Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

Worst case scenario: you sell 1 million copies at 1$ and 80% ask for a refund, your net income is 200k$ and you have to pay 200k$ in fee to unity

 

xD what the hell are you talking? EA IS the most hated gaming company today, they are pretty worse hahaha

 

https://www.sec.gov/complaint/select

 

So the whole idea is to blackmail the top mobile developers into not using Applovin? That's what this about? If that's true then not a single post in this thread matters.

 

In what sense?

 

Here’s an idea for John Riccitiello and the Unity team:

SOLUTION TIME!

Take the current Unity agreement and add...

"Unity guarantees, PERPETUALLY, that all service fees and charges, per year, will NEVER exceed 5% of the relevant project's gross revenue of that period."


Thoughts?

 

No, the worst case scenario is each of those 1 million copies is installed 3 times, and you have to figure out how to budget $600k in fees off $200k net revenue.

 

I feel the pain of Unity developers who have become hostages of "efficient" managers.

 

the only thing i'm thinking on flax is for the mobile support, i'm working on Unigine which is way better IMO specially on tech and graphics, but no mobile support, just pc. I do not want to make more android games but at least i want to finish the one i'm doing right now

 

Maybe they should just charge a fee for installing Unity. And then get really pushy with installing new versions.

 

If it’s not in a legally binding way those are just words that mean nothing. Also 5% revenue on top of subscriptions and retroactively for existing games? Nah.

 

Nah. ABK and Ubisoft are doing their level best to be even worse right now.

 

In the sense that they just want to mllk those big mobile IP's where they feel the devs are already locked in and don't give a S*** about the future or any of us.

 

Dear Tom_Timothy, Sandler,
I am just trying to understand, but..
That does not totally make sense, you did agree and 'downloaded' the Unity 2021, but for the ToS to take effect you have to use the software (for the 'updated terms' to apply to you) -- if you do not, the ToS is invalid, because you are not making any use of that specific version software. I know that lawyers are more accurate than me on this (am not lawyer, so I will trust them more), but, let's just read what the ToS says there...

Mere downloading and 'agreeing' to use Unity 2021...and -- Not --- using it afterwards and using and old version Afterwards...means you are not bound by the new version -- because, you are not using it -- you may have 'agreed' but agreement means - that you use it, thus it applies to you, for you using it.

If you use an Old Version, this old version is bound by the Old ToS, so if you Stop/Do Not Use Any New Unity version that 'downloaded just to see' (that is After that old tos) than No, you are not bound by these New Terms.
Because you are not Using this new version; you are Only using an old version that which has the Old ToS, which you also had agreed to.


And btw, this last ToS is October 12, 2022, in this ToS, they said 'we updated' and this update is made 'October 12, 2022' and this specific ToS, is valable, until April 2023 (the New 'again Updated Terms' ToS for 2023; this new ToS, says
'Last Updated: 3 April 2023').

So, I mean, if you use the October 12, 2022 ToS, there is no fee related to 'per-install fees' in it -- Until the Next ToS 3 April 2023. So, from 12 October 2022, until 2 Aprile 2023, you are on that old October 2022 ToS, and in it there is no per-install fees clause. And the Versions of Unity related to that, are Unity 2021 or before, and they say 'most recent current-year version', so that means the year - 2022 (12 October 2022). What is the last Unity version Before 2022, it'S Unity 2021.3.1f11. And, if you Stay on October ToS 'Updated Terms', than it is the version Up To April 2, 2023 that is valuable and still with the last October 12, 2022 ToS.

I think I got this right and I could be confused with the dates, but yeah, as others said, don't download 2023....
stick the 'current year version' and that'S 2022. You can stick with 2021, but the 'Updated Terms' of October 12, 2022, do not contain anything related to per-install fee -- till the Next Update, which is April 3, 2023; there they removed the clause that says you may elect to be on the Previous Terms.The Previous terms are in the October 12, 2022; - And - this ToS 'new Updated Terms' - Also - do not contain anything related to per-install fees. Only, when the April 3, 2023 does it start when they removed the clause - in the October 12, 2022 ToS.

Anyway, that'S what I'm undestanding/reading here, but yeah, lawyers have to be listened to but they are not completely right , and like, this ToS (october 12, 2022) is valid and this ToS applicable for Unity 2022. You may thus elect to stay on that one. I might be wrong of course...

 

60.000, you are in pro now so 0.02 x installs

 

What? He literally suggests to add it to the TERMS AND CONDITIONS how do you conclude that it could be not legally binding. If you have nothing of value to add, and are just contrarian for the sake of it, maybe reconsider posting at all.

 

Lawyer lawyers are in disbelief too though.
https://x.com/henryhoffman/status/1702356093416927462?s=46&t=Bv3_c-pn9Z25o1EVJSlQPg

 

Looks like you guys are having a lot of fun here, and I'm late to the party.

For every 1k installs from Google Play I get one-two IAPs sold, worth $5 - $10. No ads, no other revenue. That's $0.01 per install, best case scenario. With pirated installs factored in, my revenue is closer to $0.001. So how in the world am I supposed to pay Unity $0.2 per install, when I earn only $0.01 ~ $0.001 per install?

I don't have time or patience to read all those previous 150 pages, so can someone please answer just one question: are all of us completely doomed, or there is some hope still remaining?

 

And what is stopping them from removing it from the terms and conditions,?

 

Ya the idea would be to bind fees to the revenue, irrevocably - otherwise there is no assurance to any potential business plan - only potential liability (especially if future terms change as quickly as this).

Re legally binding - oh come on dude! - the principal is the discussion. Legal terms and language, um of course, would be built on the principal. 8-\

 

I think it says 2022.2.13 was the last version that still is unaffected by those TOS from April.

 

If you don't make over 200k a year per app, then you have nothing to worry about. If you do, well then you're effed.

 

The terms used to say they won’t change them retroactively and then they removed that part and now they are changing them retroactively.

 

Crazy that a guy who is CEO came up with that. Are we sure he is even qualified to be CEO? Looks like he dosen't even know how a business plan is written.

 

In perpetuity agreements are common in copyright - the agreement not to change this limitation would stand apart from other future term modifications.

Again, this is not "legal details time" - it is a solution idea to bind fees to revenue.

 

I tend to lean also towards the opinion that they wont be able to enforce this on prior versions of Unity, such as 2022.2.13 and earlier. I think in the end for us it will be possible to stay clear of new fees on our last unity project as we are on 2022.2. The previous TOS only mention you can use Unity runtime if you paid applicable subscription fees. Newer TOS says any applicable fees. So that's why.

 

I am baffled... why even launch news like this, right after your biggest competitor is praised and celebrated for revealing their latest tech...

its not only the worst decision they could have made, it also came at the worst time possible

you are essentially asking your clients to pay a premium for a product that most of the public is perceiving as inferior to the product of your competitor

I m fearing for the future of this engine and now feel pressured to switch tools in mid development....
even though the changes dont directly effect me as my company is too small, surely if a lot of the larger companies jump ship, not wanting to pay the install fees, Unity will go under regardless...
so this still effects me indirectly as the long-term existence of the tool I m using for my development is now in question

 

That is a very short-sighted way of looking at it. Even if you're not affected by all this as much as mobile F2P developers, the fact that Unity can retroactively impose arbitrary fees on developers should terify you.

 

not senceful.
Because of:



the updated terms will then not apply to your use of those current year versions unless and unity wwill update
to a subsequent year version of the software (e.g. from 2020.3 to 2021.1) if material modifications are made to these terms
unity will endeavor to notify you of the modification. if a modification is requiereed to comply with
applicable law, the modification will apply notwithstanding this section.

**shortly**
you can denied for example: unnity 2020.10.F10
= changes the Terms. You do not want ?
use Unity 2020.9
if they release 2021, the Terms change for you to.
so: was a nice shot, but badly: a wrong.

 

Okay, I still don’t like it.

 

We are in agreement.

 

Pointedly, as far as I'm aware I was never informed that they had changed their TOS back in April. Does anyone else remember getting an email about that? Because the TOS also said they had to tell us if they were going to change them (and they are legally required to do so in certain jurisdictions like the EU).



https://unity.com/legal/terms-of-service/software-legacy

(EDIT: the TOS also says that use of any new version or release will be subjected to the Updated Terms applicable to that release or version, so I don't see how they could conceivably claim that just because you downloaded 2023.x, you're prevented from continuing to use 2021.x (or whatever the most recent non-retroactive version is) in accordance with the previous terms.

 

Congratulations, you (Unity leadership) burned down every ounce of trust we ever had in you. Now it's going to be an incredibly uphill battle for you to regain that trust. Until then, I'm switching to Godot. Failing that, Unreal. Have fun losing tons and tons of money, Unity leadership. Arrivederci

 

Again, for the legal experts - but the principal of committing to an irrevocable fee/revenue limitation would put it on par with Unreal engine.

 

I think in many jurisdictions, this will probably not be in accordance with local laws. Let's wait and see what will come out of this.

Edit: Although I guess that is irrelevant, and Unity's jurisdiction applies.

 

Is it also a small subset of Unity PRO users and former Unity PLUS users that are affected? You obviously count also the PERSONAL users, which of course are a lot, since it's free. But most of them use their Unity copy just to learn your program for being later PRO customers too.
So it's a normal thing not to punish them, since they bring you your next steady income eventually by subscribing to a PRO licence - once they are PROS! And the PRO steady revenue from the subscriptions is not enough for Unity? This is even worse than Autodesk acts, which is saying something.

But that's not the only change you made. You also cancelled the PLUS subscription. That means a price increase from around 400€/year to 1800€/year per seat. For me without any benefits, since i don't need any PRO feature - otherwise i would have subscribed to PRO before.

Do you really think at Unity, you can just wink through a price increase to 450% without nothing more to mention and believe we developers just suck it?

Ridiculous behaviour.

 

Does that mean no more subscriptions?

 

Looks like they are getting death threats now. While I in no way encourage violence, at least it's good to see this crap ain't gonna blow over lightly.

https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/14/23873628/unity-death-threats-john-riccitiello

 

Not true at all, even using unity 2024 with the new fee, because the download fee with the download count that make no sense will not be possibile to implement.

 

Cult of the Lamb dev. was just joking.

I never expected them to actually delete their game, but still in poor taste to make it a joke amongst the real concern.

https://fandomwire.com/cult-of-the-lamb-developer/

 

I'm a tiny/solo Indie game dev and self funded. I chose Unity so that I wouldn't have to deal with accounting for installs and revenue to a 3rd party. The complexity of reporting, or disputing, revenue and installs and the amount of money/time/effort to do so would eat into my profitability. My project is free to play and my margins are expect to be tiny.

For me success is a large install base, but the runtime fee exceeds my expected revenue per install. I expect to make less than $0.20 per install.

I can pay $2k for Pro licensing to change the thresholds to 1M installs and $1M last 12 month revenue. $2k is a lot of money when you have no revenue and are self funded.

If I reach $1M in revenue (and that's certainly a goal, I want to grow my studio, and that adds to my costs) I will still start losing money with every new install. If I made $0.20 off of each install (and I think it will be less) at 5M installs at $0.20 revenue per install that's $1M. Any additional installs at the point are a net negative and I pay more in fees then revenue is generated.

With the Unity runtime fee, if my project is successful my studio wont be financially viable. For my use case this is like paying a 100%+ royalty fee (after the thresholds are exceeded).

The fee would be the equivalent of a 5% royalty fee on a $4 game, except it is charged per install regardless of licensing. So on that $4 game, 5% goes to Unity, 30% to the store, 20% to the publisher, and 45% is left for the developer. After costs whatever profit is left over is subject to a 21% corporate tax in the US.

Unity was a great startup option. I aspired to levels of success that would have me paying for multiple seats of Pro. After over a year in development the investments I've made in pipeline development, code development, and the assets I have purchased... they are all just sunk cost.

I don't really see an alternative at this point. I have to migrate off of Unity.

 

Don't worry, you can waive the fee. If you do Unity a favor and use its ad service. They know they have existing and in development mobile games from non giga-studios by the balls. That's why they're giving you a negative incentive for not using their services.

 

Aha ? So the lion wants everything from your plate, and you think we should not rebel about it, but feed him with sugar, because otherwise he won't listen ?

Ehm. No! I rather look around for a bite basket!

Besides:
After Unity, even in the statement today, still lies to the community in my eyes about being able to distinguish Humble Bundle sales from Steam Keys ( ridiculous ), you expect them to listen

if you want to give them more money ?
I expect first of all that they come to meet
admit their lies

and keep away from the idea of wanting money for installations! It is incalculable, and abssolute risk, on top of that unfriendly and not a legitimately fair approach, towards a dev community that made them big.

With all due respect:
to stay there, and to encourage them to collect more money, even though they lie to us.

...is the wrong way!
Besides:
After Unity, even in the statement today, still lies to the community in my eyes about being able to distinguish Humble Bundle sales from Steam Keys ( ridiculous ), you expect them to listen

if you want to give them more money ?
I expect first of all that they come to meet
admit their lies

and keep away from the idea of wanting money for installations! It is incalculable, and abssolute risk, on top of that unfriendly and not a legitimately fair approach, towards a dev community that made them big.

With all due respect:
to stay there, and to encourage them to collect more money, even though they lie to us.

...is the wrong way!

 

It seems they are doing this to force big mobile game devs to switch to their monetization service and get an exemption. You might get an exemption but I wouldn't trust them. I would start porting to another environment so you don't have to worry about it and stay free from their closed system.

 

But you're basically a content creator for the asset store so besides a loss of sales due to people abandoning Unity will this affect you? (Your stuff is awesome though and I own several of your assets)

 

sigh.
But thanks for the clarification.
This is so F***ed up...like in 12 different dimensions.

 

Good consideration AcidArrow - or that subscriptions would be considered in in the fees calculation.

Just ideas here for a way to give some assurance that the current fee/cost structure allows for predicting expenses in a business plan.

 

Yes, they do.

 

Cool.