cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/5196308
It’s scary that the Unity debacle is not just happening in games but a very real threat not just in digital and app space but in real life.
It can happen in medicine, housing, even the food we eat if the trend of subscriptions and lock ins continue.
Despite this, a global concerted effort towards Open Source tech is still not happening.
In Unity for example, there is a push to transition to Unreal but less so for Godot. We see this happening with reddit too. And soon maybe we’ll see it in real life. What’s stopping our hotels and landlords from charging us everytime we open doors.
We see this in the rampant mandatory tips. Where everyone is automatically charged per order.
It’s scary and frustrating at the same time that there may not be a clear remedy for this. As the world shifts to subscriptions and services, do we truly own anything anymore?
Unreal is creaming their pants this week. They can’t have imagined a better sales pitch.
We chose unity because we thought unreal model was shitty too.
Next time it’s open source, godot or stride or i don’t know, but not unreal.
They would have done the same shit if it worked
I’ve honestly been surprised that Godot’s getting a lot of hype out of this. I had expected MonoGame/XNA to be the big beneficiary – particularly for Unity’s 2D users, but also 3D (though I expected Unreal to benefit the most there just because of developer familiarity).
Godot is the closest alternative to Unity.
Unreal is kind of a different beast on a different market, more complex and more geared towards big 3D games with high-end graphics.
Unity worked on consoles. Godot don’t offer that.
Directly no but that’s because its legally impossible to.
So a lot of services exist that’ll do it for you, cheaper than unity pricing model yet (or you can do it yourself it just takes effort)
There’s even a company created by the godot devs specifically to fill this void, and the profits go back to development
They have been at the right place at the right time.
Never heard of MonoGame but from what I see, it’s much less noob-friendly, no editor etc. Looks too different
MonoGame/XNA used to be more relevant 10 years ago, but not so much any more (funnily enough, in large part because Unity ate their lunch).
It’s still pretty relevant. Some of the biggest indie hits of the last several years used it (Stardew Valley, Celeste, Supergiant games pre-Hades).
MonoGame is basically a continuation of Microsoft’s XNA which was their engine for the Xbox 360 era. It supports the full Visual Studio (not “Code”) so that’s the environment you get.
MonoGame has the advantage of being used to ship a number of indie hits, though.
Supergiant still uses an in-house fork of it for their games, if I’m not mistaken(ed. I guess they rewrote their engine for Hades).
they just have to unveil some new shiny tools to convert from unity to unreal and unity is kill
There will never be a tool to convert Unity projects to Unreal. However there are already several to convert Unity to Godot, because both use C#
Edit: And as a dev that has used both, I just converted my project to Godot.
Edit again: It actually may be possible or at least be made easier using LLMs to convert to Unreal
How much work was it to convert ?
I guess the tool didn’t managed every single detail ?
Sadly it can’t work that way. From a programming perspective alone they are very different engines.
Unity uses C# while Unreal is C++.
Except Unreal already had the same kind of pricing structure that Unity is trying to move towards, that’s why Unity thought they could get away with it.
Ticketmaster is another real world example we’ve got right now. Or any service that adds on arbitrary fees that aren’t a part of the advertised price.
Ticketmaster is a monopoly that should have never been allowed.
Do we know yet if unity’s plan won’t work?
Games take 3-5 years to make… you can’t change engine mid-development so it’ll literally be years before they see any negative impact - during which time they’ll be making bank.
From their point of view that’s a success… shareholders care little about long term sustainability.
Developers are on the hook for potentially infinite losses without gaining revenue in a per install fee system. Expenses are entirely unpredictable for developers and bad actors can run basic install scripts to cost the company a lot, so if Unity stays their current course for a few more weeks, many of the larger developers using Unity will begin switching engines even if it means delays. It’s absolutely worth it for a developer to port their game over no matter the cost, because they are easily looking at no limits to their costs if they don’t
Removed by mod
An open source project backed by a corporation that sells support. And… the open source community almost instantly turns on that and decides they are evil
Redhat was the golden child of the open source community, the paragon of open source success stories, until fairly recently.
Canonical was also very highly respected until they started putting Amazon ads into people’s menus.
It is not something that happens instantly for no reason, it’s because of the need for these companies to squeeze every last drop of revenue out of a product to appease shareholders. Open source companies can, and do, thrive without screwing their communities over. The problem is the mindset that creating value for shareholders is the only thing that matters.
Removed by mod
A universal basic income would allow more developers to choose to work on software they actually like, rather than the demands of business and their proprietary models.
Removed by mod
There are free OS nowadays that are Better than the paid ones (especially the most used one for desktops).
What do you need your PC to do? If it’s word-processing and spreadsheets you are already ready to go free. Other software or “solutions” will come later.
It just takes time because the money is pushing hard the payment models.
What can happen, and actually happen in a lot of software fields, is multiple companies investing in the tool. That’s the case for the Linux kernel, for databases, for programming languages…
Many game companies even have their own in-house engine. Instead of investing in that (usually sub-par) engine, they could be investing in an open Source engine.
I don’t understand why this doesn’t happen in games. And don’t tell me that they want to keep their own engine as a competitive advantage, because most in-house engines are shit.
Removed by mod
The right-to-repair movement is showing us cyber-feudalism will fail in time, as is the failing BMW subscription seats thing. We may be moving into a golden age of service and media piracy in which households throughout the developed world simply resort on cracked services. We may be using cracked ink cartridges and illegally-jailbroken refrigerators until they realize the compound public resentment and ingoing war against pirates is cutting more into profits than is gained from rent seeking DRM
We’ve already seen how the efforts by the record lables to litigate against children and elderly can go poorly and just increase piracy (or worse, decrease engagement).
But it means we’ll have to suffer more as the paradigm shifts. Capitalists are not allowed to relent when it comes to profit seeking, making them the enemy of the people. And a government that favors commercial corporations over the public (as is the case in the US) is also, by definition, the enemy of the people. It means any transaction is predatory unless there is a force acting in the interest of the worker and the consumer that effectively dissuades contracts without parity.
I would use open source but there are no open source game engines that support VR with controller and hand interactions, let alone online avatars. Open Source is just behind in a major way in the VR/AR space and I hope it makes closing that gap a priority.
Removed by mod
I remember when FB bought Oculus and everyone was outraged swearing to boycott and maybe they did, but the Quest went on to be the best selling VR headset by a lot.
Techno -feudalism
Strangely enough, don’t feel like laughing.
what’s funny tho? dude has a point
The absolute absurdity of framing and drawing comparisons between the technology sector and feudalism.
Well that’s why he called it “techno-feudalism” because he does recognise it’s anachronistic
Have you watched the video? The point stands tho. Argument goes as follows: “just like in feudal times you were forced to pay a rent for the privilege of living on the land of your lord, likewise nowadays companies seek to establish a rent seeking position, like leeches, where you pay for the sole privilege of using their product. It’s different from ‘a price’ because customers often have no other choice.”
Oh I guess there aren’t open source alternatives.
Just sounds like an interesting name for SAAS.
SaaS, literally slavery.
Requesting source of the emoji.
Google GBoard built in!
