this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
1074 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

60130 readers
3662 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1074
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by Gemini24601 to c/technology
 

Everyone can agree on VLC being the best video player, right? Game developers can agree on it too, since it is a great utility for playing multimedia in games, and/or have a video player included. However, disaster struck; Unity has now banned VLC from the Unity Store, seemingly due to it being under the LGPL license which is a "Violation of section 5.10.4 of the Provider agreement." This is a contridiction however. According to Martin Finkel in the linked article, "Unity itself, both the Editor and the runtime (which means your shipped game) is already using LGPL dependencies! Unity is built on libraries such as Lame, libiconv, libwebsockets and websockify.js (at least)." Unity is swiftly coming to it's demise.

Edit: link to Videolan Blog Post: https://mfkl.github.io/2024/01/10/unity-double-oss-standards.html

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gerbler 120 points 11 months ago (4 children)

What pisses me off about the whole Unity thing is that if Unity makes itself eat shit then it just further consolidates engines into fewer hands. Godot is great and all but it doesn't have everything Unreal has (I'm not throwing shade it'll get there dw) and I really really don't want Epic to have a bigger stranglehold on the games industry than it already does.

Unity had its niche and if the executives could stop fucking around it would be lovely to have as a competitor in the landscape.

Also to everyone saying "just don't use Unity": there are a lot of people who have put a lot of time and money and effort into learning Unity and it's not exactly as easy as you think to just switch to an entirely new workflow. You also have to consider how impractical it is to switch engines mid-development. There's a reason why Unreal 5 has been out for multiple years and we're only just seeing games developed with it now. Developers (especially ones with big budgets and all the caveats they come with) don't want to ship a game with the latest and greatest engine if there's kinks to be worked out. This is why you still see Unreal 4 in games released today.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It almost makes me think the higher ups got paid to kill Unity. All the C-suite got golden parachutes if they kill the project now.

Then I remember OGL and the fat lack of competition they had, and remember C-suite often don't know what they're actually in charge of. Malice vs stupidity and such.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago

The C suites have nothing to lose. Best case, they make more money, worst case they get replaced and hired as a C suite by some other company.

[–] AnyOldName3 30 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Epic donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Godot when Unity was being dumb this summer, so either they think an open-source project is on the brink of making their competitor unprofitable and collapse, and think enough of the studios jumping ship will come to Unreal to cover that sum, or they're concerned that someone will start enforcing antitrust laws and want something to point at to say they're not a monopoly.

[–] AstridWipenaugh 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Epic is just a troll company. They donated to Godot when it served as a jab in the side of their competition (unity). Their entire business model is to inflict Stockholm Syndrome on their users via free games.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Their entire business model is Fortnite

[–] NegativeInf 10 points 11 months ago

Both. Definitely both.

[–] sir_reginald 4 points 11 months ago

I think they saw it as an opportunity to wash their image. "Look, we're the good guys" kind of thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Both and also Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

[–] mightyfoolish 9 points 11 months ago

You are 100% correct of course. I do want to add that depending on the works/software of others is also a risk as well. It's the tradeoff made when the developer decided not to build an engine from scratch. If the game engine company becomes shaky, the developers have to weigh that in when looking at the cost of switching or not. Or maybe everything will be fine.

[–] chitak166 -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

there are a lot of people who have put a lot of time and money and effort into learning Unity and it’s not exactly as easy as you think to just switch to an entirely new workflow.

Honestly, that's the price they pay we pay for not doing things right the first time.

I'm not sure why people have convinced themselves that they can just ignore problems and they will go away. Software licensing is an issue that pervades all development. Ignoring it is asinine and will lead you to wasting time and money on bullshit.

When I was picking an engine to learn, I chose Godot. Now I'm not bitching when Unity is dying because I said it was going to die years ago. People just like to ignore problems until they can't.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Godot is fine for solo/very small indies and people trying to learn gamedev, but it is not ready quite yet. Most devs still are stuck using proprietary engines.