This is of course not including the yearly Unity subscription, where Unity Pro costs $2,040 per seat (although they may have Enterprise pricing)

Absolutely ridiculous. Many Unity devs are saying they’re switching engines on social media.

  • Hadriscus
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Until a few years ago there was barely any alternative afaik

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Did they clear it with the owners first?

      Because if you don’t, and later they pursue the legal route, there’s not much you can do, you agree to their terms or fight a lawsuit where they’ll likely take everything

      • WldFyre
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Game devs and engine devs don’t necessarily have the same skill sets though, right?

        And who complained about Sync for Reddit? How would used foss alternatives to access Reddit have changed what happened to Reddit?

    • gencha
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      52
      ·
      1 year ago

      People wrote their own game engines since the earliest of games, they just want the easy route today and a marketplace to monetize on. These are poisoned gifts, and always have been.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        62
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        And if everyone invented their own wheel every time they wanted to build a new cart all we’d ever have is various different wheels and very few carts.

        • Beliriel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean that’s honestly true. There are so many “infant” small selfmade game engines that are just complete shit lol

        • gencha
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Great analogy, but this is a wheel you’re being charged for, after you’ve installed it on your product. Maybe you would have been better suited with your own wheel.

          You’re not picking an existing good wheel solution that you can use forever, you basically took a promise for a free wheel that you’re now being charged for, and you’re sad because the free wheel isn’t free anymore. Well, maybe you should have picked an actually free wheel to begin with.

          Unity is not the only solution to your cart problem. You’re just using it, because it is convenient.

          • Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Are you being obtuse on purpose?

            This isn’t a case of “I use unity because it is free,” because outside of recreational game developer use-cases, it isn’t free. There are very real costs associated with monetization that any developer, team, and studio should be aware of.

            Developers who have been using unity with knowledge of their pricing mechanisms are being blindsided with new pricing, that you can’t opt-out of, with a little less than 3 months notice. Going back to the wheel analogy, these teams have designed entire vehicles around these wheels, with application-specific knowledge and workarounds to be told that “Hey, regarding that product which underpins your entire project, one with which we’ve already entered into a sales agreement… we decided we want to change the agreement and track its usage and charge you more money. You have 11 weeks to get over it. Your continued use of our product implies consent to the new terms of this agreement.”

            You can’t just move to a different platform without significant amounts of rework.

            • gencha
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Developers who have been using unity with knowledge of their pricing mechanisms are being blindsided with new pricing

              I get that, and it sucks. But too many offerings on the market are nowadays accepted as normal operating procedure, when they seem like such obvious traps to me. There is no financially-driven company out there that you can rely on with your project. Go with an open-source project or write what you need yourself. I fully understand the challenge of writing a product from scratch and bringing it to market. Your dependencies can break your neck one way or the other.

              You can’t just move to a different platform without significant amounts of rework.

              I know and feel that. I am no longer in entertainment, but I also see these exact same patterns in my current line of work (IT infrastructure). People use “free” tools that they take for granted, and then they’re surprised by rug-pulls. This has been happening for so long in so many areas that it’s almost tiring.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Unity isn’t free, what are you on about, you pay money for it.

            There really isn’t much point having this conversation if you’re going to operate on flights of fantasy.

      • adriaan@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not “the easy route”. Making a game engine is a tremendous investment these days. If you are making anything other than a game that looks like early 2000s or earlier, you need a pretty capable engine that takes years to develop. That’s on top of the time it costs to make a game, which is also typically years. Not to mention that your proprietary engine will have subpar tooling and make your game development slower.

        For anyone but industry giants it’s not feasible to make a modern engine. Unless your game is not aiming to play and feel like a modern game, you have to run with an off-the-shelf engine.

        • dylanTheDeveloper@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Plus when you break it down you’ll still need 3rd party software in order to do anything more than a console only application (OpenGL, directX, Havok, Bink etc)

        • gencha
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with everything you’re saying, but it’s still the easy route and it’s still a poisoned gift, as can be seen by this story. People rather pick the “free” and capable tool than investing time in an open-source solution that needs more work, or developing from scratch. Maybe they just want to reach more platforms to make more money, or use the super advanced tools, but that doesn’t change that you’re picking the path of least resistance, and you might pay for it in the end.

          Chances are, if you’re expecting to compete with industry giants on the same level, you’re already investing massively into the production of assets and you’re project in general. You’re just skipping the investment in the engine and tooling. If you just want to make a small game, then maybe you don’t even need Unity and would be better off with something more tailored to your project.

          I just can’t feel sorry for people who walked into this trap. I feel like this pattern has been occurring way too frequently to ignore the danger of “free” tools that really aren’t.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          29
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well, it doesn’t matter if it’s hard, the companies that did it are using it to control you and so now you don’t have a choice.

          So get cracking or don’t complain.

          Also Godot is a thing.

          • adriaan@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re not listening. It’s not that it’s hard (although it definitely is), it’s literally just infeasible financially and time wise. You cannot spend millions developing an engine unless you are a large AAA studio. You can’t pull up your bootstraps your way into making a modern game engine within the budget you have to make a game.

            As for Godot:

            1. While games like Domekeeper and Luck Be a Landlord are great, they are made by two people and one person respectively. It has not proven itself as an engine capable of supporting the type of development cycle and team necessary for larger projects.
            2. The best games released in Godot are visually vastly inferior to anything you can whip up in other commercial engines. Its focus has been on 2D, and the 3D games released in it don’t look great. Users expect more from bigger budget games.
            3. Godot is very new. Many games started development in its infancy, and some before it was even released as open source. Not to mention that most studios have existed much longer and are already established in an older engine, with lots of capital and knowledge locked up in those softwares. There is a lot of inertia to adapting new technology.
            • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think you’re comparing apples to orchards here.

              I’ll grant you, Unity has been a commercial standard that many large and good games have been made in, Godot hasn’t. Godot has been used largely by solo creators or small teams which has limited the scope and detail of the artwork in Godot games thus far.

              This begs the question: What’s the best looking solo-developed Unity game?

              Does that game include a lot of purchased/sourced assets? Should that count as “solo” developed then? Given the contents of Steam’s catalog, by sheer volume of titles it seems that Unity is THE engine for creating low effort shit-tier asset flip “games” that are little more than a tutorial project file with a retail price. “Games made in Unity” is a LOT of rough to look for diamonds in.

              Once you’ve found the best looking solo-developed Unity game, ask yourself this: Could this game be remade in Godot? Is Godot technically capable of running a game like this?

              I’m also unconvinced that Godot is inherently a poor choice for larger development teams. It has built-in support for versioning systems such as Git, and its modular node-in-scene system mean that different team members could work on different components independently, then bring their work together as a whole. There’s also that whole aspect where the Godot editor is itself a Godot “game” that runs in the Godot engine, which means it’s possible for developers to create their own extensions to the editor using the same skills needed to make games.

              Beyond that, much of the work on graphics–3D art, level design, character/creature design, rigging, animation–a lot of that is going to be done in an art package like Blender rather than Godot. And yes I would suggest Blender for the same reason I’d suggest Godot, because Adobe and Autodesk are also pulling the same kinds of enshitification that Unity is.

              The real reason that Unity is the industry standard? Because it’s what they teach in school. “Learn Unity because that’s what they use in the industry.”

            • gencha
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I said this in other comments earlier, you don’t need to rewrite Unity to build your game. Build what you need, or pick up an open source product and add what you need. I don’t understand why people bring up financial feasibility if you’re being charged now for a wrong choice in the past. This was to be expected. It’s always the same pattern. If you can’t figure out how create your game without some false promise product, then don’t build your game. It’s really as easy as that.

            • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It’s not that it’s hard (although it definitely is), it’s literally just infeasible financially and time wise.

              And yet somehow Godot exists.

