Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

What a shady , fractured and untrustworthy this company has become . A total shame . Too deep in the current project , but if I could I would ditch unity in a nanosecond .

 

To rebuild trust I would there is a simple way, unity can pay every developer 20c every time their game is installed, and the devs can make these numbers up using their proprietary model

 

rm -rf /

 

This is not sales no one can know how many installs they will get.

 

1.000.000 USD to port what I imagine being a small game into Unreal?

 

Once again, this isn't a negotiation. You can't sit down and start a multi year piece of work based on the software of someone who has shown they'll rewrite your contract any time they need more money.

 

Nonsense. You can sell 20.000 copies and they can tell you that you got over 200.000 installs, so it's time to pay.

Of course you can 'work with them' under the curtain, where they will be judge and jury, basing their demand on a closed, non-verifiable data source.

 

I wonder how they decided how much installs should cost., 20 cents seems pretty random. What i dont understand, if you have a very good example of how to make money by UNREAL, why do you not using it and insted just introduce some unserious scammy pricing system that will destroy all the trust in unity.

I think that CEO just trying to create a golden parachute for himself before he ejects himself from titanic, that he has turned this company into. Its freaking disturbing but i think were about to lose our hobby game engine and all the money and trust we invested into it.

 

You're accusing me of things I never did
I don't even complain, I've always wondered how's Unity not bankrupting and apparently they were, so they have no other option - I understand that.
So I simply accepted that I'll throw the last 5 years in the garbage and the 20 years of savings I invested into my game without getting anything back and get a real job in construction. It sucks, but there are worse things in life.

As for suggesting improvements - it's already been suggested - capping the taxes to say 5% of gross revenue should solve pretty much all problems with the bankrupting devs. And it probably will happen. Unless the idea is to actually kill the free games (which is not impossible as they are mostly a big, money eating black hole).

 

Me too dude we have a product that was intended to be F2P so we'll switch to P2P and keep increasing price every quota

 

A solution is really simple, any type of fee used in any business ever that make sense except paying for someone else installing stuff.

1) Remove the free version, or leave it just for learning but require pro for commercial use.
2) Add a REVENUE share, 5% like unreal, or hell even 10%
3) Add a fee to remove the Unity mark of shame, like 100$ x project for example

Seriously anything works, at least for me.

But the idea that they can charge people a fee for an action made by someone else, that you have no control over, that can be done unlimited times for eternity and you cannot stop in any way ever, it's the most stupid thing I've ever heard happening in any business ever.

 

Why dont you just do as epic?? Take 5% off sales over x amount??? This installations thing screams of disaster. Keep it simple! I dont mind giving you money, but it should be in no doubt The amount.

We dev need to be able to have controll over our studios economics. And not have to worry about IF our lovely players want to f*ck us over or not?

IF not you will lose many bigger devs to unreal and others... Give us controll

 

Prepare for the 20k party then.

 

Asked Chat GPT about this. Maybe unity should have done this too:

Hello. I'm the ceo of a tech company. We provide a product used to create software. I have an idea how I can earn more money. I will charge my customers a fixed price per install their end users do of their software. If they install on multiple hardware or reinstall I will charge again, despite there's no new sale for my customer. Since the software prices the cut I take will not be proportional to the profit my customers do. I can't provide how I will count the installs but hope that my customers will just trust me on this. I will also implement this retroactively. So, what's your opinions on this? Will it be a success and keep my customers happy and loyal?

----

While your idea of charging a fixed price per install may generate additional revenue for your tech company, it's important to consider its potential impact on your customer relationships and long-term success. Here are some factors to consider:

1. Customer Trust: Charging customers for installs without transparent and verifiable metrics may erode trust. Customers are more likely to be loyal if they have confidence in the fairness and accuracy of your pricing model.

2. Customer Satisfaction: If customers perceive these charges as unfair or unexpected, it could lead to dissatisfaction. It's crucial to communicate any changes clearly and seek feedback to address concerns.

3. Competitive Landscape: Evaluate whether your competitors offer similar pricing models or if your approach will give you a competitive edge. It's essential to balance revenue generation with remaining competitive.

4. Retroactive Implementation: Implementing this retroactively could cause friction with existing customers who did not anticipate such charges. Consider grandfathering existing contracts or offering transition plans.

5. Value Proposition: Ensure that your software and services continue to provide substantial value to customers. If they feel that the added costs outweigh the benefits, they may seek alternatives.

6. Alternatives: Explore other monetization strategies that align with customer needs and expectations. Subscription models, tiered pricing, or value-based pricing could be more customer-friendly options.

7. Legal and Ethical Considerations: Consult legal experts to ensure that your pricing model complies with relevant regulations and laws. Ethical considerations should also guide your decisions.

