Unity: We have to charge for every install because we only see totals. Also Unity: We can tell which install is which, so you won’t be overcharged.

  • Mereo@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The whole thing seems rushed because the CEO of Unity, John Riccitiello, was the leading advocate of microtransactions when he was at EA, and now he is instilling the same culture at Unity.

    How will they differentiate between pirated copies and legitimate copies? How will they distinguish first-time installs from repeat installs? Can we trust their algorithm? It just doesn’t seem possible.

    • Big P@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      If there was a foolproof way of checking for a pirated copy they wouldn’t be making a game engine they’d be making DRM

      • Ertebolle@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It may have been more like:

        Unity: “We love money and hate our customers, who can we hire to realize that vision?”

        EA CEO: “Finally, a job that understands me”

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

      I’m not sure why they hired him.

      “Hey we’re looking for a new captain, why don’t we go for the guy who repeatedly sails into rocks? He’ll be good.”

      • Obi@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately a story as old as Wall Street. CEOs designed and hired to kill companies are a thing.

    • ampersandrew@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can usually tell a unique machine apart from another via MAC address, but even that has issues, and that’s giving Unity the benefit of the doubt when they haven’t earned it.

  • Bellatired@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The fact that they went forward with this decision means they’re not so wise at lying. It sounds more like last-minute damage control, but I doubt this will stop their greed. What I’m wondering now is how will the Chinese game companies react? Everybody get your popcorns ready.

  • Platform27@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lying about collecting that data, because they do (and I block it). Not lying, but backtracking on everything else.

    • nothingcorporate@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re right, they’re absolutely collecting data, but saying they can’t differentiate between activations and then saying “oh yeah, actually, we can when it comes to (piracy/bundles/charity/etc.)” less than 24 hours later tells me that not only do they not care about game devs, but they think we’re stupid too.

      • dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It also tells me that this is the first time their internal devs have heard about these plans. This is the C-level‘s wet dream, not something they have actually implemented yet.

        But hey, it can’t be that hard, can it? The code monkeys should be able to get it to work in three months, right?

      • Platform27@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There’s a couple of ways to block it.

        1. Via an application Firewall, which will run on your PC. Safing’s Portmaster works on both Linux and Windows. Objective-See’s LuLu is a good Mac option. Both of these tools are free and open source.

        2. If you know Unity’s IPs, you could block it in your firewall. I’m guessing you do not. Though, with a little work, it can be done.

        3. If you can’t do either, you could at the very least block it at the DNS level. This will stop the software getting those IPs. It doesn’t really work if the IPs are already baked into the software, but that is incredibly unlikely in games. A great configurable DNS provider is NextDNS. If you have the know how to self-host a Pi-Hole or Adguard Home are great options.

        There’s also ways to analyse that traffic, which I won’t go into here.

    • that_one_guy@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t worry bro, if we make a terribly designed system that directly benefits our bottom line, we will totally fix it and make it fair. Trust us.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well it kind of is. Either they can differentiate between a new install and a repeat install, or they can’t.

      • recycledbits@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s also possible that they can’t track new installs either. Or have not implemented anything yet, so they have no idea what properties it will have.

        FAQ:

        How is Unity collecting the number of installs?

        We leverage our own proprietary data model and will provide estimates of the number of times the runtime is distributed for a given project – this estimate will cover an invoice for all platforms.

        Which is some kind of weird nebulous BS.

        They’re not saying their engine phones home and/or collects data from end-user devices. With the associated data protection nightmares.

        • luciole (he/him)@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oof. This is corporate lingo for “we’ll pull a number out of our ass and charge the dev accordingly”. “Proprietary data model” makes it clear they intend to remain conveniently (for them) opaque about it.

  • dom@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ok so if they are now only charging for the first install, why aren’t they just charging an extra fee per sale? Wouldn’t that accomplish effectively the same thing? (And actually work out in unity favour since not everyone who buys a game downloads it)

      • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s probably pretty negligible numbers. In fact I’d suspect that the number of people who buy a single copy that they then install on multiple devices is lower than the number of people who buy a game and never play it.

        It’s also much simpler to implement and the numbers are verifiable. Unless… that’s exactly what Unity wants; just “trust me bro this is the correct number” kind of deal.

        • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          People eventually upgrade their computers. Swapping out mainboards and/or reinstalling Windows probably counts as a new device.

    • Veraxus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because they realize that a huge number of their customers are small indies, and they want to be able to squeeze them - the majority of their customer base - not just the minority of big companies (who are also the most likely to fight back legally).

      Just look at how their scheme squeezes smaller, poorer developers way more than big ones. If Unity went by points like, say Epic does with Unreal, they could shake down the big developers… but wouldn’t get much out of the indies.

  • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    So does this mean every single unity game will have unity online drm now? Or how else will they be able to tell? Seem so much more convenient to take a cut from sales instead

    • Gamma@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Considering it applies to games released before 2024… they would have to already have their own tracking built in