Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I don't think Unity3D has anywhere to go from here but down. Which doesn't mean it's dead, since there is a long sunset in sight - but the gamedev workforce turns over in cycles of under five years, which means that training as an economic moat is only locked in for about that long, too.

The problem is threefold:

1. Almost no game will use all of its features. For any one project a competitor with slightly more niche positioning can find a way to pull ahead - a death of 1000 papercuts.

2. The underlying tech only becomes more of a commodity. Some of the biggest things that Unity solves are things that are still important, but not very differentiating now: having an asset store; having cross-platform deployment options; having modern rendering capabilities.

3. Unity isn't designed for sustainability. Interest in long-term maintanence has become increasingly important for developers who are able to continue marketing the same game, with the same tech, more-or-less indefinitely in today's digital marketplaces. Unity's approach is of the "move fast and break things" sort, which has served it well to grow, but makes it a business risk for developers: updating Unity versions is a perilous exercise.




As to point 3 - unity has introduced LTS versions to counter this.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: