1. Become a closed-alpha partner on the new Facebook games platform. Read more about it here.
  2. Enter the Samsung TIZEN App Challenge for a chance to win prizes. Read more about it here.

Unity Technologies Sale/Options [SOLVED]

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Cogent, Sep 15, 2014.

  1. ippdev

    ippdev

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,071
    This is BS..but if Sumner Redstone is involved I will be out of Unity on day one. I won't put one red cent in that scumbags pocket. But this is BS.
     
  2. moonjump

    moonjump

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,943
    What are you waiting for? The only way rumours of a sale will go away is if they sell. A potential sale is one of those things you cannot prove the absence of.
     
  3. Teila

    Teila

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Messages:
    4,430
    Because at this point, there is no reason not to wait. If we were ready to publish, it would be another matter.
     
  4. tswalk

    tswalk

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Messages:
    954
    I personally don't think that their group is trying to acquire Unity. However, I do believe they're using tactics to persuade investors and developers away from it by using their media channels to swing them to their own platform and tools by manipulate minds.

    Just speculation, but I think it is fairly easy to draw some conclusions just by looking at the parties involved.
     
  5. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    My personal opinion on the matter is that Microsoft would be the best option to purchase Unity.
    Microsoft has long been the king of development toolchains and environments (anybody who has used Visual Studio knows this).
    A Microsoft-owned Unity could potentially mean vastly better integration with Visual Studio for, say, debugging.

    There's also rumors that Microsoft is moving to acquire Xamarin http://www.zdnet.com/is-microsoft-about-to-buy-xamarin-7000027434/

    If Microsoft were to acquire both Unity and Xamarin, it would spell good news for Unity. Not only could the Mono team benefit from the actual Microsoft .NET code (and thus bring Mono up to par with full .NET), the latest and greatest Mono would certainly be integrated into Unity free of the licensing cost which is currently limiting UT.

    You've gotta admit, having the latest and greatest .NET features available to Unity would be amazing.

    EDIT: Additionally, if the rumors are true and Microsoft is moving to acquire Xamarin, the only reason I could see them doing so is if they plan to support Mono (otherwise, they already own .NET which is practically by definition ahead of Mono, so they'd have no reason to acquire Xamarin if their intent was to make it MS-exclusive).
    Thus, it stands to reason if MS were to support Mono in all of it's multiplatform glory, they would also support Unity in all of it's multiplatform glory rather than make it MS platform exclusive.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2014
  6. ippdev

    ippdev

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,071
    MicroSoft would purposely hobble iOS and Android and add stuff to Windows Phone exclusively in yet another of hundreds of attempts to force their platforms on everybody..like it or not.. I have no doubt in my mind..and they would push their schtick down everybody's throat.
     
    JAKJ likes this.
  7. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    I wouldn't be so sure.
    Hobbling the multiplatform nature of Unity means hemorrhaging customers.
    Take a look at the mobile hardware stats for Unity (http://stats.unity3d.com/mobile/os.html)
    70% played on Android. 26% played on iOS. A teeny, tiny 2% played on Windows Mobile. Effectively, if Microsoft were to make it Windows Mobile exclusive, they'd be hacking off a whopping 98% of the market.
    It's a stupid business move no matter how you look at it. Effectively they'd be paying 2 billion just to purchase 2% of Unity's customer base. There's no way they could justify that purchase.
     
  8. ippdev

    ippdev

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,071
    It would not happen all at once. They would... as always... stealthily introduce stuff that only works on their crap. You want an example of recent? They now use something they bought that was named UnityVS and incorporated it in VisualStudio..but they give no support at all for UnityScript hobbling 30+ per cent of developers from using that tool if on Windows. There is no OS X version of VS. Is UnityScript not a part of Unity? Yet they already ignore it and said they will not add support for it. How ya gonna justify this??

    AutoDesk is moving all their applications to a subscription model in 2015-2016. See here the reactions from the CG Community... http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=59&t=1223109 Won't be much different here if they acquire Unity..Outrage will redline and folks will bail en masse. I will.

    Google will rape every app made with Unity if they acquire it by sucking up user data pissing people off.
     
    JAKJ likes this.
  9. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    Good god you're a cynical fellow.
    The UnityScript example hardly works in your favor - UnityVS never did support UnityScript, its only purpose was to add support for debugging between VS and Unity. And since VS does not support UnityScript (because it's a Unity-specific language - and a somewhat hobbled one at that).... you get the picture.

    EDIT: herp derp pulling facts out of my butt. Apologies.

    VS not being on Mac is a pretty weak argument as well.

    EDIT: And before the Unityscript flame war erupts over my use of the word "hobbled"... when I say that, what I mean is that there are very rich features of C# that don't exist in UnityScript, thus it's a somewhat hobbled second-class citizen.

    EDIT 2: I'd also like to say that, if you are fluent in Unityscript, then you can definitely learn C#. Actually, it wouldn't be very much trouble for you at all, as they are syntactically not that different.
    For instance:
    Code (csharp):
    1.  
    2. var something : Transform = null;
    3.  
    Becomes:
    Code (csharp):
    1.  
    2. Transform something = null;
    3.  
    And:
    Code (csharp):
    1.  
    2. function myFunction()
    3. {
    4. }
    5.  
    Becomes:
    Code (csharp):
    1.  
    2. void myFunction()
    3. {
    4. }
    5.  
    To give a handful of examples.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2014
  10. zenGarden

    zenGarden

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,617
    We can see the strong point of the subscription model of UE4 : after cancelling a subscription you can still use the software as long as you want and make a game. That's not the case with Autodesk or Adobe Photoshop.

    You will always find open source software and 3D engines, or non rental alternatives software.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2014
  11. superpig

    superpig

    Insert bacon, receive bugfix Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    Messages:
    3,627
    Both of those statements are false. UnityVS previously added new project types to VS which allowed VS to open UnityScript projects; it also added some stuff like syntax highlighting. The support wasn't as rich as C#, but it was most certainly present.
     
  12. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    A-whoops, there I go spouting stupid crap on the internet... :oops:
    That said, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with removing UnityScript support. IMHO everybody should just use C#, but that's my personal opinion.
     
  13. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,976
    here

    FB, app store search, and smart phones are what most people use to 'surf' the net. Niche 'Magazine' style apps eliminate the need to Google/Bing some bizarre web address. You can bet the owners of the 'niche Magazine apps' are the ones raking in advertising dollars from place ads if they are sensibly managed. FB on the iPod touch / smart phone is pretty effective at weeding out all the interruptions to productive thought from Google, MS, FB and other advertisers through shear lack of screen space.

    That said, I dislike even surfing the Asset Store, let alone an App Store.
     
  14. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Messages:
    982
    That is not the way Microsoft views things. Microsoft always assumes they can force everybody to use their latest OS release regardless of what users actually want and regardless of what the statistics say. Microsoft would love to hack themselves off from 98% of the market on the off chance a few users might switch to their products. I honestly could see Microsoft paying top dollar for Unity and then gutting the massive multi-platform advantage that Unity has.

    Microsoft would not do it directly. They will do it in slow, subtle ways through a bunch of different seemingly trivial incompatibilities and dependencies. But eventually, Unity development will require the absolute latest version of Windows plus the absolute latest Microsoft development tools and we will no longer be able to fully target other platforms when building games. We'll all have to install Visual Studio Pro plus SQL Server. Even though nobody would need SQL Server, Microsoft will make some other piece of the software puzzle require SQL Server because that is Microsoft's constant pattern in the IT industry. Microsoft makes sure everything requires more Microsoft software in order to work. Eventually, Unity would require thousands of dollars worth of Microsoft software and require several hours of additional software installs on the latest Microsoft OS in order to work.

    Ask anybody in the IT industry about how Microsoft operates and you will get a clear picture of what Microsoft would likely do with Unity if given the chance.
     
    resequenced and JAKJ like this.
  15. Graham-Dunnett

    Graham-Dunnett

    Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    We going to convert an thread about sale rumours into one about c# vs JS? Let's keep on track or we'll have another "omg Unity shut down a thead about sales rumours" problem to solve.
     
  16. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    There's absolutely zero evidence to support those claims.
    I, for one, would actually welcome support with other tools. For example, integration with Visual Studio Online (previously Team Foundation Server) could be a neat alternative to the current Asset Server.
     
    tango209 likes this.
  17. GiusCo

    GiusCo

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Messages:
    405
    From a business perspective, iOS and Android are a total waste of time today. MS Unity would be good for devs and make sense, on paper. One other option could be some hardware powerhouse looking for their own interactive media creation and streaming tool, say Sony or Samsung maybe?
     
  18. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,740
    I've been waiting to press stuff.
     
  19. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    I think however you look at it, somebody looking to buy Unity for its customer base needs to maintain Unity's wide reach in order to maintain that customer base - and that includes iOS and Android which is arguably where Unity really shines (although that may change soon - Unity 5, anyone?)
     
    moonjump likes this.
  20. GiusCo

    GiusCo

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Messages:
    405
    Yes you're right, I was taking an indie perspective in saying that mobile market is dead as a business plan, at least at Western world hour rates. In fact, Pros shoot higher (Mac, PC, console, web) and then eventually dumb down for mobiles.

    From the engine perspective, the free mobile licenses for indies make marginal profit from the Asset Store, but for how long? Money is big where you meet the rich, not the hobbyists, the skint and the many from poor or developing countries.

    UT have democratised game development in 2010, now it's a completely different scenario and they need to adapt (making Unity 5 compete with UE) or cash out. They know what, the effort may be too much.
     
  21. VicToMeyeZR

    VicToMeyeZR

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    Messages:
    381
    Didn't they already do that? Look at the addon costs for Unity... :/
     
  22. malosal

    malosal

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages:
    145
    Seems to me more of a tabloid like article than anything.
     
  23. malosal

    malosal

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages:
    145
    Wouldn't a microsoft take over be a threat to the ios developing side?
     
