• @Carnelian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1110 months ago

    Is that really how it works? That seems like a pretty egregious oversight if so, couldn’t groups of people bankrupt devs, especially small ones with small file size games that are easy to reinstall over and over?

    • @chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2010 months ago

      Hearthstone runs on Unity. I’m ok setting up a little something to let people constantly install and uninstall Hearthstone to bleed Blizzard dry… hell, once it’s discovered how your installs are tracked, I could see that leading to insane exploitation.

    • @Fylkir
      link
      English
      1510 months ago

      especially small ones with small file size games that are easy to reinstall over and over?

      Wouldn’t even need a small game technically. I’m pretty sure the only way to properly calculate would be running a postinstall script and someone could presumably just keep running that script

    • delcake
      link
      fedilink
      -310 months ago

      Nah, it’s per device install. So unless you modify your PC enough to generate a different hardware fingerprint or go install a game on a fleet of laptops or something, most people won’t be running up that counter too much.

      • @BURN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1910 months ago

        They’ve clarified this is not the case. Reinstalling counts as a new installation

        • delcake
          link
          fedilink
          1010 months ago

          I saw that a short while ago and actually laughed out loud. The only thing left is to get the popcorn ready I guess because this is going to be hilarious.

      • @colonial@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Depending on how they generate a hardware fingerprint, fabricating random ones every check is a single LD_PRELOAD (or equivalent) away.

        • delcake
          link
          fedilink
          710 months ago

          After Unity’s clarifications, I’m honestly kind of expecting the old “null-route the web address in the HOSTS file” to be a valid method to prevent their installer from phoning home to increment the counter. It’s gonna be incredible if people start trying that just to frick with Unity.

          The fact that we can even have this discussion should be proof enough to Unity that it’s a complete non-starter of an idea to let user behavior influence the developer bottom-line.

          • @colonial@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            210 months ago

            I wonder if distributors could get away with doing that automatically. My gut instinct tells me that Unity isn’t stupid enough for that to be feasible long term, but… like you say, the C-suite bozos clearly aren’t listening to the engineers.

      • TwilightVulpine
        link
        fedilink
        12
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        How many reinstalls? Because I have games I have bought 4 PCs/laptops ago, not counting some few more when I installed them in family members’ computers to play with them. What about OS updates? Windows keeps insisting to move to 11.

        Frankly, this doesn’t sound reasonable at all. It’s not even like Unity is doing any of the hosting to justify squeezing devs like this.

        edit: Now it has been confirmed it’s not measured on an unique hardware basis, any reinstall counts. It’s just madness.