Ultimately, the success of this pricing strategy will depend on your ability to maintain customer trust, communicate effectively, and ensure that the value you provide justifies the pricing changes. It's advisable to conduct market research, pilot the new model with a subset of customers, and gather feedback to make informed decisions that benefit both your company and your customers.

 

False. 'Open source' as a term has a specific definition which is not applicable to Unreal. Unreal source code is available, but that is not the same thing; Unreal Engine source code can only be redistributed to someone who already has a license to use it; that specific restriction means it is not 'open source.'
If you cannot redistribute source code completely freely, it is not 'open source'.

 

At least we got twitter to cheer us up.

 

Funny how Unity is simping for Ai, but even an AI tell them that there plan rly sux.

 

I agree that Unreal is not open source, but you can have open-source licenses that require redistribution under the same license for example the GPL or even Ms-PL. The reason Unreal is a proprietary license is because you need to pay royalties.

 

They are really bad full of crashes and freezes, hub ain’t that great either look at all the bugs they report on it themselves, all the problems that people have with the hub and the engine itself, even the die hard Unity fans don’t like the recent versions they say it was better in 2019 (versions), we are far from 2019

 

Ha ha ha

 

Frankly, while I perceive this as the inevitable outcome, it's certainly not the preferred one.

Unity has already made its stance clear: pricing is subject to annual reviews.

This is merely the beginning of the end.

I predict several years of attempts to milk as much as possible those juicy stocks, until the entire system collapses. There's the looming risk of online servers vanishing and developers being unable to access the Editor. Eventually, someone might crack the Editor – but that's hardly a solution.

Developing and publishing games is a serious endeavor. Therefore, operating with a pirated Editor is hardly a smart decision.

From my perspective, individuals looking for alternatives have two main options: switch to Unreal, bracing themselves for the challenges that come with mastering such a beast, or embrace Godot, participating in its journey to potentially become the next Blender in a decade or so (while being prepared to navigate the frustrations of its hardly developed marketplace/tool selling ecosystem).

 

Yes you can. But 'redistribution under the same license' isnt a restriction on who you can distribute to.

Nope. Royalties is not one of the things that defines 'proprietary license.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software

 

Most people want to share a treasure when they find it, but to pay for the adventure of unity and to share is being kinda greedy on your side

 

The first "scenario" is unrealistic, because no mobile game makes 2 cents per download. The industry standard is ten to twenty cents, and even my mobile games were making 8 cents per download and I had no idea what I was doing. If your mobile game is making only 2 cents per download, then delete that game, uninstall Unity, and get a job greeting people at Walmart.

Your second example is wrong immediately because you have to make over a million dollars to owe a runtime fee.

Both examples are wrong. Like I said in my original post. There are no examples given where this new pricing structure is bad.

 

When you really think about it, it gets worse.

Imagine this: You create a f2p game that suddenly blows up. While you're trying to dodge high install fees -somehow-, some shady developer see a chance. They use their tech team to rig the system with virtual machines, exploiting the install fee system to financially strain you. As you grapple with these unexpected costs, they simultaneously clone your app. By the time they've drained your resources, they launch their duplicate, leaving you in the dust.

This is just one of many potential problems.

Simply put, the mobile market is a mess right now.

 

I feel so sad.

I put so much time and effort to learn many gimmicks of this engine, I planned that perhaps after small success I might be able to learn new unity multiplayer and create something interesting with ECS, as it's finally finished.
Now it's all ruined, because I would need to put trust into something I can't trust.
Meanwhile, I really like this engine, there are problems, but I really do like this tool, and I pray for some miracle to happen.

My productivity also went down because of lurking in this thread, so it's time to halt a little.
Besides, who knows, they might retroactively add forum post fee after 10.000 reply, and I don't want to be charged for every person who read my posts.

 

yes. they will get the money back they have spent in a way or another. they could have been profitable from pretty much day 1, but they chose not to. they presented themselves as "almost too good to be true"-tool for developers. by pricing it low, they got devs locked in and made themselves a standard. and now we pay the price. i must say, i didn't see it coming, but now that i look back, it all makes perfect sense.

they won't roll it back, they will do this. they are fine if 50% of their low tier customers disappears. the price from plus to pro will cover this.

 

Could you provide some references that would corroborate both those assertions, please.

 

There hoping for the next fortnite game which is an add-on for unreal, for devs to make add-ons for money but they don’t charge for broke editor version

 

I used Unity for over 10 years and released dozens of mini-games in that time.

Toward the end, I had so many issues using Unity like the constant need to validate my account/license, very long loading times, large downloads/updates (slow and unstable internet connection at times), Unity's acquisition of questionable companies, and the infamous comments made by the CEO etc. The last straw for me was when I was testing my game (developed on Mac) on Windows. Things behaved differently, cameras rendered in a different order, and the lighting was so much darker.

