Do they hook up a GC to malloc/new for that? Isn't that really slow?
Unity and a data-oriented approach
- Thread starter Scott_Arm
- Start date
Do they hook up a GC to malloc/new for that? Isn't that really slow?
IL2CPP internals: Garbage collector integration | Unity Blog
As with all of the posts in this series, this post deals with implementation details that can and likely will change in the future. In this post we will specifically look at some internal APIs used by the runtime code to communicate with the garbage collector. These APIs are not publicly...
Above is their blog post on how their IL2CPP compiler interacts with their garbage collection and below is a sequel of sorts ...
Unity and .NET, what’s next? | Unity Blog
We’ve recently started a multiyear initiative to help you write more performant code faster and deliver long-term stability and compatibility. Read on to find out what we’re doing to update the foundational tech stack behind your scripts.
Some historical insight into Unity's technology stack:
Does Xamarin owe its existence to Unity & Apple?
Yes, Xamarin owes its existence to two other bits of technology that were huge around 2008 - the Unity Game Engine and the iPhone. The reaso...
I'll take that as a yesIL2CPP internals: Garbage collector integration | Unity Blog
As with all of the posts in this series, this post deals with implementation details that can and likely will change in the future. In this post we will specifically look at some internal APIs used by the runtime code to communicate with the garbage collector. These APIs are not publicly...blog.unity.com
Above is their blog post on how their IL2CPP compiler interacts with their garbage collection and below is a sequel of sorts ...
Unity Overhauls Controversial Price Hike After Game Developers Revolt
Maker of video-game development tools backtracks after customers threaten boycott
www.bloomberg.com
Unity engine maker says sorry after runtime fee price plan backlash
The company, headed by ex-EA boss John Riccitiello, says it will change plans to charge developers.
www.bbc.com
Unity to Cap Runtime Fee to 4% of Revenue Over $1M, Users Will Self-Report Figures
The overhauled Runtime Fee policy plan being considered by Unity Technologies will cap the fee to 4% of the game's revenues over $1 million.
wccftech.com
This remains a concern as worded. Is it still a huge percentage of low-income titles? And why 'installs'? We can't count installs, only sales. We can provide all the data from Steam, Google, Apple, itch, et al. for sales. And what about people buying a game and installing it multiple times - why is that supposed to incur a fee? Are we supposed to license to end user "valid only for one install. To request a new activation, please pay ..."???
'cos it's too little too late for quite a few people. Trust is quite lost, Riccittello, who wanted to charge people for reloading a weapon, or adding packs (like Ultimate Team packs) in every EA game, has just disappeared after making the company crumble in the stock market and won lots of money after selling the companies shares when the time was right.
I guess the problem (for Unity) is that many titles are now "free to play" and rely on in-game purchases to make money. Since Unity can't force you to use their payment processing system (they are not Apple after all), they take nothing from these revenues. That's where the stupid "fee on installs" scheme came from.
In the hindsight they should start with the "a percentage of self reported revenue." If a small studio with small revenue tries to cheat I'd say it's really not that big deal (though one might argue that when many do that it could add up quickly). On the other hand, if a studio with large revenue tries to cheat then I guess there are many different ways to counter that.
In a way I understand their concerns, though of course their original solutions are obviously not well thought out. I used to work for a software company which sells bundled software to smaller webcam vendors. They almost always cheat (one of them even got caught using our software after they refused to sign contract, by showcasing their product in a big trade show). My boss tried every sorts of "solutions", starting from serial numbers to even make the software phone home (not a very good idea). In the end he gave up and changed the contracts to a flat yearly fee. However, after a few years the company finally went bust.
I totally get the need to monetise. It was just horrifically underhanded. As developers, we are dependent on Unity, or whatever platform. We know we have a partnership and want it to work, so are happy to invest more. Particularly those who have been able to grow from nothing and make a lot. Given the choice of not giving Unity money and them struggling, and giving them a cut and them thriving, we're all in the latter! Going with your camera example, there's no such mutual relationship there as clients can abuse you and then get another supplier, but using alternative engines is not really viable.
But Unity sought more revenue in such an arse-about-face way. Not just the fee move, but the way they've taken a profitable company that was doing fine, blown billions on acquisitions that don't help their audience, run out of cash and are now scrabbling about to make the difference. Since floating on the stock market, it's gone completely to shit. 7000 employees achieving not a lot, Unity Engine in a wonky state of development, and management making bonkers decisions that's destabilised their entire business. Who didn't listen to their own employees telling them not to do this, nor their Trusted Partners who told them not to do this.
Problem is the money men these days want massive growth and try to get it with massive expenses. No-one wants slow, organic growth building up. Everyone wants to be an Amazon but it's not a workable business model. Massive spending, massive debt, panic-driven monetisation efforts and everyone getting fleeced and pissed off.
But Unity sought more revenue in such an arse-about-face way. Not just the fee move, but the way they've taken a profitable company that was doing fine, blown billions on acquisitions that don't help their audience, run out of cash and are now scrabbling about to make the difference. Since floating on the stock market, it's gone completely to shit. 7000 employees achieving not a lot, Unity Engine in a wonky state of development, and management making bonkers decisions that's destabilised their entire business. Who didn't listen to their own employees telling them not to do this, nor their Trusted Partners who told them not to do this.
Problem is the money men these days want massive growth and try to get it with massive expenses. No-one wants slow, organic growth building up. Everyone wants to be an Amazon but it's not a workable business model. Massive spending, massive debt, panic-driven monetisation efforts and everyone getting fleeced and pissed off.
cheapchips
Veteran
Alanah Pearce's latest Play, Watch, Listen episode has Unity chat with well known devs Mike Bithell and Rami Ismail. Starts about 15mins in after lots of random music chatter.
Don't think the recent 'we're listening' from Unity changes much of the discussion.
Don't think the recent 'we're listening' from Unity changes much of the discussion.
This phenomena permeates many markets even more important than gaming.
Too many investors are clowns gambing with other people's money (sometimes partly tax payer's) who are chasing trends and shortcuts and nothing else.
At the same time, too many companies dont take the way they go about going public and what investors they allow in seriously enough.
Everybody things they'll be on forbes cover next week.
An open letter to our community | Unity Blog
An open letter from Marc Whitten to the Unity community in September 2023.
That's gonna be a fun chat tonight!An open letter to our community | Unity Blog
An open letter from Marc Whitten to the Unity community in September 2023.blog.unity.com
New terms sound reasonable. 2.5% revenue share or installation fee thing, but you choose, so pick the lesser. Self reported too. A lot of insult and injury, some won't forgive. I'll be okay with Unity a little while longer.
New terms sound reasonable. 2.5% revenue share or installation fee thing, but you choose, so pick the lesser. Self reported too. A lot of insult and injury, some won't forgive. I'll be okay with Unity a little while longer.
If I were a developer, I still wouldn't touch it. The management is the same, and they've basically shown they can change their license terms from under you at any time. My understanding is that Unreal Engine has part of their license that says they cannot do that. If you start a project, you get to keep the terms you started with. So Epic can change the terms, but you're basically locked into the old one you started with if you want.
The new terms do sound good for people who are too far into development to switch.
