• scala@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Will they tho?

    It’s unclear if Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are aware of this particular change in policy, and whether they’d be willing to comply with Unity Technologies.

    • Endorkend@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      98
      ·
      1 year ago

      Going into a legal dick measuring match with 3 of the most hardcore litigious corps in the tech world.

      Sounds smart.

    • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If they aren’t already paying royalties to Unity on behalf of the devs, then I can almost guarantee they won’t be paying royalties in the future. If they are doing that, then the devs might want to double check their revenue, because that may mean that Unity’s been double-dipping on royalties (taking royalties from distribution through Sony, MS and Nintendo, and then taking them again directly from the devs).

    • stopthatgirl7@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s like when CDPR said everyone could get refunds for CP2077 without talking to the stores first, then were shocked when Sony removed it from the PlayStation Store.

      • loobkoob@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yep, although at least that was a pro-consumer move on CDPR’s part. It’s very understandable why Sony wasn’t happy about it, but it wasn’t a shady move on CDPR’s part. Whereas the same definitely can’t be said for Unity right now.

        • stopthatgirl7@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s more, you gotta let your partners know before you announce something major. The reason Sony had to pull it was because they only allow refunds after a certain point on defective games, and they can’t sell a game they know is defective. So the only way they could do blanket refunds is if the game is labeled defective, which means they can’t sell it. Giving Sony a bit of a heads up might’ve meant they could have changed their policy, which would have been better long run for consumers.

          • loobkoob@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh absolutely, I agree! I just wanted to point out that CDPR’s move was at least well-intentioned so it’s harder to judge them poorly for it. But you’re right that communication is important in these situations.