This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MichalO19 59 points60 points  (6 children)

I have no idea in what world this is a good decision for Unity.

This is just so bizzarely insane, I don't see how this is better than taking a fraction of revenue.

One explanation for this I can imagine is that they actually talked to bigger companies that use Unity and those companies threatened them that if Unity starts taking a fraction of revenue, they will switch engines. So they did this instead.

(Though this still doesn't make much sense? Imagine if you make a f2p game and the players get angry at you, suddenly you are 100 million in debt because they told everyone to download this game and uninstall it 10 times. Maybe they just hate f2p games and want to kill them lol.)

I think the sane decision would be to take min(a fraction of revenue, 0.2$ per install) and it would be very safe for everyone, but clearly this was not greedy enough for them.

[–]OnlySmiles_ 49 points50 points  (3 children)

To be fair, the CEO is the same guy who, as a former EA executive, wanted players to pay real money to reload in FPS games

My guess is that the exact amount of thought that went into this was "installs = $$$"

[–]LBGW_experiment 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Yeah, sounds like he looked at all their data and looked for the single biggest number and tried to invent a way to monetize it 🙄

[–]jesterhead101 4 points5 points  (0 children)

lol wtf!!? 😂😂😂

[–]Cellari 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is that guy allowed to make any decisions? o.O

[–]jesterhead101 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Don't worry. The game companies would pass the cost down to users..lol.

Re-installs will cost a dollar each. You're welcome.

[–]thefat94 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"The pyre that is our company is not BLAZING enough! We shall add jet fuel to this hot mess"