Despite all the issues and after being called a pucking idiot by the CEO, I was still planning to upgrade to Unity Plus just to remove that stupid splash screen since I had already dedicated so much time and money to using Unity. However, after I finished my last Unity game, I opted to learn Godot instead. I switched over to Godot 3.5 late last year and since then I have honestly enjoyed developing games again. Godot is perfect for 2D games and low poly or stylized 3D games. I'm currently working on a more ambitious 3D game right now in Godot 4.1 and haven't come across any issues so far.

I released most of my finished Unity mini-games as Unity Packages for free on my Ko-fi store page. Anyone crazy enough to still be using Unity might find them useful: https://ko-fi.com/snarklestudios/shop

If anyone has any questions about moving over to Godot from Unity then I'm happy to help. Best way to contact me is through email: johnkuneko@gmail.com

Good luck everyone

 

I would like to try this asset, has anyone tried it?

 

The mobile games they're targeting generally make between 5 and 20 cents per user. Picking 20 cents was probably the lowest value they could think of that would hit 99.999% of those games. The goal of that clause is that it forces mobile devs to Unitys ad platform. That's it, it's the only reason it exists.

 

In many ways, this isn't novel. It's the typical business strategy for tech firms offering online services. Initially, they offer their product at a very competitive price to capture a large market share. Eventually, they go public, secure investors, and assure them of future returns. With this new capital, they aim to dominate even more of the market. Once firmly established, they either monetize aggressively or complicate the user experience. We've seen this with Netflix, YouTube, and now Unity is following suit.

On a personal note, I belive that while many of us can envision countless ways this new fee system could harm the indie ecosystem -mostly in the mobile market-, it's also straightforward to think of alternatives that would've benefited Unity without causing such disruption. I personally would've accepted a change like removing the personal license and introducing a monthly subscription, even at $50-$100. I believe many of us would have understood and accepted that.

But the trust is broken. This is the point now. It's time to gradually seek alternatives.

 

How is the Unity Runtime Fee calculated?


If a game or app meets the minimum thresholds for eligibility, the Unity Runtime Fee will be calculated based on the applicable rate (depending on the number of installs, the country of installs, and the user’s Unity plan) multiplied by the number of eligible installs.

The runtime fee schedule provides tiered rates based on your Unity plan (Unity Personal, Pro, or Enterprise). For a game with a high number of installs spanning more than one tier, the first set of installs will be charged at the first per-install rate, and incremental installs above the first set, charged at the second tier rate, and so on.

For example, let’s look at a hypothetical game made by a team using Unity Pro with the following revenue and install numbers:
Revenue from last 12 months - $2M USD
Lifetime installs - 5M

The Unity Runtime Fee will apply to this game, as it surpasses the $1M revenue and 1M lifetime install thresholds for Unity Pro. Let’s look at the game’s installs from the last month:
Prior month installs (Standard fee countries) - 200K
Prior month installs (Emerging market fee countries) - 100K

The fee for install activity is $23.5K USD, calculated as follows:
(100K x $0.15 (first tier for standard fee countries)) + (100K x $0.075 (second tier for standard fee countries)) + (100K x $0.01 (fee for emerging market countries)) = $23.5K USD

Note that this example shows just the fee for the month in question. Fees will likely vary month to month based on the previous month’s installs, including the potential for months with no charge.

 

I have a strong feeling that all these developers that are taking down their games and publishing rants about how much they hate Unity, will be right back to using Unity once they all figure out how this new pricing structure isn't very much money (or no money at all for most games), they will be coming back and using Unity again.

I wonder how many apologies we'll be getting?

 

People are completely missing the point on this issue about retroactive charges. It's not about the charges being retroactive but the terms. The games shipped under terms agreed to with Unity and those terms have been changed retroactively and now devs are going to be given charges they didn't (knowingly) agree to.

What's worse is the people running the show are doubling down on it in spite of the massive universal backlash.

Clearly it's time to play hardball and the most effective way will be abandonment. Close Unity editors, shut down Unity ads, radio silence the forums until:

1. The board fires their CEO and everyone involved in this monumental f up
2. Revoke these terms and hire some competent people to run this company

https://unity.com/our-company#board-directors

Reminder for the board
Unity values: Users first, Best ideas win, In it together, Empathy, Respect, Our community inspires us.
If those aren't your values, take that page down.

 

The retroactive part people have issue with is changing the terms on already existing games. The terms themselves are not the main issue.

 

Ok. Except some do. Like some literally do... What else am I supposed to say to that?

And none of our back and forth even matters anyway BECAUSE THE ISSUE ISNT THE INTRODUCTORY $0.20 AND WHATEVER THE INTRODUCTORY THRESHOLDS ARE...

BUT THAT THEY ARE SAYIN FROM NOW ON THAT THEY DECIDE HOW MUCH YOU GET AND HOW MUCH THEY GET FROM YOUR GAME.

Do you really think they are not going to ever increase the price or range of users paying it?

Plus their "install" will not = 1 player's rev anyway. The whole concept is flawed and if you can't see that you lack critical thinking.

 

Seriously why should someone apology for ranting about such a stupid move by Unity? Even if they come back? Some might. I won't, trust is gone. I'm going to finish our current PC title. I don't need Unity and I'm sure they won't miss me either especially because I'm doing PC games there are enough alterntive engines out there.

 

Apologise for what? Also who is "we"? Do "you" want an apology?

 

godot has a boat load of gotchas, it's not a mature project yet and people should really look to other engines for now and if they do want godot for their 2d project should use gdscript for the best experience (it's not hard to learn). You can get godot to work with everything but you will need to make your own fork and re-compile it. I really feel that the engine needs 3-4 more years of work before it's a realistic option for most.

Until godot is ready for "production":
Unreal for 2d/3d advanced shaders and more advanced graphics.
gamemaker for 2d games that want more rails in the engine.
heaps is another open source engine using the haxe language (like javascript) and worth checking out.

 

Totally wrong, you can still making success with ARPU below 2 cents, it’s called “emergent markets” and it drops your ARPU to that level.

 

So, let me get this right: You just stated the Industry standard for mobiles is 10-20c per download and you're claiming there's NO examples that would point a 20c per download would be bad in ANY way that you can see. Alrighty then

 

Maybe they have shares in Unity and they are part of the board

 

yes. the strategy is now clear. now you have to take it or leave it. leaving might be almost impossible and painful, staying could be the only option. then you have to swallow the pill and start paying.

and if you are still in denial and think "they can't do this" or "they will be F***ed in the long run" ... yes and yes. but the beauty of big money is that, it doesn't care. it doesn't have moral or ethics. if an investor can double their billion dollars, they will tear up the company if that's what it takes. there is no more emotional touch to build this company, there's only money. this is called "exit strategy", or more like "exit scam".

 

Unity doesn't charge 20 cents per download. You can't read, obviously. You're panicking over nothing. You really need to relax.

Unity only charges you on a monthly basis for new installs. If you get a lot of installs, you pay less per install but only if you passed the threshold which most mobile games will never do. You really need to stop reading these posts and go read the official Unity stuff.

 

Anyone have info on the class action suit that is supposedly being started? I definitely want on that train.

 

So for you is perfectly normal that, for example, iPhone15 is out with all his versions and say... 70% of ALL your userbase of people using iPhone could change phone. So you have to pay AGAIN for all the userbase. Forever.
This is perfectly fine for you? And moreover, 3 days ago, we as developers had the responsability to decide to get a game going for 1, 2 years till it went viral to get a fan base, now it's right that a company will decide that "no, I suck at game development, and I HAVE to get a tot amount from any user". And that amount could be wrong by a factor of 2, 4, 10, 100 we do not know. And WE are the ones that can't budget and should go bankrupt?
But really... you and the guys that are defending this pile of S*** are out of your mind.

 

Un ya it is

The typical conversion rate that we see from F2P games not using ads but rather using MTX and or DLC, etc. is around 2% meaning 98% of users do not monetize at all they are big fat 0 on that rev chart.
Next 1 user is more than 1 install ... that's the whole WTF Unity your clearly trying to screw us

If you where not TRYING to screw us you would have said per-user e.g. per unique license or better yet (Not to exceed X% project rev) that would have prevented the ability fort this hairbrained scheme to eat your lunch

But in reality they WANT it to be able eat 10-20-30% of your revenue ... they either didn't think or didn't care about that sliver of the market where yes it can eat 50->100% of your revenue

Then there is the trust issue

Even if they resolved the royalty issue which honestly is easily fixed ... just add a "Not to exceed 5% project revenue per month/quarter/year"

And all is well on the fees side of it ... then it would never be any worse than Epics terms and could be better if your conversion rate was high or your value-per-conversion was high

So lets say that is fixed ... it is easy to fix after all

We still will not be using Unity ... why?
These fools DRASTICALLY changed the calculus of doing business overnight with 90 days warning and applied it retroactively to all projects in flight and even those that have shipped.

The danger that puts on a small studio that is just getting by and is counting their pennies carefully is completely unacceptable. Just the fact that they announced this like this with so many unknowns and train wrecked deals and negotiations and plans literally overnight

Unity = Seagull ... flys overhead S***s on everything occasionally eats your lunch
Cannot get into bed with that for the multiyear-long relationship that a game project would be

And that trust cant be earned back over night, it can be lost over night it cannot be earned back over night.
Unity will need to put in place contractually binding iron-clad terms that prevent this sort of behaviour in the future and we will need to see multiple years of that operating without them trying some BS like this again for us to consider using Unity in a game project again.

Its just FAR to much of a liability till that happens