The developer of superb action-roguelite Cult of the Lamb has threatened to delete the game on January 1 amid a row with game engine company Unity.
The developer of superb action-roguelite Cult of the Lamb has threatened to delete the game on January 1 amid a row with game engine company Unity.
Oh dear. The only option left will be to pirate it… And in the new model, the dev might have to pay unity even for pirated installs.
For real? That’s crazy!
Try to charge me retroactively for anything and see how fast I lawyer up.
Right? How the fuck is it legal to decide that your customers retroactively owe you money just because you unilaterally said so?
One of the really fun details about this fiasco is a few years back, after they had made a big PR fuck up like this, Unity stated they would make their Terms of Service version-bound. If you had Unity 2019 and continued to use it forever, you would only have to abide by the ToS for that version. Put simply, they could not retroactively apply new changes to you.
…Guess which segment got quietly removed last year!
That’s the part I don’t get. If I bought it in 2020 or whenever that was in the license, how can they decide to violate the license on the software you bought?
It’s one thing of you go into the agreement knowing about the fees, but enforcing them retroactively against your own license agreement sounds like you’re asking for a lawsuit.
I would think their public statements would significantly hurt the ability to do this, even if developers “agreed” to the terms without that clause.
I straight up don’t think they could legally do it either way. But if they made public statements specifically addressing this particular thing, it has to significantly weaken their case.
Sounds like they could though?
Jokes aside, this is another in a recent string of “let’s pretend our ToS are legally binding documents as fool-proof as the law” actions by major companies because … well, who’s stopping them?
John Riccitiello is Unity’s CEO, you may remember him from being EA’s CEO or for being the guy who said the devs who don’t monetize (you know adding microtransactions, loot boxes and all that greedy stuff) their videogames are “fucking idiots”. I think that explains all
Over a finished unavailable product and unauthorized distribution? They might as well sue Unity back for trying to profit over piracy of their works.
Only monetized games have to pay. If they stop selling the game, they shouldn’t be affected anymore.
Also
“trust me bro”
As far as I understand (someone correct me if I’m wrong) games that are free / non-commercial and have zero revenue are not affected at all by this, they still don’t have to pay anything regardless of the number of installs.
If the game is no longer being sold (and thus no longer commercial / having revenue), then I expect that even under those new rules Unity would also not charge the dev.
"Will games made with Unity phone-home to track installs?
We will refine how we collect install data over time with a goal of accurately understanding the number of times the Unity runtime is distributed. Any install data will be collected in accordance with our Privacy Policy and applicable privacy laws."
Sounds like they’re gonna add tracking data to the game, so probably pirated installs won’t count
What a joke of a response.