I mean, it was also reactionary by Unity and they’ve since walked back their executable fee plan for legacy applications. If that didn’t happen I have no doubt Cult would have been pulled, because what indie can afford to pay PER INSTALL?
I fully blame unity for the debacle and fall out, and don’t think it’s right to blame devs for backtracking after unity put new conditions on the table.
Sure, but I don’t appreciate childish antics by devs, apparently for the sole purpose of catching a hype wave.
I’ve written them off and will not be purchasing their game, as every time there’s a slight inconvenience it seems they’ll throw their hands up and threaten to stop developing their game. It’s not the industry they should be in imo. (See also fez)
The industry backlash wasn’t about any hype wave. My game is nowhere near marketable yet, but I internally switched to using godot despite how much work I have to repeat because unity has declared hostile intent towards indie games. Even if they walked it back the threat of their whims is still there.
Not just the threat, unity clearly stated they are still moving forward with their plans, the fee just won’t apply retroactively. Of course, this is how it should have been from the initial announcement, but too little too late - it is the right decision to not use their tools for your future project.
Their Twitter page also clarified literally the next day that it wasn’t a serious tweet, and they weren’t expecting the media to run with it like they did.
https://twitter.com/cultofthelamb/status/1702091821273461176
Even if they did delist it, though, I fully understand. They sold over 1 million copies in their first week or something? They would behave been overwhelmingly affected by this pay-per-install issue.
