It’s a drop in the ocean if developers didn’t even notice it changed and were indifferent to it changing.

That is Unity devs themselves saying that. They even say they already had Pro access anyway.

And if you can’t afford the $1800 license fee how are you ever going to afford dev kits?

@Orchard
Did every developer said? No. And if you would read the post, it says «Some developers». I repeat, SOME developers. And it's because they already were paying for Pro, of course they wouldn't notice, for G-d's sake!

For example, i have $100 million, you have $100. We were forced to pay a $1,000 fee. For me, it's drop in the ocean, for you - no so much. So, according to you, we should ignore people like you, right? Wrong!

As for dev kits, it's one-time fee and it's a physical object (aka, hardware), that you can move to a new company if something happens with the current one. With this subscription, you must pay all the time, even if you used Unity (software) for just 1 hour in a year. And it's non-transferrable, for that matter.

I don't understand how you can not see the difference and say it's like basically the same thing.

You need the pro licence anyway if you make enough money off game development. If you don't make enough and still need to publish to Xbox then it'll be $150 a month and you won't necessarily need another pro licence for that or third second seat unless you desperately need all seats to be able to output to Xbox (you can all work on the same project and run your test builds locally on PC still). I'd hazard a guess that any team big enough to warrant a few seats that all need to test on Xbox then you're probably making enough money to have to pay the 150 a month under the previous tiered licence structure anyway.

N4G: MS has no games
MS: *acquires quality devs to make games*
N4G: *attacks MS for acquiring devs to make games*

Don't know why the disagrees, there has been rumblings and buzz building around that engine for some time now much like Unity in it's early days. I'd say if they keep improving it, that's not unlikely. Haven't used it myself yet but i've heard good things

@isarai
I get the disagrees, Unity still is a sensible choice or maybe it’s about not agreeing Godot is the right alternative, it’s fine.

I’ve used both & let me tell you Godot is very lightweight on the system. I could think of sthg, launch my project, change the code, build & run in about 30 seconds to a minute. The same never takes under 5 minutes on Unity & I found the flow of work is way better/faster on Godot + full fledged UI solution, themes system & multiplayer built-in. Sorry don’t mean to sound like an ad I just love the engine :)

It’s not without disadvantages of course & Unity still has advantages for now, but Godot is open source & constantly evolving. It has incredible potential.
I’d say for 2d games Godot is a no-brainer. And quickly catching up on 3D.

These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse