ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- Unity the Game Dev Engine has fired the companies CEO John Riccitiello. He got suddenly fired and will be replaced by James Whitehurst as the CEO and President of the game development company. In this news video I will keep you updated about the current situation around Unity.
Discord Community: / discord
*Please subscribe & consider joining the Unitea Discord Server* to get in exchange with each other (including me):
discord.gg/hxua9Ggbjv
He didn’t get fired because we asked, he got fired because the stock price went down
Exactly
No he steped down as he knew he would be fired
True, but that provides a vector for attack. Crash the stock price, get rid of abusive business practices/people responsible.
The events at Unity are remarkably similar to what has been happening at Wizards of the Coast this year. Both companies have an unusual business model that is highly dependent on a relationship of trust and credibility with its customers. Many customers do not generate revenue…. today. But some of them are the revenue generating customers in the future.
The investment banker mentality that pervades the board members is reasonable, considering that it is primarily investment bankers that choose to hold the stock. This is not necessarily a bad thing, they are trying to manage our 401k and IRA accounts after all. But, problems arise when a board promotes leadership and/or a strategy that is incompatible with a company’s business model. To this end, investment bankers are particularly bad at accurately valuing a companies credibility with its customers.
Rudy from Alpha investments should run Wizards
The reason Riccitiello got fired is the same reason you flush toilet paper: it's done its dirty job and now you throw it away so it can carry the stink with it.
Exactly. Some roles have like a 3 year shelf life. With exceptions, CEO is one of them. You get paid a lot to make unpopular but lucrative decisions and get yeeted after enough build up.
@@Electric_ Especially IPO-specialized CEOs.
@@mbg4681 for sure, they usually work at the behest of VC firms who install their guys pre-IPO. They’re usually good at that, but they have to get yeeted right after IPO.
It changes nothing, he will apply to ceo position in other big companies and they probably will hire him because companies like that look only on his impressive resume.... my next guess.. Bethesda .I'm waiting for $1 for a single TP
I do hope that there well be no pay-per-sheet toiletpaper in Bethesda games.
I'll have to cry in chunks of cheese!
>> It changes nothing, he will apply to ceo position in other big companies
Actually, it changes his salary for the positive. People are blaming him for the board's sleazy business tactics. That's *_EXACTLY_* what he was paid for.
Freaking finally! Now please make sure he doesn't get another job in gaming industry. like never again
He killed ea and now unity, who he will kill next, activision? Valvle? Or epic games?
Unfortunately, he's executed perfectly, which is why you're blaming Riccitiello instead of the Unity board.
I doubt it 😀
How in the hell did he get hired in the first place considering the boneheaded move he made at EA?
He was hired in 2014, he was lucky i guess
He's got quite a resume so expect hi. to be hired somewhere else
>> How in the hell did he get hired in the first place considering the boneheaded move he made at EA?
He got hired in the first place *_because of_* the boneheaded move he made at EA. Ask yourself why the board hasn't rolled back the new pricing structure.
@@mbg4681 I was talking about suggesting charging players actual money for reloading their guns during combat.
I'll be honest, this just seems like a marketing stunt to me. It might be a bit tin foil hat-like, but rarely have I seen a company do something that benefits the end user, especially if they don't gain anything from it. Companies can rearrange who works where, but does that really change their end goals?
I can understand longtime Unity users being resistant to moving to another engine, because learning another engine is not the easiest thing, especially when you have existing projects using it. But I, for one, who has only briefly tried Unity, will never trust Unity again. I'm happy with my current engine anyway, but if I had to switch, I'd probably choose Godot. An open source engine with no cost sounds rather appealing. Unity, as far as I'm aware, also doesn't have much going for it. Unreal is one of the few engines I see that are actually trying to improve their product, but it looked a bit troubling to learn how to use it from videos I've seen. But that's just me.
>> I'll be honest, this just seems like a marketing stunt to me.
A stunt involves danger. Unity are perfectly safe.
Unity is too volatile to be considered anymore. Any developer working with them will do so with significant financial risk. Thats a big No No in money world.
The licence fees and conditions are fixed for older versions.
this man was a scourge upon the game industry
Unity is pretty much _done_ as the premier indy game development engine. No one will trust them again.
Yeah trust is lost for most people, but I will stick with Unity for now. It's still a great engine and has a lot to offer, even if the company is in a death spiral.
Good. Maybe a tad bit too late considering lots have already jumped ship, but a step in the right direction regardless.
Personally, were I a Unity dev this would be enough to convince me to stay unless I already moved to a new engine. I don't use Unity in the first place tho XP
They're still implementing a walked back runtime fee. They can shuffle around the name in the corner office all they want, but unless they actually deal with the elephant in the room it's not going to matter much.
@@soujemn5 Your opinion bud and well it's okay if you want to hold that opinion.
Personally the one thing that I found absolutely abominable was the retroactive part, where even games made prior to the new pricing would be affected, and past Unity versions were also affected; they no longer do that (at least for now). People didn't sign up for that and yet they were forced to accept the term unilaterally and so it was absolutely disgusting. Now at least past Unity versions are no longer affected and so people can just choose not to use the newer versions of Unity if they don't want to take any part in it.
Other devs I know that use Unity also find the new policy much more reasonable. People's mileage do vary though and of course many people have already jumped ship by the time all the rollbacks have taken place and Unity only has themselves to blame for that.
Then again... I do not use Unity... so this does not affect me, and I am only watching the drama as an outsider who knows some Unity devs so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
@@Anonymous-jo2notoo long
>> a step in the right direction regardless.
A step in the right direction... for the Unity board. They get to keep their money grab, and they managed to convince everyone to blame their fall guy.
They got exactly what they wanted, and everyone's falling for it.
@@der-Dritte Bet the dopamine from being smug to strangers online feels great huh. Keep at it bud.
Yes!
Best game engine: Unity❌ Unreal Engine❌ Godot❌ CryEngine✅
Honestly, if you do not create your own game engine and developer tools, you really do not truly own your IP. Treat engines like Unreal, Unity, Gamemaker Studio, Godot, etc. with following understanding: It's a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there.
Why did you lump Godot in with a bunch of closed-source game engines? It's not perfect, but open-source problems do *_NOT_* resemble closed-source problems. If you want to complain about Godot, it belongs in a separate argument.
I have to agree to @mbg4681. Projects, based on open-source software are different, because you own the engine at any time.
Fair enough, I stand corrected.@@mbg4681