Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ffgjgf1 712 days ago
> Unity, these pricing ding the smaller people the most

I don’t think that’s true. A very small proportion of smaller developers might have been disproportionately affected but Unity was just complete garbage at communicating the changes (not trying to downplay the retroactive bit, no excuse for that). Most people just didn’t bother reading the fine print or calculating the actual fees themselves and just looked at the published headlines.
1 comments
johnnyanmac 711 days ago
>A very small proportion of smaller developers might have been disproportionately affected

I don't think it was a small portion. The main point was that the lowest cost plan was horrible and a ploy to get you to buy Unity Pro. If you weren't a free (as in freedom) app, it as a complete negative to be on the base plan.

link
ffgjgf1 711 days ago
IIRC you weren’t affected if your revenue was under $100k and you couldn’t use the free version before the change anyway if it was over that. I might be wrong but I’m almost sure that that proportion was close to zero.

> it as a complete negative to be on the base plan.

With the changes if you didn’t get pro after surpassing the revenue it would have gotten price but that wasn’t even an option previously.

I think it was actually a significant improvement for some people in that position:

- the cap was now per game/project instead of company

- you could still surpass the previous cap a bit and save some money by paying for install instead of immediately being required to get pro.

Everybody just seem to ignore that/ didn’t notice it because Unity did such a garbage job explaining the changes.

(I’m not really defending them, they only had to introduce this few because they almost literally burnt billions between by pointlessly buying random companies and going on some deranged hiring spree for no reason..)

link