Jump to content

Cult of the Lamb will not be delisted - It was a prank bro, you're on camera


Abby_TheLastofUs

Recommended Posts

horrible unity policy def forced by the ceo (who sold tons of shares right before the announcement) if this goes into effect (Which hopefully big companies will lawyer against them to solve) it will basically kill the market for indie games and free games alike since how horrible the policy is. its atleast cool to see literally everyone against this and not a single supporter

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, this’ll be a must buy for me before year’s end. The physical version be one of my 22nd birthday presents maybe?

 

Damn U… nity!

Edited by Dry
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ZedsDeadStevo said:

Dude, we are being squeezed left, right and centre with charges, taxes and increases -  where is the line? Or do we just suck it all up and pay what the companies tell us to? When does it stop?

 

Well, my answer would be: these are video games, and if you don't want to pay it, don't pay it. I haven't paid full price for a game since Elden Ring, and before that...I don't even remember. 

 

The fact is, my personal model is sustainable only because of people who are willing to pay increasing premiums to have games day 1, or to have the "complete" version of the game as soon as possible. I'm likely part of the problem (at least as far as companies are concerned); I'm hardly a moneymaker for these companies any more. But they haven't beaten me yet, and I don't anticipate I'll lose any time soon.

 

And speaking of "sustainable", people have used that word a lot around here. But the video game industry was supposedly going to come crashing down many times before, and it still seems pretty strong to me. Yes, certain companies are wheezing (Ubisoft, Squeenix), but the overall industry seems pretty hale and hearty. The only way these increasingly costly models become "unsustainable" is when people decide not to spend their money. But if you think that your only option is to "suck it all up and pay", the model will be sustained.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way it makes sense for them to delist the game is if they haven't yet met the revenue threshold for this unity extortion to kick in, which would guarantee them never hitting it. But in that case it actually means you're hurting the dev by buying the game because you're actively putting them closer to having to pay out to unity. If they've already met the revenue threshold, then it's just a matter of time until they get enough downloads to have to pay out, regardless of whether the game is delisted.

 

The kissy face makes me think this is a marketing post and not an actual threat to delist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not in support of the policy but I think the air needs to be cleared so people don't pass around false information

 

The fees only hit once you hit up to 200k installs and 200k in revenue if you use the free version. The threshold is higher if you pay for pro. There's only one fee which is for the first game install after that, not for reinstalls like some here are saying. There is an additional fee only if the game is installed on another device

 

Games offered through charity or through services like Gamepass or PS+ would be exempt from the fees as the charges would then go to the operator of the service i.e microsoft or sony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, duncanmcleod said:

Would you advise to buy the box version as soon as possible ? It's available for 30€ in Europe. 

Demand is likely to go up if this the devs don't walkback their actions so I'd grab a copy now while the price is reasonable

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, majob said:

There's only one fee which is for the first game install after that, not for reinstalls like some here are saying. There is an additional fee only if the game is installed on another device

 

I would like to know what is the truth behind that re-download thing, because in the article they say other thing...

 

“If a player deletes a game and re-installs it, that’s 2 installs, 2 charges,” Totilo posted. “Same if they install on 2 devices.” This means that developers could be “vulnerable to abuse” from bad actors who repeatedly uninstall and reinstall their games.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, majob said:

I'm not in support of the policy but I think the air needs to be cleared so people don't pass around false information

 

The fees only hit once you hit up to 200k installs and 200k in revenue if you use the free version. The threshold is higher if you pay for pro. There's only one fee which is for the first game install after that, not for reinstalls like some here are saying. There is an additional fee only if the game is installed on another device

 

Games offered through charity or through services like Gamepass or PS+ would be exempt from the fees as the charges would then go to the operator of the service i.e microsoft or sony.

how did you try to make it sound better but make it sound even worse💀 this will basically mean these companies wont list any untiy games which among certain price increases is very bad. along with this you are just wrong unity themselves have stated reinstalls will charge devs too since every installation counts, they try to pretend there is some "security feature" that will stop this from being abused but it will probably be very easy to bypass.

along with this do you not realize how messed up it is to say "if you pay us 2040$ (the cost for pro) we'll take your money a bit later" if you are already paying unity to just use their service why do they need to continue to profit off of devs? this will basically kill most indie ventures, expect basically everyone to go to unreal now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DeepEyes7 said:

 

I would like to know what is the truth behind that re-download thing, because in the article they say other thing...

 

“If a player deletes a game and re-installs it, that’s 2 installs, 2 charges,” Totilo posted. “Same if they install on 2 devices.” This means that developers could be “vulnerable to abuse” from bad actors who repeatedly uninstall and reinstall their games.

