Official Important updates to the Unity Runtime Fee policy

It's great that these terms are back in the ToS(?) but they were already in before this all started and then removed. Will there be any official statement regarding this? is the new ToS locking somehow more safe than before?

 

lol wut? What spyware? They are tracking installs based on your supplied sales.

 

Pls don't be silly . Nothing assures u wont pull same stunt in the future .

 

The problem with that is I'm losing Plus, but don't need Pro, so how does that work when I'm still locked to 2018.x, 2019.x for some projects? It sounds like i'm going to be forced into splashscreen with those?

 

Yes, that is unfortunate. It would be sign of good faith in doing the same to all the way to 2020. But that's OK, I knew what I was getting into when I picked the version I did.

 

https://forum.unity.com/threads/uni...ckaging-updates.1482750/page-254#post-9340481

 

Thats how I'm reading it too. Splashscreen removal for 2022 and previous just got much more expensive.

 

YES. THANK YOU.

 

No splash screen in personal anymore.

 

I am happy with the outcome I just hope it sticks I guess. Although it is handy to know multiple engines I think if they are on par with what you are doing as a developer if you have the time of course. It was good to find out and know what was out there actually through all this.

 

https://unity.com/pricing-updates
Splash is going away in Personal, for free.

 

Thanks for the update and making some changes. My trust has been broken too severely to look back now, I'll keep learning and porting my current game to Unreal. But atleast I feel some closure that the devs staying will be doing so under more fair terms. And I don't feel active anger towards the platform, which I've been with over 10 years. Thanks for providing me the space to learn how to make games and giving me the option to leave with some peace in my heart.

A final word: seriously consider getting rid of your current management. The initial changes came from SOMEWHERE, and wherever that was needs to be cut out like the cancer it is, those ideas were ethically and morally bankrupt, manipulative, and poorly thought out. I'd love to see the reasoning behind such a poorly thought out idea, or the reasoning behind not firing the people responsible for it.

To all the developers I am very proud of us sticking together and demanding change. Good luck to everyone, wherever their journey takes them next.

 

It's a big improvement from the initial plan, but it's still a labyrinthine system, which seems quite complicated, and depends on many parameters whose we don't have any guarantee they won't change next year to our detriment.

If Unity wants to get back my trust, they should do a S***load of guarantees about many things (everything ?), and start by firing the exec team and board that thought it was alright to throw old promises into the bin...

 

This is a good change but I wish this was the initial announcement because I worry the brand has been tarnished permanently and trust has been broken.

Objectively having the option to pay a lower than the 2.5% revenue cap based on installs is a better option than just 2.5% revenue.

I honestly wish it had been like this since Unity5 because maybe then we'd have seen better investment into the engine rather than billions poured into everything other than game development and the engine. I still wish Unity would stop acquiring companies that don't help us make games. Hopefully this future revenue share/royalty will be invested into the engine development and help stabilize the companies balance sheet.

I still worry for the future of Unity and worry the damage has been done, even long before the initial runtime fee announcement, but at least this direction is an improvement from last week.

 

Wrong. Not for the old ones. They would need to patch those versions and I doubt they will.

 

So what happens if you’re on Free and you make over $200,000? Is that 2.5% or .20 per user?

And then you can pay for pro to bring the minimum threshold to $1mil?

So theoretically, if you make over $200k and have over 200k downloads, you’ll be paying for pro. I’d like to know how much that is now.

 

Only if you're on the latest LTS.

 

Demo is just a cut-down version of the full game, same project, different branch. WebGL demos are relevant for some business models even when the Steam version is available. While the demo is unmonetized, it's sold elsewhere.

 

I am happy with the changes. Thank you.

 

Losing of services will be painful ( I guess i'm not sure which as I don't believe i've ever needed to use any of them ), though if you are successful you could move up to Pro.

Regarding the fee, that was a given, there is clearly no way that Unity can continue to exist without changing payment scheme to include royalties in some form. Granted I think a large portion of that is due to mis-management, but i'd rather Unity continues to exist than go bankrupt.

If fees are a significant issue, you will sadly have to switch to a different engine.

 

Short-term I can stay with Unity, but long-term I'm leaving this engine, unless Unity states in TOS that this pricing is permanent and if a new one is rolled out, I can stay with the old TOS if I dont upgrade version of the engine.

That, and... heads need to roll. Whoever came with this freaking stupid idea of a "plan" needs to be fired and never employed again by anyone. This self-destructive behavior HAS to stop.

Sure - changes are ok and you should have started with them - most people wouldn't be mad, some would be happy...
BUT I'm somehow reliant on your company - if I use your engine, how am I supposed to feel safe if your management engages in self-destructive behavior?

What if I decide to create a 3-4 year long multiplayer project with years of support planned and then after 2 years of production your management blows up the entire company and... engine never again will receive updates?
This is a huge business risk.

I think I can speak for everyone, when I say that we need to have a leadership we can trust. Someone who will not randomly go for hitting red "self-destruct" button.
IMO you should think twice before you bring on board someone who is hated by gamers and worked in one of the most hated gamedev companies.

 

Nothing really. For me the trust is lost...perhaps in 3-4 years if keep ur word, I can believe u again.

 

Still talking about the runtime fee...?

No thanks, leaving...

 

It takes time to make sure your ToS does not change or get removed out of nowhere again?

It takes time for that to get right?

What are you talking about? These are completely unacceptable behaviors. Should be there from day 1.

It's very simple. Don't be evil. Nothing here that needs "commitments" or to "get right".

 

Fire the exec team and change the board ?

 

Splash screen removal is locked into accepting their new runtime fee/rev share terms.

Stop punishing your established developer partners who have had games in the works for years. Bring back Unity Plus or make these changes apply to all versions, this isn't how you regain trust and makes you look even more shady.

 

Much better BUT this should be done on 12 September not now. Now even with the new price model that's ok-ish, the trust problem is still there and you done nothing to address that.

Also I don;t understand why is the Plus gone.

 

So apparently you asked some lawyers this time upfront before doing an announcement?

 

Thank you for listening.
A week ago I felt like all of the work I put in over a decade using this platform was for nothing.
Everything listed out in this post is so much better than what was initially foisted on us.
As long as you can promise to never repeat the mistakes that initially brought us here, I can feel comfortable continuing to use and recommending Unity as my game dev platform of choice.

 

This "200k" revenue number refers to the newer threshold for the legal requirement for you to subscribe to pro or above. It was 100k before. It is not the number involved in runtime fee calculation thresholds afaik.

This wasn't a new thing, you needed to do this at 100k for years already.

 

Just to confirm, you only have to worry about the runtime fee or the 2.5% revshare if you have Unity pro, version 2024, and more than 1 million?

 

Rock-solid and permanent changes to the ToS that enshrine our rights clearly in law.

For starters.

 

If you don't know the answer to this question - you've already lost.

 

There was an option to replace it with a 2.5% revenue rate if I'm not mistaken, and I also suggested they remove the so-called runtime fee. I can absolutely suggest them better ways.

 

You can still start on free edition and toggle to the paid only when release the game, correct ?

Most indies just starting would make no sense to start paying 2K, until develop the game that can take any amount of time.

 

The TOS will have to be frozen in stone before any hint of trust comes back for me. Also are there any other TOS/EULA or legal documents that are applicable but have low visibility? If there are I would appreciate they're pointed out.

 

Get rid of the people who came with this idea at first place, you know, that guy who wants to charge for "ammo clips" during a match in a multiplayer FPS

and that guy from the malware company too...

that would be a good starting point...

 

So assuming LTS is 2023.3, then 2023.2 does not include the fee?

Do you really want to push some subset of users onto (in the future) old, non-LTS builds?!

 

As long as Unity is providing a service and not a product, they can (and probably will) change the TOS retroactively, I don't see anything more legally binding here than the last time they promised this back in 2019.

 

Better than what we had before, but frankly speaking there is still nothing legally protecting us from Unity pulling the rug under us in 3 or 4 years like they tried last week.

Till Unity gives us some sort of legal protection or licensing stating they can and will NOT change the license for prior engine versions, the blog post is essentially of no substance for anyone here and it'd be foolish to blindly trust into it.

To paraphrase or not, since I can't recall the exact wording:
"You simply cannot choose to comply with a prior license".
Don't take it from me, since it was your lawyer who said that.

I also hope that this does not mean 2021.3 and 2022.3 will get limited or barely any support or features going forward.
It's really not hard to imagine a change in approach toward LTS now internally where crucial updates to existing packages for versions prior to 2023 LTS will simply be left behind in the dust to force people to upgrade or deal with broken editor issues for the rest of their game's life-cycle which they can't fix due to no engine source code access...

 

Without explaining in technical detail how this "runtime fee" is calculated, it still raises concerns. Removing the retroactive nonsense is good, but considering they bought a place known for malware, this magical calculation process is still a problem

 

From the new blog

Editor terms
We will make sure that you can stay on the terms applicable for the version of Unity you are using as long as you keep using that version.​

So as long as this is enshrined in an EULA or other terms, without some dodgy conflicting term in another a document, then in terms of making changes apply retroactively we should be good.

It should however be obvious that in terms of fees these will change in the future, if nothing else due to inflation. If Unity make 'unfair' changes then you will be free to leave Unity and have no adverse problems, unlike with the previous plan where you might be taxed on old games.

If these terms are still not satisfactory then you can leave Unity now, and again not suffer any additional adverse problems to your existing games. Obviously you might be giving up sunk costs on assets etc.

 

If we upgrade to LTS 2023, say on 01 Oct 2024, from when do the thresholds count, are they calculated from 01 Oct 2023 or do you start with the release then?

Do you have to pay retroactively if you come over the thresholds also? Let's say 6 months later we have a revenue of 1,2 million, do we have to pay 2.5% revene share of the 1,2 million or 1.2 million - 1 million (thresholds credit)?