirements instead.

SDL is one possibility, but for a strategy game I would rather be going without a game engine at all, i.e. dotNET or Delphi plus sound. If you need something slicker, there also Qt.

SDL isn't a game engine though.

 

[Bustamonte]

SDL is one possibility, but for a strategy game I would rather be going without a game engine at all, i.e. dotNET or Delphi plus sound. If you need something slicker, there also Qt.

SDL is more like GLUT than anythign else. It playes sound sounds sure but many it's there just to create a window.

 

[Davaris]

I'm having a deja vu. You're not going full retard on me again, are you?

You really are a one trick pony aren't you?

That guy is an idiot.

He's been profitable as an indie for a very long time, when the majority fail. How about you?

Oh I'm sorry.. He made a few dialogue box games. I guess he's actually a genius beyond critique..??

Is he forgetting the second part of the equation.. the whole "Free Market - People don't need your shit". If Unity wants to hemorrhage userbase to other engines, go ahead.
Nobody loses by not using Unity.. except Unity.

There are costs associated with changing engines. Did you think of that or are you an idiot?

The personal plight of developers stuck on Unity today is largely irrelevant.
I was talking about the long term end game plan of Unity as a company.. In the long term they will lose customers.
My argument was that in most cases competition will keep businesses honest and if Unity wants to go down that road it's not only a stupid choice by them but also a stupid assumption to make that all companies will go that way.

For example, In the world of Mr.Pro-Indie-Developer-Who-Is-So-Smart-And-Davaris-Loves, We should never rely on any software we have to pay for or don't have source for.
In his hypothetical - Microsoft might buy Steam and charge a MILLION DOLLARY DOO's to upload games - so should we all probably stop supporting Windows then?
I mean.. what if one day Windows 10 starts charging a billion dollars to install a game. WHAT IF?! You Okay NOW?!?

Most companies want your money and won't make stupid decisions that lose them business.

An awful lot of text to avoid answering a simple question. lol

 

[DakaSha II]

Unity and unreal are both shit for indie devs

 

[Immortal]

An awful lot of text to avoid answering a simple question. lol

I guess your English isn't so good.

 

[adrix89]

Doesn't Unreal have the source code? So why whine about bugs? Stick with a version and backport all the relevant fixes.

Unreal might be the harder engine to work with but you can trust the source code.

 

[vean]

You can tell someone's never worked on a huge project before. "Just backport the fixes. How difficult can it be?"

 

[shihonage]

Indie devs should write their own engines. Unless they want to do 3D, that is. Which they shouldn't.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

Indie devs should write their own engines. Unless they want to do 3D, that is. Which they shouldn't.

Then I'm pretty sure I'll play the Shelter in 2030+ with about 5% of the planned features/areas/characters/etc.

 

[DakaSha II]

Indie devs should write their own engines. Unless they want to do 3D, that is. Which they shouldn't.

wrong

 

[Excidium II]

right

 

[Bustamonte]

Indie devs should write their own engines. Unless they want to do 3D, that is. Which they shouldn't.

Especially if they want to do 3d. Otherwise you are at the mercy of upgrades, closures, and the ever more popular 'lol you have to pay again you don't own anything bitch'.

Nothing you could have chosen 5 years ago, would be something you can actually use today.

 

[shihonage]

Indie devs should write their own engines. Unless they want to do 3D, that is. Which they shouldn't.

Then I'm pretty sure I'll play the Shelter in 2030+ with about 5% of the planned features/areas/characters/etc.

The reason Compound has stalled, has not as much to do with its engine, as with overwhelming amount of content on all levels that is required for an authentic Fallout clone. I don't have the luxury of being George RR Martin at this point in my life.