 

Got it from this article. https://www.axios.com/2023/09/13/unity-runtime-fee-policy-marc-whitten

2 minutes ago, willows_blessing said:

how did you try to make it sound better but make it sound even worse💀 this will basically mean these companies wont list any untiy games which among certain price increases is very bad. along with this you are just wrong unity themselves have stated reinstalls will charge devs too since every installation counts, they try to pretend there is some "security feature" that will stop this from being abused but it will probably be very easy to bypass.

along with this do you not realize how messed up it is to say "if you pay us 2040$ (the cost for pro) we'll take your money a bit later" if you are already paying unity to just use their service why do they need to continue to profit off of devs? this will basically kill most indie ventures, expect basically everyone to go to unreal now

I wasn't trying to make anything sound better, I just wanted to lay the facts out instead of people posting speculation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DeepEyes7 said:

 

I would like to know what is the truth behind that re-download thing, because in the article they say other thing...

 

“If a player deletes a game and re-installs it, that’s 2 installs, 2 charges,” Totilo posted. “Same if they install on 2 devices.” This means that developers could be “vulnerable to abuse” from bad actors who repeatedly uninstall and reinstall their games.

 

Depends on what you read. Some newer articles say that Unity later clarified there would be a first time install fee and a new device install fee only. What exactly constitutes a new device is up for debate (eg. changing just some hardware pieces, formatting a PC, etc.)

 

It's also worth saying that there's other worries among devs about this because of piracy, all past installations and how an installation would be counted. Basically, Unity gave the idea that they would estimate how many installs a game received and charge based on that instead of actual data. They would charge devs over past installations too (not only those after January 1st or something - although I have no idea how that would be legal) and pirated games could also count due to some calculations based on servers and whatever else.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, majob said:

Demand is likely to go up if this the devs don't walkback their actions so I'd grab a copy now while the price is reasonable

 

Thank you for the advice, I grabbed it at my local video game store. I expected it to eventually be included as a PS+ Essentials game down the line, but now that the delisting is confirmed surely it won't happen. And there's no way I'm missing on this gem. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well for what it's worth walmart (in-store only, here in the US) have been putting the physical version on clearance lately, that is how I grabbed my copy a couple of weeks ago. I imagine any store with a lot of foot traffic has probably already sold their copies (aka resellers scooped them up) but less popular stores might have some.

 

Also the physical version is PS5 only, so if it does get delisted the PS4 version will just be toast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DeepEyes7 said:

 

I would like to know what is the truth behind that re-download thing, because in the article they say other thing...

 

“If a player deletes a game and re-installs it, that’s 2 installs, 2 charges,” Totilo posted. “Same if they install on 2 devices.” This means that developers could be “vulnerable to abuse” from bad actors who repeatedly uninstall and reinstall their games.

 

This is going to be the new review bombing then. This is what makes it hard to believe, at least for me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I’m hearing, they’re walking it back a bit… but it was originally stated that an install was an install and thus part of the tab, regardless if it was someone who had already installed it previously. They had also previously stated that it didn’t matter where the user/installer got it from, it was counted towards the charge, so pirates, GamePass/PS+ subscribers, freebies from Epic, Steam or Origin were all going to be used against devs.

 

They’ve since stepped back to “one user = one install” and that GamePass/PS+ wouldn’t count against anyone, but I guess we’ll see.

 

I suspect the original announcement (from Unity, not Cult of the Lamb) was testing the waters and poking the bear, as others have noted; see what they can get away with.

 

Curious if physical copies would actually circumvent the issue, given that almost everything you buy on disc still ends up downloading something - patches, full versions, the remainder of the game data - or if they’d even still work in some cases.

 

EDIT/ADDENDUM (because my brain no worky and I forgot the last thing): You can all but guarantee someone’s going to make a script of some sort to spam installs just to “punish” some dev that gets on their nerves for one reason or another if this goes through. Be interesting to see how that gets addressed, or if it’ll just be incorporated into the “this is fine” mindset like hackers, pirates in general, review bombers and “we’re making a list if you get caught playing this game” people.

Edited by Ashande
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, willows_blessing said:

horrible unity policy def forced by the ceo (who sold tons of shares right before the announcement) if this goes into effect (Which hopefully big companies will lawyer against them to solve) it will basically kill the market for indie games and free games alike since how horrible the policy is. its atleast cool to see literally everyone against this and not a single supporter

Some have said they won’t be going with Unity going forward and I know there are some other options, though that isn’t a simple thing. My guess is somebody will sue over it. And of course the CEO will get away with the share sales because it’s not a problem unless someone needs it to be.

 

Either way, getting this physical so don’t have to worry.

Edited by MidnightDragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...