Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

the system they want to force on to the devs currently is essentially a money printing machine. Nothing less.

This is my personal opinion.

 

I would pay $1000+ for a bypass of this. BTW DOWNLOAD archives of unity so if you really dont want to pay just use a non malware version of unity

 

Piracy rates can also be high for retail software.

 

I would highly encourage you to rethink this. It's not feasible and will screw over your entire niche of the game dev community. It is not going to go well for your company.

 

I think the buyout opportunities are Valve and Microsoft who would both benefit from having a game dev tool that people can use to crank out huge amounts of sub-AAA games for their stores/platforms. Valve technically has Source2 but I haven't heard much about it in a while.

 

Yes, you're not a very good developer, we get it.

 

If they patch a LTS version of your choice that should work

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattpe...olleagues-former-exec-claims/?sh=38bfb7c0435a

 

Most indie developers don't just try to meet their project's goal. Rather, they start out with dreams of hitting the jackpot.

This is no sense.

 

deja de apoyar esa mierda... y darles "soluciones"...

 

"We leverage our own proprietary data model. We believe it gives an accurate determination of the number of times the runtime is distributed for a given project."

"We believe..." is corporate speak for the opposite is absolutely true but for legal reasons we can't say "It is..." because then we'd be bald-faced lying and get our butts sued. Exactly like the tobacco industry - "We believe nicotine isn't addictive".

If Unity retroactively changes the agreement between us then so will I. All bets are off, if you cheat me, then I cheat you back more.

@Dennis_eA "God knows why"... because indy devs can compete with the big guys if they have a good idea. EA etc, doesn't want that competition, so this is an infiltration by Riccitiello on their behalf. Sold some shares there, John? Kind of like you knew what was going to happen?

 

And then my other naive thought from today: If Unity can change the ToS just like they want, can customers do the same thing?

 

The way the agreement is written if you accepted 2022 maybe 2021 license you cannot switch back to an old license.

 

Lovely read. He has always looked sleazy, so it's not a hard sell but I guess we'll have to wait for the courts to sort this out. Both sides and all that.

 

i suck man

 

You need a court order to figure out who agreed to what. The sexual deviant CEO ain't spending time on figuring those things out

 

To all the people saying this isn't so bad, it might be good for you to consider a few things.

What will you do when companies charge a small "service fee" for downloading or redownloading a program? If this goes through and Unity doesn't fall, that is EXACTLY what will happen. Just look at how microtransactions started. It was just a few dollars at first, right?

But now you have battle passes. Energy systems. Digital items that cost more than a game itself. I saw a digital sword with a 100 dollar price tag!

This decision affects far more than just Unity developers. If it is successful, you WILL have companies adopting the same strategy.

In addition, the fact that Unity is trying to apply this to all games EVER made with their runtime is simply wrong. That is not what Unity developers agreed to when they downloaded the software! If this stands, it means that any company can change their terms of service willy-nilly and charge you for things you never agreed to. Bought a Windows 7 license? Oh sorry, you need a subscription to keep using it. Got a 3000 dollar computer? Oh, they upped the price two years after you got it, so you now owe an extra 300.

You might not need to pay the install fee, but it's naive to think it won't affect you. Companies will be hopping onto this bandwagon if it gets serious traction.

As for the 200K revenue requirement, there is no guarantee that Unity will stick with that. They could just say that you owe installation fees the moment your game makes any money.

You might say they would never do that. I would have said the same thing about this! At what point do you draw the line?

 

If we all don't pay they'll have to sue all of us

 

rechange the pricing plan, it is not friendly for us. I have used unity for 5 years.

 

Even if they retract, do u trust them they wont pull something even worst in the future?

 

Just uninstalled Unity Will not be learning or using Unity

 

You can also just hand your code to ChatGPT and ask for a translation:

Spoiler: Header

Code (csharp):

1. #pragma once
2. #include "CoreMinimal.h"
3. #include "GameFramework/Actor.h"
4. #include "MoveObject.generated.h"
5.  
6. UCLASS()
7. class YOURPROJECT_API AMoveObject : public AActor
8. {
9.     GENERATED_BODY()
10. public:
11.     // Sets default values for this actor's properties
12.     AMoveObject();
13.     // Called every frame
14.     virtual void Tick(float DeltaTime) override;
15.  
16. protected:
17.     // Called when the game starts or when spawned
18.     virtual void BeginPlay() override;
19.  
20. public:
21.     UPROPERTY(EditAnywhere, BlueprintReadWrite, Category = "Movement")
22.     float Speed = 10.0f;
23. };

Spoiler: Code

Code (csharp):

1. #include "MoveObject.h"
2.  
3. // Sets default values
4. AMoveObject::AMoveObject()
5. {
6.     // Set this actor to call Tick() every frame
7.     PrimaryActorTick.bCanEverTick = true;
8. }
9.  
10. // Called when the game starts or when spawned
11. void AMoveObject::BeginPlay()
12. {
13.     Super::BeginPlay();
14. }
15.  
16. // Called every frame
17. void AMoveObject::Tick(float DeltaTime)
18. {
19.     Super::Tick(DeltaTime);
20.     FVector ForwardVector = GetActorForwardVector();
21.     FVector NewLocation = GetActorLocation() + (ForwardVector * Speed * DeltaTime);
22.     SetActorLocation(NewLocation);
23. }

 

Mhhhh I need to test if it can translate basic C# into C++

 

Maybe like Blender.

Blender was purchased from neo-geo for $100,000 through crowd sourcing, made foss. Now it is.... Awesome.

 

Tapping in just to see what's happening and I'm shocked to see that there are still people trying to handwave away the fact that they are doing retroactive TOS changes while hyper-focusing on the math. Seems pretty disingenuous which is why I guess you have to qualify that you aren't an employee!

Anyway, reminder to switch engines immediately not because the math may or may not be bad, but because this is a red flag moment and if you don't you are setting yourself up for further betrayal that you might not have another opportunity to walk away from with as "little" harm as you currently have the opportunity to do now.

 

It can

 

Indeed, Blender is a beautiful piece of software.

 

I have the same issue, at least for the 3D models it seems that you can use Unity assets in an UE game:

https://forum.unity.com/threads/how-to-download-asset-pack-without-it-being-in-unity-format.533863/

 

Haven’t seen it mentioned yet but we can add Kenny to the list of people who are out.

 

Brilliant! This could help a lot of devs, although obviously, you'd have to account for the differences between how the underlying code works. AI coding FTW.

 

Ok something that I have just noticed is that, as far as my understanding goes, you will never be in a situation where this runtime fee will actually apply to you. Your required license level is based on your business revenue, not game revenue.
If you breach $200,000 in revenue from any of your games, you're then required to move up to the pro license, as your business will have passed the threshold for moving to pro. Regardless of install count.
The limit for revenue then goes up to $1,000,000. If any single one of your games makes a million dollars, your business has made a million dollars, and you are then required by Unity to move onto the industrial license. The industrial license is exempt from runtime fees.

Each time you breach the conditions for paying the Unity Runtime Fee, you are essentially forced to move onto the next license up anyway, therefore not paying any runtime fee at any point ever. As far as I can tell, this is just a really overly complicated stick to threaten people with if they just flat out refuse to move up to the license Unity wants them to be on.

Unless I'm misunderstanding something here, I cannot see a situation where this fee will actually have to be paid.

Now, the license fees for Industrial can still be pretty large if you need a lot of seats, but I dont believe that the requirement to be on industrial over 1m in revenue is a new requirement.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but there essentially isn't a Unity Runtime Fee, its just a theoretical weapon to force people onto the license they were already required to be on.

 

This is wrong

 

They removed the revenue limit from personal.

 

Oh BTW i forgot... there is a game engine powered by blender:
https://youtu.be/E2CssnQnOUI

There is an stable release but i sugest you to find more info before...

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattpe...olleagues-former-exec-claims/?sh=4c45ba7a435a

 

That's well thought but this is not the main issue. The main issue is that Unity decides how many installs you have so they can bill you for anything they want really. If they wanted to force you onto another plan they could just do so directly without using the installations number.

 

Indeed! Thankfully AI is already making learning new languages and porting between them easier and faster than ever before. ChatGPT (v3.5) is also free, you just need an account. And GitHub just launched Copilot which is basically just a IDE integrated version of it that cost money but has a free 30 day trial.