  24. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
  25. zenGarden

    zenGarden

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,617
    They can take very bad decisions, remember Xbox one announcement stating you must stay onnected to play a game or kinect for everyone. Finally they changed all that and try giving indie support, because PS4 was more interesting in these points.

    MS could buy and just keep MS products related to Unity , all people wanting Android , ios would have to find another solution. No one knows or can say what could change or arrive later if MS would buy UT.
    If it happens and turns bad, you'll still have a great alternative as UE4 low price and mobile support growing.
     
  26. Joachim_Ante

    Joachim_Ante

    Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,706
    We always wanted to make a game engine that is accessible to everyone - to give customers an equal chance to develop great games and compete with larger players.

    In other words, democratise game development.

    The role we now have in the gaming industry has been noticed by other companies. And today we have partnerships and collaborations with many of them. And these partnerships have enabled us to make it even better for you guys. For example offering you access to even more platforms in Unity at no extra cost. Sometimes when we talk to our partners, discussions turn to talk of acquisition.

    Our response has always been that for Unity it is best to be an independent company.
    This has been true for the last 10 years, it is equally true today.

    So to sum it up: We have no plan to sell Unity.
     
    twobob, karljj1, GarBenjamin and 76 others like this.
  27. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Messages:
    2,843
    Is Pro a requirement for your app? I use Pro for iOS and Free for Android... If my Android market expands, I'll eventually purchase Android also... Best rule of small business - don't spend until necessary!

    Gigi
     
    Cogent likes this.
  28. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,740
    You heard it from the top folks. Joachim has said his piece, so it's time to put the thread to bed :)
     
  29. adamhill

    adamhill

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    I will gladly trade F# support in UnityVS for UnityScript any day of the week :)
     
  30. Teila

    Teila

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Messages:
    4,430
    Yeah, it is necessary, unfortunately. :) But Joachim's post has made me happy. Thanks. I do rather wish they would give a break for those of us using PC exclusively rather than just to app and console users and also discount multiple purchases. In my mind, that would really be democratizing. ;)
     
  31. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,728
    This should surprise exactly nobody.
     
    inafield and rockvider83 like this.
  32. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Messages:
    2,843
    PC only? That's not too bad at just $1500. As I only develop for mobile, the first $1,500 just unlocks iOS & Android pro. :(

    Gigi
     
  33. Toad

    Toad

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    278
    Very glad to hear it.
     
  34. Cogent

    Cogent

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    357
    Whew!
    *wipes brow*

    Well that is about as official as it can get.

    Thanks for the response Joachim.

    Cheers :)
     
  35. Teila

    Teila

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Messages:
    4,430
    It is all relative, right? ;)
     
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  36. angel_m

    angel_m

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    993
    Thanks Joachim.
     
  37. Ippokratis

    Ippokratis

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,397
    Thanks for the clarification.
     
  38. Krahgnatokz

    Krahgnatokz

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Messages:
    5
    Can't give more likes to this. Unity forever independent!! And thanks for keeping it that way guys
     
  39. BeefSupreme

    BeefSupreme

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2014
    Messages:
    262
    Good to hear!
     
  40. LeftyTwoGuns

    LeftyTwoGuns

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    Messages:
    135
    Thanks for the response! I don't think that leaves any question unanswered. Really I think we should all take the increased demand for Unity by other corporations as a good thing. It only signifies its continued success.
     
  41. ZJP

    ZJP

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,443
    That clear and limpid. Modo, close the thread. :p
     
  42. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,740
    I dunno, people may want to respond to Joachim's post or just say what they're feeling, but no need to drag the topic of what-ifs out any more :)
     
    Gigiwoo and JAKJ like this.
  43. ZJP

    ZJP

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,443
    Better, much better... ;)
     
    Gigiwoo and Guile_R like this.
  44. JAKJ

    JAKJ

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    185
    I feel like one of the best pieces of evidence in favour of the truth of Joachim's statement is the statement's existence. In other words, what other company on the planet the size of Unity would ever give enough of a crap to even have the CTO posting on the message board, and would even make a statement in the first place?

    The three stages of "getting big" are as follows: 1) Become too big to have time to respond to people; 2) Become too complex to be able to safely respond to people; 3) Have your PR department start telling you what to do instead of the other way around.

    I think UT never got CC'd on that memo.
     
  45. Meltdown

    Meltdown

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    4,875
    Yay :D:D:D:D:D:D:D
     
  46. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    30,045
    They didn't "allow" Bungie to do anything, since they don't own Bungie anymore and are in no position to allow or disallow them to do anything.

    --Eric
     
    TylerPerry likes this.
  47. malosal

    malosal

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages:
    145
    Thank God! Thanks for the announcement Joachim. It really eased my mind.
     
  48. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,740
    Cleaned up. Trolling is not welcome. Left eric's post though since it corrects some inaccurate claims. This thread is winding down as the original concerns & point of the the thread were addressed by the co-founder of Unity, which I'll quote here:


     
    mcroswell likes this.
  49. Cogent

    Cogent

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    357
  50. Cogent

    Cogent

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    357
    /agree

    Hey, I did my part with the [solved] tag...

    :cool: