With massive decisions like this that fundamentally screw up the company's perception by clients, the CEO isn't the only one to look at, they're just the scapegoat.
Always need to see what happened with the rest of the Board of Directors. Are those the same people? The CEO works for the Board.
In some ways the Board being the same is a good thing, since it means they remember that they can't try to pull this shit again.
Of course it also means they had (or supported) the stupid idea, so they'll probably try to pull something similar again.
Really no matter what it means keep an extra eye on Unity. When it comes time to evaluate engines this incident should always show up on the con side.
With massive decisions like this that fundamentally screw up the company's perception by clients, the CEO isn't the only one to look at, they're just the scapegoat.
Always need to see what happened with the rest of the Board of Directors. Are those the same people? The CEO works for the Board.
In some ways the Board being the same is a good thing, since it means they remember that they can't try to pull this shit again.
Of course it also means they had (or supported) the stupid idea, so they'll probably try to pull something similar again.
Really no matter what it means keep an extra eye on Unity. When it comes time to evaluate engines this incident should always show up on the con side.
Unrelated but is your thing mendicant bias?
Yes it is.
neat!