Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

Is a total waste, i know you are talented, your shader was looking good imo. Can you make it on another engine?

 

that is exactly the point almost no one get it

 

If you are talking about Richard Hoeg, you do not understand what the lawyer wrote. He said something more along the lines of it wasn't an open and shut case where the matter would definitely be resolved in favor of the developer, and that the developers would likely have to rely on the judge and jury feeling sympathetic towards them.

But I think if you put this issue before a jury, and you show them how much lead time is necessary for developers to create a game, show them the public statements of the CEO where he promised developers they could stay with the TOS on the engine they're currently using, show the web page on Unity that stated developers could stay with the TOS on the engine they're currently using, show them the previous TOS that said developers could stay with the terms if they continued using an older version of the engine, show how Unity deceitfully deleted the Github repo for the TOS without any public comment, then the developers in such a hypothetical case have a decent chance of persuading a jury that Unity breached its contracts with the developers.

And then you add on to that the strong likelihood that the FTC is going to intervene in this goofy fee waiver scheme where Unity apparently intends to waive the runtime fees if you use their ad platform, and you have a situation where Unity will probably be tied up in the courts for years.

And I think the reason why Unity's executive team is willing to do all this is because they are desperate. Unity is failing.

 

The only way to ensure profitability under this plan is micro-transactions. Nickel and dime the players, because Unity is nickel and diming us. That's a sure-fire way to destroy your credibility immediately to the consumers. Gamers will reject any Unity game off-rip with extreme prejudice. This whole thing is disgusting. John Riccitiello is the biggest douche-bag in gaming. Congratulations asshole.

 

The new splash screen for my MMO

 

In Unreal 5, it would be DEAD EASY to recreate my personal shader libraries (I used Amplify Shader Editor, which is way more user friendly than the Unity Shader Graph and nearly all of the nodes are in UE5), just have to carefully replicate it.

And if I can find an equivalent plugin like UFE in UE5, i'll be good...

 

Not kidding, this is actually a really good idea

 

This is what Unity has done:

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

 

Serious contender, but nah... Bobby Kotick is still here.

 

man, i'm really happy to know that, go for it and please, keep me posted

 

Funny enough, the attorney I spoke to, said that while the runtime fees are legal but still can be argued against on grounds of unreasonable cost. They said, making a contract, and changing terms, and then changing them again to favor your newest model of profit, even though you stated clearly that you can remain on previous terms with reduced support or older software, may in fact be illegal. Like, that can be submitted as evidence for your case. Unity did have written terms that said they can change the terms at any time, but they also had written terms which state you can remain on old terms connected to old versions or specific versions, correct?

 

They're not edge cases though. Even since mobile and Unity blew open the doors to indie development, developers of F2P became a standard and there are many devs operating on minimal-income-per-user projects. It's pretty much a market Unity created! I'd argue those making larger earnings where this fee system is better than Epic's 5% in raw numbers are more the edge cases of Unity developers.

Unity claimed 1.5 million active creators a month. That's probably 100x what UE sees. And you have 90% of those making very little money, but the promise, the chance to make it big, is massively slapped on the head by this fee structure. Unity should be fostering an open development that gives opportunity for start-ups to achieve something wonderful, and then monetise the big successes who feel a good connection with Unity who helped them get there.

It's the same as the F2P model Riccitiello loves so much. Most F2P players don't pay a cent, but the whales pay big. This is equivalent to charging the bottom players something, turning away the massive install-base that makes these F2P games appealing to the whales. They should be looking at monetising Unity via the same principles as monetising F2P games.

 

I'm not 100% in agreement. You can charge Steam a proper rate. Mobile are fussy and you need to nickle-and-dime them, but can also offer a proper flat fee for those consumers who'll play fare and are willing to pay a decent flat fee. Don't need to ruin things for decent gamers on platforms that don't want pervasive MTs.

 

sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeit. I think Made with Unity sounds so juvenile... POWERED by Unity would have been so impactful, but now it's oxymoronic

 

You don't actually know that it will be more than sales, especially in the PC market. Steam is notorious for people buying games and then never playing them. It will probably be more than sales, but for games, especially those distributed in bundles, it very possibly will be a lower number than sales.

But, this is kind of an aside, since the entire Steam market in 2022, which was just under 6000 games released, likely had fewer installs than just one big low ARPU mobile game like Genshin.

 

I will. And even if I stay on the Unity engine (due to all of the assets I've purchased recently), it will be a challenge to abandon it. It will either, end up like engines of the past (i'm old enough to remember Torque 3D and Ogre) or get the Blender treatment...

 

Because this is even more blatant anti competitive behavior and is outright illegal. If Unity wants developers to use LevelPlay it's simple. Compete better. The average revenue a dev sees from LevelPlay is half that versus AppLovin.

 

And here Apple is winning court case after court case that says it's ok to force devs to use their payment processing / store.

 

Microsoft should charge unity 20 cents for every c# script created in Unity

Unity Response - But we can't control how many times a user creates a script, we would go bankrupt.

Ya that's exactly what you are doing to us. We can't control installs.

 

Bundled games don't sell anywhere near full price. You get like 0.25 a sale but guaranteed to sell 2,000 to 20,000. It is more of a way to promote your game to people who would not normally buy it and also get better reviews.

 

Honestly, my biggest fear with this has nothing to do with the licensing change itself as it will never adversely affect us. It is a fear that Unity will lose so much community and 3rd party support as a result of other engines becoming less risky for those who are just getting into game development. We like Unity because it is easy to find plugins, it is easy to hire experienced developers, and so on. Much of this stems from their business model that made it accessible to everyone. I hope the community doesn't jump ship, but I understand if they do.

 

What a mess, Unity...

 

They say they will be able to tell. Everyone I know thinks otherwise.

 

''Why are devs not moving to other engines...like Unigine or Crytek. Unigine, is better than Unreal 5, better quality, better graphics that UE5, better than Unity by a mile (has 64-bit precision world, can make 'cosmos space' in it)....so why not?''.

Because, excluding Unreal, most do not have (really) a 'real' asset store and they have plenty of great features...even some that Unity don't have (nor Unreal)...but the lack of (a real/any real) Asset Store...is a deal breaker.
Their asset store is 'empty'...and not much is there if you go look. I think this is a very good reason why, people stick to Unity or Unreal (or Godot...Godot is building theirs).

You have the engine + the license cost + documentation + community + ecosystem + ease of use of engine/compatibility + adoption + asset store...it's about that equation..

The costs/how much you pay --- once your make 100,000$ revenue..is also one other big reason. The subscription to a new engine (godot = free...can't beat free (meal)...'no such thing in life...as free lunch').

Also, because, you 'learned it' and spent years/money..learning it...learning new engine, big cost. Time = Money = Time....we can be 'thrifty/adaptive' and learn new engines...time is the cost.

People have to remember, ...some assets save you time and money...and allow games, impossible, to be possible (like mine; have thousand assets...); so, I know some devs do not use any assets...but Many Do...and it is very important to their game's creation. So...no assets? no asset store....ich...it will put a dent in some devs. Only big companies or very temerary solo devs 'who may everythign theirself'...will skip the asset store....assets are both overestimated..and underestimated; you might do your whole game..with no assets; but, then aging, you might do your whole...with assets.
So, it depends, on you, if you need them or not...and you are willing to do game with or without them.
I think this is one reason...as for people who say: ''No problem..I just buy the assets...and Export them in whatever engine..''. True...that'S one good reason...to go to any engine..and just use the 'other engine's assets...on their asset store'..and, simply, Export these assets to another engine (I mean, Import them - in another engine). We can export the whole Unity project and its assets to other engine...but, I mean, some see it as a very 'proprietary thing'; albeit, most assets, are not 'to a specific engine'-restricted license. 99% are not; only some Unity Technologies assets or Epic Games assets...can only be used in their respective engines; the rest of assets...can be used in any engine; unless, the asset creator said no and this asset is to be used - in this - specific engine, only. But, yes, most assets (their license) are not locked to 1 engine. And you can see several assets of 'many asset stores'..as they try to sell them on as many assets stores as they can (to recoup, of course).

As, for Unreal 5, I think, that some of its recent developments are why people are much more into it than Unigine or Crytek 5, specifically, the Nanite and Lumen techs....and they ahve the Unreal Marketplace/assets...which is very big, like Unity's asset store; in fact, currently, the 2 biggest Asset stores...are Unity's and Unreal's...there are others, but not as big/filled. So, it is a key element, for some devs. And, many assets are made -specifically - for Unity. You cannot use it in Unreal..or vice versa. Like, especially, scripts and whatnot...Unity (C#), Unreal (C++)...

I think the 'not enough adoption' is also a downer...Godot is getting 'adoption' right now...no adoption...no good.
Adoption = more support/more community/more devs using it/more certified'/more games 'done with/proven/battle-tested'/more choosing of it/more trust...

Just a 2 cents.

 

People are making a big deal of the fact that the ToS are such that users cannot sue but instead must settle for arbitration, but do you think Unity would enjoy having to organize 2000, 3000, 5000 simultaneous arbitration claims?

Would *that* be financially good for them?

 

It's full board swipe or Unity is done. Why should they stop? Even on a board swipe it would be an uphill battle.

 

Assuming I don't hear any news tomorrow about a reversal on these bullshit** new fees, I'll be moving my game's loaded assets off of Unity's CDN to AWS.

Transferring to a new engine may not be as easy as a click of a button, but loading my assets from a different URL mostly is.

If anyone else can also do the same, do it! The more they hurt financially, is mostly the only way they'll listen.

 

both still exist and get updates xD that is really cool, i actually tried torque3d recently and is not that bad tbh haha

 

You're just making nonsense up as you go along.

 

Guys just STOP they dont want your advice this are corporates stuff for big money and you are all the toys for them, they have big brains about making money and dont expect advice from all of you, i think ship is sinking and you all know this deep within you but cant ackowledge and do something about it cause of years of dedication etc. but as soon as you understand this and cut the relationship the better.
I mean who ever think this will be good with EA guy Ricitello who say about charging ppls 1$ for a reload in Battlefield or CEO guy from Iron Source.

 

Hey Unity, are you still alive? You was dead inside for years already and now we can drop you in trash can with every S*** on us you gave for last years. Burn in hell with your CEOs!
How much stupid you should be to develop public proprietary engine and still thinking you can do anything you want in shady ways???

No, your engine is proprietary, but this is just an illusion left in the past. Now its OUR tool and we can throw it in the trash can while you will silently watch on it without anything able to do. Its not your product. Don't you agree? Okay, try to make money with it on your own. Oh... sorry, I completely forgot the fact you are not able to develop games or even useful tools, you just another one bubble marketing company. Now try to sell your overpriced demos to players and see what you get, LOL.

Go to hell, work with you was a pain for all my years along with other developers.
No thanks.
No regards.

 

Lol

 

If you know how to code, cool... but I love the community here and I seriously hope Unity takes time to sit in the corner, think about what it did, and get its S*** together... if Unity stayed a private company (can they even go back to being privately owned?) this wouldn't have taken place.

 

I'm stealing this picture... it's a great one too.

 

What? What kind of response is this?

 

Unity is what made me passionate about gamedev, I had a great time with it for 5 years, with this change you ruined everything, congratulations

 

Not likely.
In theory they could go private but they’d have to buy back all their outstanding stock wich is probably not happening.
Another way is a corporate buyout where someone like Apple or Microsoft buys them but if they really wanted to, they’d just wait for bankrupcy and buy them for much less than they valued now.

 

If Terraria would have been under the new terms they would have lost money on me with at least 24 installs over the years for 10 bucks on steam. Ask others that played that game. Edge case anyone?

 

@nasos_333 is a bit desperate because he had built a comprehensive environmental asset pack for the UAS for a full decade, and it's pretty good too. I for one sympathize with him, and also happen to use SkyMaster.
UAS creators are clearly in dire straits right now, and an exodus may be imminent. Hope not though.

 

It's sad but bottom line is Unity was a great tool with great community and now it's a tool with bad pricing and bad management and quickly diminishing community. Still it is just a tool. It can be replaced.

 

That would be as predatory as it is the current strategy.

 

If at least, before announcement they could have made sounds nice rather than just plain information like a bomb when seeing 1+ install = $0.2 everyone should be upset is understandable.
They could add, `We love our community so we decide to not use percentage revenue anymore, so now our fee will be lowest than our competitor`
Then in original table could have added `0-200.000 installs and $0-200.000 revenue, no cost`.
Who made the announcement must need to learn words.

 

I was honestly thinking about that just now. I decided I'd finish my latest asset, publish it then look into Unreal more seriously. In the last few days, I have felt discouraged to continue supporting my assets but only time will tell...

 

Is it feasible to switch to Godot? Because I was a loyal Unity user due to its features and was still learning it. Godot seems like a downgrade.

 

Unity has proven, quite spectacularly, that they are capable of doing a dirty deed. For those who are doing the math now to see what they will feasably pay, just remember that the dirty deed has been done and when your companies wallet is overflowing, they will look at it, and do a dirty deed on you again.

Listen, there is no trust here. None.

 

Godot 4.X is way better than the 3.X release but it won't be 1:1
Depends on what you looking for, 2D? Probably. 3D? Maybe check out other engines before you commit.

 

That can definitely happen too... if Microsoft buys it (highly unlikely), Unity would probably get shelved in favour of their own engines, mainly because devs who work on Xbox games have to use their SDK.

 

For years blender seemed like a downgrade too. Now it's top tier software in terms of quality and user experience. Godot may see the huge talent flow right now. Who knows what gonna happen.

 

Years ago when John Riccitiello selected as new CEO of Unity, elder brother of me said you will see Unity will be death. I wish I listened elder brother's words and started working Unreal starting from those times