1850
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 169 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And this clause will give unity some fun lawsuits for those old versions

[-] nothingcorporate@lemmy.today 75 points 1 year ago

I'm really hoping some of the bigger Unity devs, like the people that made Rust or Among Us sue, as most of us don't have enough money to even stand a chance in court against Unity's lawyers...especially once they have all that nice runtime money to spend. ๐Ÿ˜’

[-] GreenMario@lemm.ee 49 points 1 year ago

Thinking small there, there are several Unity games published by big dick AAA corps.

Like Hearthstone, most of Kings catalog, the Doom ports were wrapped in Unity. Plus there's a lot of Unity games on Gamepass and that's Xbox 's bread and butter right now so Microsoft could just slap the shit out of em or just buy em out entirely (might be smart just for the King purchase itself).

[-] thanevim@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

I've seen the "Microsoft should just buy Unity" argument a lot lately. And while I think it's probably a better management than current, I imagine Microsoft is hesitant having only just come out of a, what, 6 month long legal battle in US and EU courts regarding acquisition of ActiBliz? So a good idea, but one I can imagine might not happen...

[-] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 year ago

I honestly don't think MS really wants to own Unity. Like, sure, there's a small amount of synergy because some of their games use it, but owning Unity also means committing resources to support and improve it and competing with Unreal to an extent.

If anyone would be interested in buying Unity I'd think it'd be a Chinese corp like Tencent or NetEase or else a publisher that works with a lot of indies like Devolver or maybe Embracer.

[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah, it kind of sucks that Microsoft being an even bigger unstoppable monopoly would have actually helped in these instances... at least in the short term... hopefully something less future terrible comes along to solve the short term problems instead at least.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Microsoft gaming is not even an industry leader, much less a monopoly.

[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Gaming isn't the only thing they do though, cornering multiple markets as one company is the definition of a monopoly. The merger was thoroughly investigated as to whether it would be unfair competitively, that is a different way of saying they were worried it was gonna be a monopoly, and in that case they were even only concerned about the gaming market.

I'm not just throwing around random terms, it is indeed approaching a monopoly. And could indeed be bad long term, even if it gets rid of kotick and helps clean up blizzard in the short term. And that's a pretty big if.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
1850 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59440 readers
3119 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS