Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

Being the lesser of tow evil doesn't change the point I was making which is that the paid product is better.

What you describe as "complicated" is the definition of a poorly designed UX.

 

Well, Unless you REVERT its entire mess and GET RID of the entire board SPECCIALY riccitiello...

I don´t care.

 

Blender is not nearly as horrific as it's made out to be EXCEPT for the animation system, which feels like it was implemented by the hand of Satan himself.

 

Yeah, practically all of these people need to go for there to be any trust in Unity moving forward:

Without that, what's the point. Even if they do a full reversal, it'll just be to bide their time and try it again, or introduce it little by little. The complete loss of trust has already happened, we won't ever feel safe they won't retroactively change the license agreement again, that they won't force spyware and adware on people, that they won't gimp Pro in order to make Enterprise the only viable option for anyone going to market.

At this point the only way I'd trust Unity again is if MS or some other big player (other than Google...) buys them and sacks everyone responsible for this calamity.

 

I'm still on Blender 2.79b. I like it how I learned it. Which I'll admit is a double-edged sword.

 

MS is worse remember when they bought simplygon they kicked out every indie dev obliged devs to use hotmail accounts and made you buy points so you could use them to reduce polygons , only stupid people think MS is the savior

 

So what you're saying is for indies it was simply gone?

 

I don't necessarily think one is better than the other. These are two very capable 3D modeling and rendering tools. But I don't think they are similar products the same way a moped and a van are two vehicles for different targets.

3dsmax went through a financial natural selection process making it a tool for professionals who need to be productive right away. Blender didn't.

What blender users tend to miss is that I don't have time to learn all the blender quirks. This makes it more expensive than the paid alternatives.

This is why I prefer paid software.

 

That is precisely the reason indies are feeling and will be impacted. Insanely successful indie games like Minecraft, Stardew Valley, Soul Knight, Among Us, and many others don't happen because one day an indie developer decides he wants to be a millionaire by creating a game that everyone likes.
I know that the people behind this decision may not fully grasp about what it means to pursue a profession where you find joy in your work while earning enough to sustain yourself, but to make it short, being among those 10% of victims is not something that indies developers can just calculate, predict and, in some edge cases, even afford. We did not choose this industry over data science or web development with the intention of owning mansions, yachts, sport cars or other highly expensive goods like that. We are in this so that we can work creating experiences that we want to share with the world. Being absurdly rich is, in most cases, a welcome but secondary consideration.
The main problem is that this overly complicated pricing plan is subject to many obvious exploits, gray areas and absurd edge cases, which pose potential dangers to a niche of independent developers who want to create certain types of games and may accidentally make a masterpiece which ends up ruining their financial lives. Why not simply ask for a revenue share, which will always be affordable?
We are also afraid about what else you guys will be up to if we accept this. Pay per 'Play Mode' compilation? Pay per game build? Perhaps even pay per reload of our test weapons in our games?

 

A paid product isn't always better -- that's just a huge blanket statement. And especially when it comes to Blender, I wholeheartedly disagree. However, it depends on what you define as "better". Even if Blender was less functional than any other similar software I'd still use it over the same from a public company. Look at what's happening right here in this forum -- Unity (from what I've read) is objectively better than Godot, yet people are moving over to Godot. So which one is better?

Also "complicated" isn't the definition of poor UX. Unnecessarily complicated, maybe, but being complicated on its own, isn't. A simple calculator isn't complicated right? But to a baby it's complicated, but does that mean it's bad UX?

 

The one that isn't actively trying to screw over its users.

 

This is the list of companies I am aware that offer games through subscriptions and/or giveaways which Unity would have to "make a deal" with if it turns out they actually have a legal basis for charging runtime redistribution fees:

- Microsoft (gamepass)
- Sony (PS Plus)
- Valve (Steam freebies)
- Epic (EGS freebies)
- Apple (Apple Arcade)
- Google (Play Pass)
- Amazon (Luna)
- Netflix
- Gameclub

Quite a few of the companies in that list have far more legal prowess than Unity, so their legal basis for retroactively charging for the redistribution of their runtime is better be airtight at the quantum level.

Can anyone check if Unity owns any patents that apply to the Unity runtime? Because AFAIK that's the only precedent for legally charging 3rd parties for redistribution fees.

Still, I don't think any company had the audacity of letting people distribute their IP for free and flipping the "pay me" switch 10+ years later.

 

Asmon's take on today's drama.

 

If unity is losing a 100-200 million each quarter and need to make money, perhaps some new measures are needed.

that said these ones seem to the worst way.

Id like to know about this:

- allow Free to remain so, but remove publications to platform.
- should a free user want to publish, they can upgrade to the next tier for $100 annual.

that’s not a steep price for any one serious about publishing.

 

I think, before say 2012, 3DS Max is worth a license.

After that, I decided enough was enough.

 

123-456789

 

Blender UI is terrible and they have been told over and over again that it's terrible but took years before they did anything about it. There is a plugin called Maya Config Pro which helps, but blender is still cumbersome to me. I'm 1000% faster in Maya but I've been using it since version 8. Don't get me wrong Blender is a pretty incredible piece of software and I think anyone that can get comfortable with it should use it.


That's all I'll say since I don't want to head off topic.

 

Just an honest and critical feedbacks? It was a total loss of trust. Even i expect such an explanation from you tomorrow;

We have heard you. We fixed the runtime fee to 50% for every sales. No limits. We removed the lower and upper limits. Also splash screen will appear twice for free users. Enjoy, trust us, have fun.

 

lets wait and see guys. maybe they can read and have people that can program over there

 

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=801105098682126&set=a.512923274166978

 

Unity is better.

People aren't moving over Godot because they think it's better but because they're running away from unity's management.

When I'm saying paid products are better, I'm talking about the product, not the company. Unity the engine and unity the company have the same name but you still have to make that distinction.

Just like I'm doing with 3dsmax, a product I'm satisfied with but owned by Autodesk, a company using illegal practices against me.

I'm not using blender because I like it but because my 3dsmax license was stolen from me.

 

Now picture people that spent thousands in assets or more; as they invested in the ecosystem and need to move out of Unity...
They won't get refunds, which is a given, but whoever is selling assets won't see much in terms of sales either, if most people move out. It is not a matter of not being safe, it is a matter that in one single move, they are cutting out revenues from their asset store too, and placing people making assets in the same situation as developers too.

 

If the new terms are demonstrably more favorable than a 5% rev-share, then devs will be coming back. No one will be happy about the new terms, and especially not the sudden change of ToS and lack of protection from ToS changes in the future. But they'll be back for the same reason I came back before this whole debacle. It's a good engine with a huge healthy ecosystem that few competitors have. Plenty of hobbyists and indie's will return in the short-term.

The bigger concern is for Unity long-term. I imagine every single game studio - large or small - will be considering or actively planning a long-term exit strategy to separate from Unity. And those who do find great short-term success with Unity aren't really incentivized to stay with Unity.

 

yep. Speaking for myself if things aren’t turned around I will still be using Unity, but not for future clients or personal projects. Instead I drop to Personal for free, and use it as a means to fast prototype and evaluate ideas, or develop a code base or custom shader. At which point I’ll move it over to Godot, Flex, or other engine. I certainly won’t be purchasing any more assets for myself.

 

Just a quick search and really not sure if this is related at all, but it sounds like the first "game system" could represent the unity runtime to me:

https://www.patentguru.com/US11660538B2
US11660538B2
"A method for automatically connecting game items for sharing by a plurality of game systems is disclosed. A first game system is added to a computer-implemented game. The first game system is associated with a first game system definition. The first game system definition corresponding to a first game object. The first game system is automatically connected to a second game system. The automatic connecting includes, at least: identifying a correspondence between the first game system definition and a second game system definition, the second game system definition being associated with the second game system, the second game system definition corresponding to a second game object; and preventing a change to the first game object during runtime of the computer-implemented game based on a detection that the change to the first game object would violate a rule associated with the second game system definition."

