this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
472 points (92.8% liked)

Technology

60115 readers
2721 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 161 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

They are implementing the "Anchor High" plan.

  1. Come out with a ridiculously high number
  2. Take the back lash
  3. Issue an apology, claim you are "listing to the team, partners, etc" <---- We are here
  4. Release a "revised" plan, which is really what you wanted all along
  5. Profit (quite literally)

I'm willing to bet they are angling for an acquisition, and trying to bump up their value to get a higher number.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Precisely what I'm talking about. They can afford to do so, since they lost the trust of the user about 2 statements from the CEO ago.

And not to go too deep into it, but how the hell are you going to create a brand new pricing scheme in only "a couple of days", without already having a draft of it ready? Don't you wanna check in with your lawyer? Your CFO? This shit must take more than 2 days to do.

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

I don’t think they checked with their lawyer before releasing the first one (that had some pretty obviously legally dubious provisions). Why would they start asking the legal team now?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They want apple to buy them. Apple can't really lean on unreal at this point since the epic lawsuit. So unity is the next viable option. They want apple to buy them and/or they wanted a piece of every download on apples phones/vr.

Apples last announcement is telegraphing a shift towards gaming on some level. Unity is being opportunistic albeit tone-deaf AF.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the part they’re missing: apple actually care about the appearance of quality.

I’m not saying apple makes quality products, there’s some good debate there that they really don’t. But they certainly foster the belief that apple products are superior in quality to their competitors.

Unity is a great engine when it’s used well, but it doesn’t have a reputation for quality. It has a Reputation that says “anyone can publish a bolted together asset flip and make a quick buck off of twitter hype”

I doubt apple would acquire unity based purely on the fact that unity does not adhere to apple’s ideals on branding. Apple tends to buy rights from young companies that don’t have large established brands yet, because it’s easier to fold them into the cult of apple. An established brand with a known reputation would be a tough sell, especially when Apple has the resources to simply make their own product that’s tailored to their hardware.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

That's a good point. I know apple usually doesn't do acquisitions because cultures just clash too much (especially when it's a large company). It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Unity just shot themselves in the foot. If I was a game dev, I'd think twice or thrice about starting a new project with unity.

There will certainly be a chilling effect on their revenue moving forward. I don't understand how companies this large make gaffs this bad. Do they not have someone assigned to 'red team' major decisions.

I always assign someone or a team of people to red team key decisions. Especially if everyone in the room thinks its a great idea.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So maybe now would be a good time to buy stocks?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, because the entire industry and most of their customers are still pissed off enough at them that it’s still going to have very serious long term effects.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you look at 10 year investment it might be a good idea to buy stocks now, unless this charade kills the company

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s my point - I am fairly certain they’ve destroyed any trust and goodwill the industry had towards them, to the extent that I would bet money on Unity folding in a year or two.

The only thing that would restore that trust is for Unity to dump their entire exec team, and they’re not going to do that, because the board and the exec team are all buddies.

I don’t think this is recoverable. They tried a naked cash grab (plus some other sketchy stuff lumped in), it blew up in their faces, and now everyone who does business with them knows that Unity’s leadership sees no issue with unilaterally changing all of their business agreements in a sweeping fashion. That’s not a behavior pattern that will entice other companies and developers to do business with them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh shit, I realised I responded to the wrong message lol. I don't disagree, but what if their idea would be to sell to another company?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

They’re an industry pariah at this point. They’d have to hand out crazy sweetheart deals to get people onboard (which, with the AppLovin context, was basically happening already)… but anyone who takes that deal should ask themselves: “What if Unity decides to change this deal, too?”