Sure, but they also say you can use an old version if you prefer the old terms. Basically, that if they update the terms, it’ll only apply to the current/future versions.
So just stop using the current version. Just use the old version which still has the old terms. You never agreed to the new terms, and under the terms you agreed to, you can continue to use the old terms.
That poses an interesting question. If they can change the terms, and say that you agree to the changes by continuing to use their software, and they remove the clause allowing you to use the previous agreement, then can you use the previous agreement? It’s a bit of a buried shovel problem. Have you agreed to not use a previous agreement by continuing to use the software, or can you stick to the old agreement that lets you use the old agreement?
They can change the terms, but if you don’t sign the new terms then you have never accepted the new terms.
For some reason, companies think they can write anything into their terms and think it matters. It doesn’t. Most contracts aren’t worth the paper it’s written on.
“By continuing to use the software, you agree to the new terms…” which is, of course, hogwash, but wouldn’t stop them from say “Sorry, the new terms were released and you agreed, so pay up.”
Depends on how long your license is for. If you have a 1 year license and they change the terms, you are going to have to sign new terms for the next year’s license.
Fuckin hell, one of my favourite game was about to ditch flash (yea I know lol) for Unity and then that. They invested tons of money, idk what will happen
I wonder if they realize the extent to which this disincentivizes upgrades to any newer form of Unity - and the newer license - even outside the rest of the recent drama.
It would take amazing changes to even consider giving this up - and at that point, it’s a hop and a skip to a platform shift.
Google app store requires a change, old version doesn’t have the capability to make the change. App gets pulled or you upgrade and make the change… boom that’s all it takes. And appreciate from other comments it happens semi-regularly.
Lmao when you’re trying to turn your company into a bloodsucking vampire but you forgot that long ago, you told your lawyer to chain the coffin in case this very thing happened.
Facebook (a long time ago), Twitter, Reddit, Google (they even removed the don’t be evil modo), now Unity. Apple being Apple… Arduino going closed source, Raspberry Pi becoming for profit. Samsung, at least never ever even tried to look nice.
It’s a time where the kings are pulling as hard as they can on their rope until the day it breaks and their heads start flying. The people can be stepped on but only for so long.
I know Unity claim they can apply their new pricing to old versions anyway, but setting that aside, how practical is it to simply stay on Unity 2022 LTSB or earlier?
I’m not a software developer, I’m a CAD modeller. My company pays Autodesk a substantial amount of money every year for licence tokens which grants us access to new releases, but using the latest is pretty much unheard of.
For AutoCAD, 2022 is the default (2024 is current) although they don’t seem to have added much of interest since v2019. For the likes of Civil 3D and Revit there are useful updates in newer versions, but the version used is locked in at the start of a project, and upgrading mid scheme is only done in exceptional circumstances.
If Autodesk came out with some kind of scheme in their 2025 tos that said “if you model a bridge in Revit, we will charge 5 cents for every car that crosses or passes under it” then we could easily stick on 2024 for a decade, more than enough time to skill up on the alternatives.
It doesn’t matter for most devs, unless you don’t support the game anymore, this doesn’t help anything, at some point you will need an engine update to support new hardware, fix an engine bug or similar.
TBH that’s a wild clause lol. Why? Most just say if you don’t like our new terms here’s the door. I don’t blame for deleting it, it’s unnecessarily dumb, but why even add that in the first place. It’s just going to be a nightmare to grandfather people as you move forward.
Well, it should be utterly impossible to retroactively alter the terms of an agreement once agreed upon. This just gave some wiggle room that within a given calendar year, you don’t have to think too hard about the agreement as it can’t change (unless you want) on you even in updates within a year.
It seems to be a pretty reasonable clause to assuage customers that while technically the terms are a living document, they can actually plan their business around the product. Giving the supplier the flexibility they want, while promising the customer the stability they may require.
I may get downvoted to hell for this, but besides the shady business practices, Unity sucks as a game engine. You can just feel the engine eating resources for no good reason and the gfx don’t come close to UE5.
Oh, I don’t think anybody will disagree that Unity is completely unoptimized and barebones compared to Unreal. It is also hard to learn and confusing compared to Godot.
There used to be a huge amount of people that wanted exactly something easier to learn than Unreal and more featureful than Godot. But those two improved in a way that this niche may not even exist anymore. Anyway, currently Unity has that unbeatable marketplace, and I really don’t know if there’s a good enough replacement somewhere, but I don’t see any other reason to use it.
(But then, I’m not really a game developer. I’ve used those here or there, for fun.)
Not quite. Unity isn’t poorly optimized, but it’s not great either. Unity also is very easy to learn, hence the number of really shit games put out from it.
Source: have been using Unity for the past 10 years
From a hobbyist dev who dabbled with Unity for several years: The worst part about the engine imo is the fragmentation of the entire ecosystem.
There are three major rendering pipelines (HDRP, URP, Legacy), each with their own specific quirks, configurations and dependencies, which are entirely incompatible with eachother.
Foundational packages (input handling, networking etc.) change/break way too often or have been deprecated for years without replacement (uNet) and rely on 3d party packages.
And don’t even start with the documentation for any of the above. Multiple times have I found documentation for a rendering callback or ShaderLab parameter claiming it would be compatible with URP only to find that the documentation was supposed to be for HRDP.
Wow, a proprietary quasi monopoly changes their business model into something extremely exploitative and hostile. I am totally surprised! Shocked even! Blimey!
Seriously, why spend years of your life learning to work with some technology that can at anytime be made instantly obsolete or impractical to use when some random asshole you don’t know decides something dumb. If there’s a FOSS alternative, always prefer that.
I looked into it briefly after hearing this news and saw people talking about Godot. It’s for 2D and 3D multi-platform games and you can use C#, C++ and others. Sounds pretty cool
The other cool kid on the block right now is bevy. It’s less of an engine for people who just want something to write their game in, though, but more of a framework for people looking to write their own engine. There’s practically nothing you can’t customise or replace in that thing, it’s built to be both flexible and performant.
They announced a new business model effective next year. It’s plastered all over the net, just look up “Unity news” and you’ll get a ton of hits on it. Lots of coverage on YouTube as well.
Godot is a good example of a free and well-developed open source game engine. It’ll probably see a sharp rise in adoption following this controversy from Unity.
Unity’s current CEO is an ex-exec from EA. but at least it looks like in 2021 they got around to replacing the CFO from 2015, who was previously also an EA ex-exec that was hired as such the year after the CEO was brought on board from EA. The hirings coincided with many rapid, scummy changes to their subscriptions and dev support. I expect many lies yesterday, today, tomorrow, and beyond as they now focus on squeezing their non-subbed devs
lemmy.today
Active