 

Hilarious if true. At first glance I don't see where you're wrong.

 

Yeah I kind of keep coming back to this myself, but I just can't see a way of making it work. For example;

If you mean literally cannot make any type of build unless on paid subscription, then that will hurt new game developers and hobbyists, as you can no longer test on devices or outside of editor.

If you can make a build but its watermarked, or a timed demo, then I'm 100% sure that will be hacked around within a day, so that's useless for Unity.

The only way such a system could potentially work is if Unity became a middle man to publishing your app, but that wouldn't work for Windows or Linux and would no doubt be a huge PITA for all other stores.

 

From https://unity.com/pricing:
"Unity Pro or Unity Enterprise plans are required for businesses with revenue or funding greater than $200K in the last 12 months, and for those who do work with them."

Sort of. Industrial isn't "required" for game studios because until now, they wanted you on enterprise if you make more than $1mil. But Unity have contacted the business that I work at (making a childrens game app), and said that because we only have 4 seats, enterprise wont work (requires 20 seats) so they will put us on industrial. The guy from unity also implied that enterprise will go, and that the requirement will become that businesses, gaming or not, will be required to move up to industrial. Where at least for now, runtime fees do not apply.

 

No, this is wrong. The Industrial license is for non-game products. See the TOS where they refer to who the Industrial license is for and how they define them. If this went ahead and we could just move to the Industrial license and continue making games using it then that's what we would do, but I'm pretty certain you can't actually do that.

 

The problem I have with this is it puts liability on me for a transaction I'm not involved in.


What I'm involved in: A storefront I've authorized to make, sell, and distribute copies of my game sells a copy of my game to an end user and provides me with a percentage of that sale.


What I am not involved in: Ongoing transactions between the user and their storefront of choice to access their copy of the software. As far as I'm concerned, what I'm being charged for is a disk to disk copy of data on machines I do not own. I've got nothing to do with that. I literally have no way to monitor that.


If they want some multiple of 15 or 20 cents per unique user, I can work with that. If they want some amount per sale, I can work with that. But what this requires me to do is to potentially have liability for what's happening on private property that I do not own, do not have access to, am not invited to, and have no knowing of, and that liability is calculated in a way I cannot audit. It's patently insane.

 

"With this new policy, as of January 1, 2024, we will offer Unity Personal to anyone regardless of how much revenue they make to provide more flexibility in how creators manage their licenses."

 

Just to follow up:

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

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

 

Unity is putting the game studio I work at on industrial because its cheaper for us. Only 4 seats vs the 20 required for enterprise. But their point is we are no longer allowed to remain on pro licenses because we have made $1mil.
And the unity guy implied that this will replace enterprise at some point. Whether or not they then impose runtime fees on industrial is anyones guess.

 

Dear Unity,
Dear Mr. John Riccitiello,

I use Unity to build mobile APPS, NOT GAMES. My LTV (lifetime value for a user) is very low, less than 5 cents. This is because I rely mostly on banner impressions, not interstitials.

If you would apply the Unity Runtime Fee to my app, even if I were to choose the Enterprise plan, because I have between 100k and 200k new monthly users I would owe Unity 6 cents per install! This means I would make NEGATIVE PROFIT. (-1 cent)

Please understand this DOES NOT WORK! This would be a death sentence to my app, and my only option is to UNPUBLISH. It would put me out of business and leave me with no revenue source.

 

Well I'd be curious about more information about that because as per the TOS they imply Unity Industry is just for Industry Customers that they define as producing non game/entertainment products.

I'd ask Unity for clarification but insert john-travolta-looking-around gif here.

 

Industry license is for non game products

 

You can make more the $1 million on Pro you just need to pay fees if Unity says you have more then 1 million installs. If you need Industry it is because you are not a game dev.

 

This wouldn't be so bad if it was true, but no one from Unity can confirm thus. I even tried emailing sales asking how to qualify for Industry tier and they literally told me to post that question here to this thread. I don't see any Unity employees on here anymore. If Unity could confirm that the real upper limit to cost is 5k/seat/year that would ease a lot of tensions.