Official Important updates to the Unity Runtime Fee policy

That's just to get in and argue. That doesn't guarantee a ruling, they court can just (rarely, but it's an option) DIG (Dismiss as Improvidently Granted) it (which is like an un-grant of review. It just never happened). They can also decide to take it up, just to affirm it.. or affirm Apple's argument and overturn the one thing that was against Apple (probably unlikely as that was a state law, but still... who knows?).

Ultimately, Epic has already lost twice. I wouldn't take bets on them getting it overturned at the SCotUS level.

 

If the Supreme Court takes it up Apple has a high likelihood of losing given the current political makeup of the court and the war on big tech. It really does not matter what lower courts say, often the lower courts are more conservative and reversed by the court.

 

Aha, I missed that "wholly-owned subsidiary" part.

So explain why Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft can do what Apple does and it's somehow OK. Not to mention, Epic keeps 60% of revenue from their Fortnite creator program; how is that fair? And they control 100% of the Fortnite market, locking everybody else out from making their own Fortnite content stores. Monopolistic behavior!

--Eric

 

While I'm not a lawyer, every one I've seen comment on this is not as optimistic on Epic's chances. Richard Hoeg did a lot of great content during the entire debacle, but here's his analysis of the ruling (it's a long video (two and a half hours), the whole playlist is more then 18 hours). We'll see what happens, but no, the likelyhood here is incredibly low.

 

Have you tried changing the settings so that Steam starts on the Library page, and just ignoring the community features? You don't have to interact with the community. You can also try the Big Picture mode if you want a simplified interface.

 

Sorry. What's this thread all about? Isn't it something like
Important updates to the Unity Runtime Fee policy
Maybe a "non-volunteer" moderator can shed light on how these last comments have something to do with it?
Steam, apple, epic etc etc. Getting nowhere.. Maybe an additional FORUM is needed?
This one had gone south badly.

 

Nobody is talking about it because there's nothing left to discuss. The engine is in a sorry state, the new terms are still garbage, and the thread has run its course. Thread activity has dropped because of this and because people have just left the engine.

 

Look closer. There's some very interesting relationships between investors in both.

 

And a lot of lower court decisions are made to ensure further channelling up the court system...

 

Important updates that change an industry, hence the wider frame of discussion, bringing in and reasoning about the contexts and implications.

 

Because they don't do many of the other things that Apple (and Google) do.

 

All the moderators are volunteers. The admins aren't, but I don't think they really follow forum topics. I'm inclined to let topics have some natural drift, as long as it's at least tangentially related to the topic. If it gets too out of hand then we can reign it in.

--Eric

 

I for one appreciate not having to follow 20 different threads to be up to date about the Unity debacle.
If there are any news about the subject, I know I'll find them posted here.
I don't comment a lot simply because I have nothing left to say, but I appreciate reading the thoughts of the community about all of this and learning where to migrate when needed.

For example:
The latest news about Epic laying off 16% of its staff are worrisome. That combined with their radio silence about the whole Unity debacle isn't comforting at all.
I was learning Unreal but I think I should reevaluate the situation once again and go FOSS. Probably Stride3D.

 

Epic is not as bad as Unity, they are laying off employees to avoid collapse, otherwise it may increase income sharing. Even overturning previous promises. If you are concerned about this issue, you can consider open source engines, but unfortunately, there are very few open source engines that can reach the level of UE5. Godot is still very young and many features are still incomplete. I don't think it can replace Unity now. Even Unity still needs to rely on third-party plugins to improve its functions. Currently, Godot is just like a refuge.

 

Epic are just showing Unity how to save money

One thing that everyone should learn from this Unity drama is whilst one may decide to embrace a companies technology (e.g. Unity), you should always make time (hard, I know) to keep up with other people or companies technology (Unreal, Godot, etc.) because unfortunately nothing lasts forever.

 

That doesn't give Unity the right to tax us. In case of those stores, they put some added value. Unity does not put any added value in this! You pay for your subscription, then you are taxed on your content. Moreover, Unity does not even try to make a game out of their engine and sell it. They just want to tax our content. This is wrong! Very wrong! And twisting things like you is very very very wrong!

 

I think monopolistic behavior can be recognized as you have done here, however I don't fully understand why Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft were taken into the discussion.
Hasn't all started because Fortnite was banned from the Apple store?
Was it banned from Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft someway?

 

Stores have costs for the service they provide. What costs do Unity have over our builds (exported projects)? On the other hand, we do have costs, more over it is our working that makes those games. Unity are taxing this. Unity are just sitting there and taxing our work. Do not twist things! Someone is f-ck--g us and if you want to fall in love with them do it for yourself.

 

Both subscriptions and revenue sharing suck ass and are nonsensical for tools, but we "accept" them because they give you the software for free up to a point.

Unreal is free if you make less than a million, Unity if you make less than 100k (200 next year) during the last year. This is what balances the otherwise unreasonable monetisation.

Unity double dipping in both though is insane.

 

I can not believe you guys! It is not the cost we should be talking about. It is "what", and "how". What: Unity are taxing our content. It is a tax. That's it! How: They tried to enable this retroactively, then back-stepped. Does not this sound a little barbaric? Are you ok with this? If so, go work for them. It is your work that deserves an untaxed income, not their work. People here defending your rights, but you continuously twist the fact: it is/was never about money, it is all about their attitude. To come to the money, personally, I would give Unreal a 5% rather than working for Unity because their terms of services is much more clear and protecting me and my business partners for further changes. Money is/was never the problem here, if you are running a business, having trustworthy grounds is the problem.

 

@Wawwaa
If Unity doesn't add any value to your game why are you using their tools? Out of pity towards them?
Yeah right, Unity has zero cost to sustain. And am I the one twisting the facts?
You had all the right to complain with the old policy because it was wrong for all the wrong reason.
Now it is not retroactive anymore and you know in advance what to expect and can make the decision without being tied in any way.
You still have the right to complain, but do you have a saying in this?
No, because it's their business and have all the right to chose whatever price they want.
Don't like it? Stick with 2022 or change engine. It will be the market to decide if the price is ok or not.
But please no bullshit like having no cost, taxes and so on. These are standard practices.

By the way, I am not defending their previous behaviour and I would also like to see a change in management, but please let's be real.

 

Nah, this is some bullshit.

 

I don't remember where, but somebody mentioned that the reason could be that if they went directly with revenue share they would have sudden stop of revenues until the revenue share did start to kick.
Also Unreal is focusing on more bigger studio, while Unity caters mostly indies, so even with revenue share they would probably lose a lot of the cake.

 

Which part is bullshit? They may have come out with a complex plan, but each part is nothing new.
Royalties on install?Not new
Revenue share? Not new.
Combined?Not new.

Don't look at Unreal, I am talking of licenses in general. As game engine there isn't much to compare...

 

Okay. They should sell Weta and pay the C-Suite less in the meantime to make some cash to hold them over. In any case, they aren't into financial problems because of the insanely large investment in their game engine, it's because they went on a shopping spree and also F***ed up their ads business.

First of all, them not being new doesn't mean they are not bullshit, but I am not aware and certainly do not use any other software / tool that has a subscription and also asks for revenue, please point me to one.

 

I said licenses in general, I worked as a Licensing manager for a cartoon company and if they let you make a game with their character the license can ask for both, especially if it's a smaller studio.
If you are a merchant and use a POS there are several companies that ask for a monthly fee plus a commission over each sale. While there are other that don't ask for the monthly fee but guess what? Ask for an higher commission.
And by the way, speaking of the devil, guess who else ask for a subbcription and revenue share? Apple....
99usd per year plus the store sale commission.

 

I mean, it is standard practice to give my insurance info when I go to the doctor, but I would call it bullshit if Unity asked for it.

I don't know how you can call a business model "standard practice" and then all the examples you can bring up have nothing to do with what we're talking about.

 

Open Source, Decentralize, Make You Own Website and sell Games directly

 

No one needs or want weta. is an empty shell with old expensive software

 

I'd buy them for a dollar.

 

I gave you the example of Apple which you are conveniently ignoring. If that is not relevant, who should we look as comparison?
If you want to use strictly engine as comparison we are not getting anywhere if there aren't enough non free engines to fill a hand...

 

Apple is charging for store access and not for software / tools? How is it the same?

 

Again, you are trying to have a 1:1 comparison because it's convenient....
But anyway you are still wrong....
And until a few years ago you didn't even have access to Xcode.

 

Lower courts are not conservative.. its the other way around..

 

And until a few years ago you didn't even have access to Xcode.

 

And you get an engine that gets updates, new tech and things that actually work. , they support there developers who make games.... .. Unlike Unity.... They have never supported those that makes games.....

Look at there networking, cloud, relay, its all CCU base.....Why would someone pay for that, when we can get Steam and EOS basically for free....

Alot of smart Unity users, use EOS for mobile, which is Epic P2P, Relay, Match making etc..


Last I still don't understand why they bought Speed tree and they have done nothing with it... It should be part of Unity and users should be allowed to sell there work.... and sell it on the asset store... But Nope, Unity, buys tech and it sits there or they do not make any changes, which is foolish...

Epic would of made it part of the engine, and make it free, so that it helps developers make money, in turn, they make money.. But Unity does not make games, so they still have not understand that in business, if we make money, they make money concept..

Watch we will be back here in less than a year.... Mark my words.

 

They can tack on anything they want on there, but if you ask anyone what they are paying for they will tell you "store access". Xcode that people do use is not part of the "set of development tools", so I don't even know what they mean by "comprehensive set of development tools" and I've been paying their subscription for years.

Unity has a lot of "misc" useless services tacked on on top of Pro, like access to a "Unity success advisor", would it be fair to claim that people pay Unity so they can be spammed by Unity's marketing department?

Finally, I can only bite my tongue so much before bleeding to death, so I will just point out that if your bar for whether something is bullshit is "well, apple does it", something's wrong with your argument.

 

there is a running cost involved. rents, employees, third party fee licenses, probably debt

 

I'll instantly sell them for 2 dollars and make a sweet 1 dollar profit.

 

Its not worrying me at all, I been an UE user since the early days, and this is common practice, they bought a few companies a year or so ago, and they did not pan out, so they are ditching them... Also Fortnite they allow users to create content, with verse, and so forth, so many employees are NOT needed... They also get rid of areas, that are not useful any longer as new tech has came in and more automation has been here, due to new tech....

So, the core engine team actually is hiring, not one person is being removed from the Unreal itself.... In game development, we get let go after a contract near a release, or later on once our job is done.....

Epic is making tons of money and is just smart when its time to get rid of areas that are not making money or that they do not need to leave people in positions that are useless to the company....

Epic has pushed out 3 updates in a short time with new tech, like its candy... They are doing very well.... ALSO they are still giving grants out to developers....


As far as Unity, they actually been pushing Indie content and mobile content hard, and alot of developers are on high alert due to the massive push and downloads, Epic has gotten due to what Unity has done....

I have a lot invested into UE,so I keep track of alot of this... I used to invest a bit into Unity, but they do not care about developers who release games and give us support as Epic has... Sadly.. Maybe one day Unity will learn, if we make money, they make money..Which is why EPic has been so successful with AAA and AA and yes, Indies...

 

Look I am not trying to defend Unity. For me Unity has been a good engine up to Unity5. After that is the void.
I don't like the direction at all and if you see my recent posts other than here I am often complaining.
I just wrote in the Unity ads forum because they made it legacy both Unity ads and mediation and want to push LevelPlay but didn't even bother to integrate the documentation or refactor the code to change from Ironsource to Levelplay. It is pretty obvious that I will have to redo the integration for the thousandth time when they will do the refactor.
But imho it is still the least worst and I am not wasting my time learning a new engine out of spite.
We have all the right to be angry, but the current proposal albeit complex is totally fair.
To be honest the "standard practice" when there are two terms, is "whatever is higher" but they made it "whatever is lower" so it's really not bad.
Of course there are people in the middle which are affected most, cannot make everybody happy.
I am talking of companies with revenue over 200K, these are the only one who has a right to complain now, everybody else can just just switch to personal.

 

Ah, so you are one of those F***ers. Read back my posts if you want to know why, I won't repeat myself.

Newsflash: none of what you wrote is true. They got rid of a lot of people whose job actually was ongoing. Like tech writers, UI/UX designers, game developers, everyone. And they are obviously shoveling money into meaningless litigation. Tim even admitted it: "we are litigating, sorry we have to let you go, but rest assured, we will continue shoveling money into meaningless litigations after you're gone".

 

I've stuck with the old systems. Using NGUI over Unity's UI, for example. Thing is they work. Maybe not ideal, but they are field tested and work with workaround assets as needed. Unity's attempts to refine and improve just haven't landed.

 

And thank you for your time!

This event spawned a lot of related conversation. As we're only allowed one thread to talk about it - there's nowhere to talk about Epic or Apple on this forum, the conversation makes sense here. Plus there's no ongoing developments so while everyone here waiting for news, they'll sit and chat among themselves.

I guess when something meaningful does happen, so long as people are guided to it, or a new thread created, it's fine. Just need to be sure info isn't missed. Like, you know, completely changing your T&Cs to add massive new costs and then posting a blog post about it instead of emailing all your devs directly to inform them...

 

Has anybody seen a message like this before while developing in Unity? - "Unity Hub.app would like to record this computer's screen and audio" - . This is very weird I had to deny permission, but its very worrying.

The reason I'm posting it here is that its the latest 2022 LTS version and I think it has to do with licensing.

 

Ahahha!
My life, after Unity 5!

And each of these options has other 1000 variations within it.
And depending on what you choose you will have no compatibility with everything else.

From Unity 5 you can't understand anything anymore, there's too much stuff and it's also malfunctioning!
After all, how can they optimize a product if you have to work on all that stuff.

If they concentrated more on a few things but done well it would be definitely better for everyone.

 

They were so excited by InstallCore they've decided to integrate Pegasus /s

 

(I apologize for quoting you, nothing personal, just using your comment as a starting point for my thoughts.)

Reading comments like this makes me feel like Unity owes us something and they should pay us a fee for our games regardless of whether they are successful or not. That would be great, wouldn't it? If making $100,000 or $200,000 a year using their software is nothing, then give me that "nothing" please! That would be even more wonderful, wouldn't it? Yesterday I watched a video where Asmongold asked a funny question (the question starts at the 1:50 minute mark) that made me ask myself this question as well and the result of that question is my comment here.

 

Another loss for Unity. Garry opted for making their own engine going forward:



I feel we'll see more of this, the return to proprietary in-house engines while indies flock to FOSS.