              Somehow, they managed to build a viable 2D and 3D open source engine without a massive AAA studio so clearly your assumptions are just wrong.

              You just don’t like being told you have to take responsibility for a problem someone else caused, and to that, I don’t blame you. It’s not right that we have to go through any of this. But honestly, it’s time for us millennials to realize that putting in the elbow grease to build alternatives to what others have done to us isn’t doing that, it’s us building the infrastructure to allow us to move on from the powers that be, and if you want to break away from them, you have to. Your abusers will not liberate you for you.

              It’s time to nut up and do it now.

              • adriaan@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                22
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You have no idea what you’re talking about my guy. First off, Godot has been in development since 2007. That’s 16 years ago. Secondly, Godot started in Codenix, a consulting company that made money by licensing then-closed-source Godot. They only made it open source in 2014 - 7 years into development. This is a company that made its money through selling a game engine, not through making games. Thirdly, Godot receives funding from massive companies (e.g. they received $250k in funding from Epic Games in 2020). Fourthly, Godot is not up to par with Unreal Engine or Unity. It’s NOT a viable game engine for many games being developed.

                Edit: also, I’m not a milennial. I’m a zoomer. No, I’m not too young to have an opinion on this, I’ve been making games for 15 years.

                • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Well, now that it is open-source, we ought to take advantage of it, fork it and mod it up to our specifications. Or just make our own from scratch.

                  You don’t have a choice if you don’t want corporations to continue holding your dick in a vice. Bitch all you want; those are your options and sometimes in life you have to grow up and make hard choices that require a lot of effort, grit, determination, knowledge and courage to better your life and the lives of those around you. You want change? You better put in the elbow grease to make it happen. The only one who’s going to suffer if you don’t is you.

                  That is a hard lesson my generation refused to learn, and we suffer endlessly because of it. Don’t be like us in that aspect, please.

                  Edit: also, I’m not a milennial. I’m a zoomer.

                  The mindset I was addressing largely afflicts us millennials and isn’t targeted toward you. I’m not talking only to you through these comments but also to anybody else reading them, just to clarify.

                  • adriaan@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You’re not wrong that creating FOSS technologies is a worthwhile pursuit. I think what you’re missing is how massive a game engine is. The average game development company simply cannot be creating its own engine or forking Godot to create a game in.

                    It requires a large company dedicated to engine development and tooling, and at least a decade of development, to create a worthwhile engine. If you want to make a game, fronting that development with a decade of engine development is not financially sensible. This issue is not one that game development companies can fix.

                    That said, if Godot meets your game and team’s needs (or reasonably close to where you can reasonably develop the engine further to meet them), go for it. But it’s not realistic for most developers.

              • Little1Lost@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                You sound like you dont know anything about programming (at least engine programming). Most Engines have to run in something like assembly, else they would be too slow. (They use others too but Assembly is in like all, i am a junior dev so i could be wrong)

                Assembly is already a large hurdle.
                I mean it is “simple” as the arch linux type of “simple”. (Nothing more than you need to run it and nothing more)

                So the option is to learn assembly or hire someone (or multiple) who can, good luck by finding one that is capable of developing an engine that does not suck and does not cost a fortune.

                Then you need to know what the engine should do.
                If you “only” need 2D or even only some system to interact with the console you will be fine, maybe.
                3D is a bit more complicated, the reason why there are so much 2D/2,5D games out supports this claim.

                Then particle support if you want it…
                Every feature you want has to be supported!
                And every feature costs and maybe needs maintenance when bugs occur. Supporting an operating system is a feature too :)

                So the engine has to be updated when a mayor OS update comes out

                There are more points for why not to make an own engine and use one of the marked that fits ones needs even if it is closed source.

                You where so fond of Godot so trying to help them might be a good starting point for you to life your ideals. I sincerely dont want to mock you with the sentence. If you can successfully help a larger open source project everyone is happy. If you can learn something new i am sure it can benefit you. I was only a bit mad because it felt like you are comparing engines with “weekend projects” what they are definitely not in the slightest.

                • frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Assembly usage is pretty minor in these engines. Tends to be for just a few very tight loops. It has to be redone for every platform, too. Assembly for x86-64 doesn’t work on ARM. Hell, some things on 32-bit x86 won’t even work on x86-64. You would never want to do more than a function of inline ASM here or there. It’d be a nightmare if you did.

                  That said, it’s barely even touching on the complexity of modern engines. Unity and Unreal aren’t just engines, they’re a whole development ecosystem.

                • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Except it doesn’t matter. No matter how hard of a pursuit it is, it is one you have to do because you don’t have any other choice at this point. You can’t let corporations dominate humanity because building meaningful alternatives is “too hard”. People are the ones who build those engines in the first place and if that means you have to bust ass learning comp sci to do it yourself or contribute to an effort doing it, you still have to do it.

                  Nothing in life is easy. Do the research, learn the skillsets and material you need, and do it. No matter how hard or expensive it is, now you have to put in the work and the money.

                  It’s either that or serfdom. Your choice. I won’t lose any sleep if you refuse to though – I’ll just use Godot, add to it when I need and move on from you myself. It’s up to you whether you’re gonna do the same and save yourself.

                  • frezik@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’d like to jump out of the system for a moment and opine a few things:

                    • People on Lemmy are generally fully aware of FOSS and support it
                    • People on Lemmy are generally not the type who want to hand over everything to a few corporations
                    • Even so, you’re being downvoted to oblivion

                    And there’s a very good reason for that: you are vastly understating how difficult it is to make something on the level of Unity or Unreal, and people here can see it. It’s not merely difficult, but completely out of reach for anyone without hundreds of millions of existing revenue. Open source is not going to get you there anytime soon. By the time it could even get to the current level of the big two engines, those two would have already moved on to something even better.

                    It’s not a choice between a corporate licensed engine or an open source one or an in-house one. It’s a choice between a corporate engine and having a finished product in any kind of reasonable time frame, or having a finished product that’s anything close to modern looking.

                    Now, I happen to agree with the statement “I want shorter games with worse graphics made by people who are paid more to work less and I’m not kidding”. So if that’s what you’re getting at, then I agree. But know that this is what you’re asking for.

      • TechieDamien@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, and people nowadays don’t even rewrite basic libraries! Everyone should have their version of glibc or they are just lazy!!!1!!1!

        • gencha
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          C implementations are available as open-source. The glibc especially is a great example of this. This comparison is not good. I’m all for using open source

      • stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah let me just make my own fucking game engine right quick because that’s definitely easier than using another one that a team made and continues to make, support, and add onto because

        “It’s easier”

        Come on dude you’re just talking out of your ass. You should read about Cynicism and why nobody fucking likes that shit

        • gencha
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t have to reproduce Unity to create your game. You just need to write what you need. And you could also chose an actual free software project instead of something where they pull the rug right out from under you. If you look at the choice today, with the rug already having been pulled, would you not consider the choice an obvious mistake in hindsight? Every other project these days loses money by trying to build a following which they will then monetize on. I’m sorry for people who walked right into this trap, but it could have been avoided by making better choices in the past. Sorry if you disagree, but I’ve been around long enough to recognize these recurring patterns with “free” software.

          • stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This isn’t how you respond to people that have a problem. Total dude bro answer

            Be better man. I’m not going to continue this conversation

      • Hector_McG@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        People wrote their own game engines since the earliest of games

        Lazy gets, using someone else’s programming language. They should have developed their own language and written the compiler before starting to write a games engine for the game they wanted to make.

        • Droechai
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          To be honest even a home written language and compiler would be based on someone else’s hardware.

          Come to think of it, imagine if American Megatrends would start with a subscription model.

          10 USD tier: 10 free boots a month, each subsequent boot shows an ad. You can skip the ad for 25 crystals.

          Crystals are bought in packs of 10 or 35.