 

I'm not a baby, I'm a professional with years of experience in 3d modeling. I shouldn't have trouble using features I've mastered a long time ago.

You said yourself that it might be unnecessary complicated, that's the definition of bad UX.

If there is one field where you can't blame the user, it's UX.


The problem with blender and many similar open source products is that they don't have any incentive to have a good UX. They're designed for the people who are making the feature. And they don't lose money if that design is poor.

That's why Unity the engine is better than Godot.

 

I have to object because I actually think David Helgason (who is on your list) should return as CEO. He was really a nice person when I had the pleasure of talking with him and to showing him my Unity stuff on a super small user meeting with just 10 people and much more beer 10 years ago when he still was the CEO. He was very modest, reasonable and not at all aloof. And, of course, his collar was turned up. ;-)

But I guess he is busy with his new mission.

 

I remember that... and it was cool as hell

 

I know software patents usually read like gobbledygook, but this one takes it to an entirely new level.

-edit-
After reading it a few more times, this seems to be about the job system data safety mechanism.

 

I disagree with you but I'll leave it here. This isn't the time or place to continue arguing like this so sorry I provoked the situation by continuing to reply.

 

Would you please elaborate?

 

Callom Upton's new video:

 

I don't follow.

 

Did they really ban their Enterprise Partner members?
LOL!
Edit: 13:05 in the video

 

Harsh. I love it <3

 

Large companies like Microsoft, Apple, Epic, Amazon, etc.. etc..will probably be exempt from all these fees; or, at worse, Unity will negotiate some compromise/contract outside court with them (thus, no suing from any). Unity will also adjust things for the Europe regulations or like, they will adjust things so it works, they will try to reduce as many possible lawsuits to nothing/settle things quick offcourt...

But, devs, mobile devs.....they will reduce the fees....they said we will update the policy....most likely, there will (still) be some fees, somewhere....only and only if, mobile devs leave Applovin' service....will the fees be removed; I'm not so sure, they will relinquish their mobile ads profits to Applovin'...so easily. It's why, they are so set - on you using LevelPlay.

They will present this, as a compromise....take it, or leave it/move. They want us to compromise a bit, they will reduce things but want us to compromise too, for them. They will not say ''it's a compromise/tradeoff or 'move'..if you don't like''...it will just (a bit) Look like that, and said in a friendly tone.

''don't call us....we'll call you. (never)''.

I will be surprised, if they remove alll fees...we hope that...but it would be surprising.

At least, it'S great to know they heard us and there will be (some) changes....

As, for people who say: ''they have to rebuild the trust...so they have to make layoffs...starting with the high-ups...all the stock holders....must be gone.''. I think people should not expect this...they, probably, will Not change Anything, about who runs the company....and we will have to accept it...or, leave it (take it or leave it). If you cannot accept the current people that run Unity Technologies..than I guess, (for them) a new engine awaits soon (not they want you to leave...but you don't want that. so no other choice if you can't accept that). There is a sizeable chance, they will not throw or change any-body...about managment of the company. The company 'heard us'...and can ignore things (devs can ignore Unity and leave, of course), they make final decision, that's the bottom of it (devs are the users that dictacte the viability and profitability of the game engine; like customer, customer has last say/word/'is king'..but, does not decide everythhhing, they may not give 100% decisional power to customer/dev, and hold a little bit of it)...and some may not like the decision (and leave, of course), so it becomes a 'bargaining'...they are bargaining (with us), they understand some devs won't accept Anything Else...than total reversal of everying and firing of everyone concerned....they 'heard../read' 250 pages on this thread, 1 million views and on every Youtube/reddit/discord/newspapers even...everywhere in media. Many harsh words were said (although, people will say: ''they had it coming..their fault.'') and also, I think we have to be careful to say too many harsh words (sometimes, this can border on defamation (public defamation/villainizing a figure/smear campaign/find boogeyman/boogeywoman/free speech over(t)-trespassing)); It's a compromise/bargain they will give...and say: ''that's the new policy rthat improves things''...you may not like the improvements...like, they did not remove the managment, did not fullly remove/reverse everything/fees......,,
so, what then? ....yes, of course, a new engine in the soon-horizon. Some will stick (in), some will (un)stick ----out/leave. (in my case, Unity engine has audio features no other engines has except Unreal, so it is very important, I only got Unity or Unreal, as best audio/apis...; the other engines are great but limited a lot on audio/animation; there is probably something that Unity or Unreal has...that the other engines don't and vice versa (many other engine have bared bottom animation tools, like anim-retargeting/mechanim; and, as said, a non-existent asset store)...it's your decision if there would be anything, that is not found or that would find some equivalent and it suffices; for some people, they won't want to 'find this equivalent' or 'make one'; and accept whatever fees/cost comes wit hthat; it's a 'cost' vs 'features/needs' vs 'trust' vs 'use/useability'.....thing). 2 c.

 

I'm basing this only on the quoted part, but the mention of systems and detecting changes seems to be about the automatic data dependency in ECS, where the order at which jobs should execute and which ones can run in parallel is determined automatically based on what data each system reads from and/or writes to.

 

"Methods and systems for game system creation"

They're trying to patent... game making?

 

Software patents are often vague and sound bogus to anyone with common sense, so no surprises here.

The bad thing is that a select few courts are known to almost always side with the patent holder, no matter how outrageous.

Which is why all console manufacturers pay licensing fees for any sort of controller rumble, no matter how it's implemented, because one stupid troll company somehow still holds the patent for the concept of "controller goes brrr" more than two decades after it showed up in the 90s.

 

this is gold

 

any updates?

 

From reading the Unity patent abstract, it sounds like they want to patent a system whereby games share the same in-game object. Imagine getting a rare drop in game #1 and using it as a viable object in game #2.

I have no idea if that's close, but it doesn't sound like something a company can patent. It's certainly something a company shouldn't be allowed to patent.

 

Later this week.

 

Further candidates:
"METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DISPLAYING LARGE 3D MODEL ON REMOTE DEVICE"
JP2022034560A
CA3128614A1
US20220058823A1
"Abstract: A method of displaying a digital object on a device is disclosed. A set of unique identifiers and associated is downloaded for a set of digital objects within a 3D model. A position and an orientation of a virtual camera is determined relative to the positions of the set of digital objects. A visibility score for each digital object of the set of digital objects is computed based on a position of the digital object relative to the position and the orientation of the virtual camera. A polygon mesh associated with a digital object with a highest visibility score is downloaded based on the polygon mesh being absent. The downloading uses a unique identifier of the set of unique identifiers associated with the polygon mesh. The polygon mesh of the digital object with the highest score is rendered and displayed on a display device."

Went through the abstracts and it looked like nothing else was possibly related to the unity runtime, but more eyes would be better.

Patents about the job system seem to be clearly naming job system and not "methods and systems for game system creation" but i don't understand at least half of this.

this one just has a funny title:
US20190180319A1 METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR USING A GAMING ENGINE TO OPTIMIZE LIFETIME VALUE OF GAME PLAYERS WITH ADVERTISING AND IN-APP PURCHASING

 

i always say i have bad luck -.-

 

I think they should just go with a rev share like this 4%.

Pro/Enterprise/Industry pretty much just adds services and reduces revenue thresholds (maybe remove small percentage too).

Kill the splash screen for everyone. Free accounts rev share starts low (say 10k) with the splash removed.

No revenue = no pay.
No install bs.

Hell… maybe even rev share reduction for using services.

Instantly more people paying, but predictable. Not going to please everybody, but those actually making a profit would pay some for the engine.

Just my 2c… take that for what it’s worth.

 

Ah, so the CEO wants to turn the profits gained to do what IBM did to Microsoft but to all game developers.

Patent trolls.

Yeah, I'm done with this engine.

 

Why do it in such a needlessly complicated fashion? Kill the different licenses, and just implement a rev share with the exact same terms as Epic has but at 4%.

 

For a bonus toss in access to the source code.

 

https://twitter.com/unity/status/1703547752205218265

That they heard us, but not neccessarily listened

For Elon haters / non twitter users