Wait, is Unity allowed to just change its fee structure like that? | Confusing, contradictory terms of service clauses leave potential opening for lawsuits.
arstechnica.com
Wait, is Unity allowed to just change its fee structure like that? | Confusing, contradictory terms of service clauses leave potential opening for lawsuits.::Confusing, contradictory terms of service clauses leave potential opening for lawsuits.
You are viewing a single comment
I hope that shit spark interest in decoupling things, your whole project depending on a single tool is very dangerous, and foss engines should try to agree on some standards to discourage vendor lock-in.
It's a core part of any game. You basically CANNOT not make it a core part of the product.
At the point where you can write a “generic” wrapper for switching game engines you could damn near write your own engine.
Yep, and people try. It's how a bunch of APIs come about, even. A good framework these days is just extra on further frameworks, like ReactJS is just a nice gap-filler between javascript and html.
Things standardize as best and as quickly as they can, but an entire game engine is... a lot more complex than a web page.
There are a bunch of fundamentally different approaches to designing game engines, and every single one is very different in that regard. There’s no way to find a common denominator.