Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

If you are referring to a post from this whole manifest: https://waiting-for-blue-robot.gitlab.io/
Then I would advise you to also research who the person is who wrote this manifest and check their general behaviour on social media.

 

I think we have to raise our voices even more to make sure that they get that the Runtime Fee is the issue.

 

I don't like the sound of that.

 

No way subscriptions will be removed. They need a steady stream of income for huge payrolls.
And they will add some new tax on top of that for sure.
Maybe previous errors of purchasing unneeded companies are too big now to imagine anything else, but why should customers pay for this with such an attitude? Give us nanites and lumens or at least finish project examples and infinite preview packages.

 

you have all of that in Unreal Engine, you can download many templates, examples etc... in fact you have a pretty popular complete not-canceled game made by epic with unreal

 

Unity, you should undestand: no matter how many times you change the fee or if you can build a time machine with it. We DON'T WANT FEES. We want to go back to the previous status, and then, we can talk of how to save Unity if it is running out of money. We want Unity the way it was. I'm myself enjoying Unreal. Talked with my boss, if next monday fees have not dissapeared I'll enjoy programming with C++ again (as I did time ago). Thanks.

 

This is all speculation. It is essentially all made up.

 

The graph was build up for a month. It slide down until now to -15% just after the new fee announcement

Coincidence? I think not

 

They know. If the stories are to be believed, and there's no reason to think they shouldn't be, developers and management inside of Unity were raising alarm bells on this internally for months, bringing up the same issues the public has, and that insiders did in their communications. Unity employees are reading this thread still, but aren't posting for what are probably obvious reasons.

Their entire company is aware of the problem. The issue is their board didn't think this is a problem, and it's unclear if they still think that. Either way, they absolutely know what their customers think of it.

 

false. anyone could compile and sell Blender. You clearly havent read the GPL license.

tinfoil hattery.

Because not everybody has to?
Obviously the engine isnt so that games made with it dont have to be GPL'd. Codependency between engine and editor would make it sane to keep the same license.

You're just grasping here, you really are.

 

"We’re updating the Runtime Fee"

Is that Joke? updating - Someone made another mistake - Surely? I have to take a Pill before I fall over

 

but is just same as August, the difference is marginal to have any meaning.

The stock can take much worse dives and come back soon after, the 2% means absolutely nothing in stock market

 

If it's anything like DOTs they'll be years away from an update

 

They hired him to perform a job, bring the company public
He does his job
The company went public, new investors are brought in
They keep him to perform a new job, bring the stock up so they can sell it high
He does his job
The stock rises and all the dudes dump their stock
Somehow unity is not profitable. They never gave him the job to make it profitable
They give him a new job. Fix it or break it.
He does his job.
its the current day

In the end he is only doing what they pay him for, and he delivered the result they wanted

The ones who truly decide the route for unity have already decided what they want, they wont hire a CEO that does what they dont want, neither will they tell the current CEO to do what they dont want

 

more like they need to do this for some reason we do not know (or we know) this will make a big damage on the industry, i think unity is sadly dead now but they need to push this "runtime fee" to give some value to that parasite called ironsource (literally a parasite)

 

Plus you have a nearly unworkable editor, wait for life time SDFs baking, C++ that while better than was years ago is still not C# and much more workflow issues.

These give a exponential dive in ease of development and versatility. Sure has some perks and some major minuses that personally make it unworkable for my work style, as can do same things in Unity in a tiny fraction of the time. And time is the ultimate currency, not dollars.

 

Exactly this. Godot basically IS the engine. When you compile a Godot game you don't compile a separate runtime but you just pack your Project into (encrypted if desired) files and bundle it to the same engine you are working in.
If Godot was GPL you could not publish or sell any project made with the engine unless you also made all of your source code available. For Blender this is fine because the output from Blender is not bundled to the Program itself. For Godot it is not because the Project will always be tied to the engine.

 

I don't want something called Runtime Fee, it's ridiculous and feels like a parasite that exists in the games we work hard to make.
If Unity makes any positive changes, please remove this name.

 

POG !

 

"We’re updating the Runtime Fee"

I hope that when they say runtime fee, they don’t mean an install fee. But my gut says that runtime fee equals install fee.

The installation fee is the problem, it is impossible to calculate the number of installations. An install fee is also an unethical way of doing business. When you sign a contract both parties need to be able to calculate the values.

 

lol, changing the name would not do any better but worse

 

I wouldn't say dropping 7% in one day is normal. Unusual at least. But indeed 15% in one week of bad news has happened to many companies. It's too early to know.

LOL, you need it to drop to $1 to name it a disaster? When most people has been buying it between 30-40? How would you call it if it drops to $20, or $15? ot $10? Which can happen if they make another blunder.

 

Yeah, but would be nice to have some of it in Unity, as I love the engine (but hate services).
I (anyone) would pay 5% royalties with pleasure.

 

Unity Enablement Donation

 

yeah in the same, becase the "runtime" is fixed to the game, they are still charging you for installs

 

Well, no, the problem is the sneaky retroactive TOS change after promising not to do exactly that and ostensibly adding protections in 2019.

The reason this is critical is that you don't do business with anyone that brings with them an undefinable amount of risk or that has proven itself to be reliably unreliable and untrustworthy. The issue is less this current dumb fee, but the idea that on a whim we could retroactively owe Unity anything they decide on. That's why the reaction has been so universal and visceral despite the fact that it would primarily affect mobile F2P-type games.

The fact that they're still focused on "updating the Runtime Fee," assuming we can take that at face value, betrays how fundamentally out of touch Unity leadership still is. Embarrassingly out of touch, really. Updating the runtime fee to something that somehow works in the real world (which may not even be possible) does not save the company. The only thing that saves the company at this point is having a path to restoring trust. To that end, Unity shouldn't even be thinking about the runtime fee anymore. They should have reverted it some time ago (they need to slow bleeding), restored (to the best of their ability) the guarantee against retroactivity, and then focus 100% of their energy on finding a path to trust. Then, and only then, does it make sense to even think about modifying the fee structure.

 

https://unity.com/runtime-fee

 

yeah we would, but that is not the case... we are going to pay for installs

 

aaah of course THAT other problem, thank you for make me remember that

 

And don't forget the Plus subscription removal. Paying 2k USD for Pro just to remove splash screen is nuts

 

Unity has dropped to $22 in the past and kept going - we never noticed. It's also dropped far faster in the past, and recovered quickly.

For anyone watching this carefully, the fact there aren't any direct rivals that devs can swap to means Unity has a notable degree of control. If MonoGame, Godot, Flax, Unreal, were 1 for 1 replacements, the share would have dived as projects were swapped over. As portability across engines isn't transparent but a massive chore with massive issues, unlike going to a different parts supplier, there's innate stability between the supplier and its consumers. As a shareholder, a wait-and-see attitude would make a lot of sense here. If Unity produce a good response, we'll have happy (disgruntled) developers generating a lot more revenue for Unity which will please the shareholders.

 

Yes, we know, try to keep up.

 

Unity has already lost far more than $30 in stock value, actually around $170 by the graph.



This is the reality above, their stock falls lower and the fluctuations in last months is near zero in the big picture, there is just no change if see the real scales.

What i see is that they have lost value, which probably is why they introduce the fee in the first place, to try recover that value.

 

to be honest and i know i've said this many times now, but if you are not making games for mobiles, Unigine is almost 1:1 but with better graphics and better tools/technology... you can copy/paste your code just changing the "using" things at the top, the workflow is pretty the same the only difference is that unigine is just one render pipeline xD and you don't need to check the same options on multiple locations to use a feature... so, is in fact better xD

 

Unity has awakened wariness in the industry, despite its fee changes. This creates opportunities for other engines and we will always have backup.
If Unity changes again, we will be fine, and that will be the end of Unity.

 

Wanna use a feature?



is all in one place, you don't need to check 3 different options to use water or ssr or ssgi, is all in one menu xD

 

What Would Probably be accepted by Most would be something like:

Free - For Evaluation
$20/m to Publish - (rev under $100k) (Max 5 seats)
$50/m to Custom Splash Screen - (rev under $1m) (Max 10 seats)
$150/m (rev over $1m) (with a limit on Max Seats)
Enterprise/Industry (Custom Arrangement)

Then: Offset the Above license costs on a monthly basis from other things
Credit back the 30% from Asset Store Purchase for last 12 months
Credit back the % take from using their Ad Solutions
etc.....
(And yes, out of good faith - including the last 12 months off the bat)

This way you're providing an incentive for people to use rather than a penalty/forcing

Then:
Announce that the previous Run-Time fee has had a nasty accident from a 3 story building and has sadly died

Then: (To really boost revenue) and make everyone happy

Create a UNTIY Games Store
Where you take say, 10% (with 5% of that getting offset against other things dev's utilise)

I find it kinda crazy that Epic did create a game store (which apparently now has a larger userbase than Steam) - but Unity hasn't done the same - quite happily letting steam take 30% and $100 from unity devs.

If Unity was to create a store - on part with Epic - This would probably finally force Steam to actually change.

And i'm probably guessing Epic make more from their Games store than they make from their 5%.

 

It does not support mobile at all ?

 

they have to make money. they have a big loss in 2022.
waiting is not an option for them.
i don't want fees also, but let's be reasonable
It we are not reasonable and we get angry over every price change, then it's the same for them it they put a decent price or ... a runtime fee

also I stated this again. every new technology is great until you really dive into it and see that's not really the case. unreal is not the holy grail (of course neither is unity). other engines are pretty much behind.
i see from time to time " godot is perfect", or flex or uniengine or whatever... no they are not. even looking at the features you see they miss a lot of stuff.
It's good godot receives attention now and maybe in a few years it will be a real competitior. but now it isn't,
now it's just unity and unreal... sure we have 2d games when things are a bit better but as a general engine there are only those two.

 

Publish is not worth 20$ per month. Should just be free

 

That's the reason I say that, if money is the problem, finding REAL solutions is the way to avoid Unity bankruptcy. Adding a fee to the project installed on every computer/phone/console is just the craziest idea I've ever read. I can pay more (Unity Plus is what we have) and we can discuss many things. But the fee must be revoken right now.

 

Not retroactively. Are you crazy? What's with next time they "need money"? How can anyone build a company around that?

 

there are games made with unigine on mobiles, but i don't know how...
https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Unigine&gl=US&pli=1

One of the unigine's devs said this:
https://developer.unigine.com/forum...ine-for-android/?do=findComment&comment=17016

Take into consideration that the first versions of unigine ARE still amazing. Anyways, i'm using Unigine for months now to make my pc game

 

- Before 12th : Sure, you need money, you can raised some fee. Some rev share is sensible. Should be 3% above $1m. 1% above $100k is also fine
- After 12th : BS, just get money from all executives who create all this scandal. They must sold half their share out for company. Your company have no right to utter any word relate to "fee" for at least a year

 

Sorry Everyone,

I have to comment about this again.

"We hear you, and we’re sorry.

We’re updating the Runtime Fee, and we’ll be sharing a new FAQ outlining the details in the next few days. We appreciate your patience."

What the majority of dev's are requesting is apart from anything else is I presume :

"We hear you, and we’re sorry.

We’re Removing the Runtime Fee/Install Fee completely, and we’ll be sharing a new FAQ outlining the details in the next few days. We appreciate your patience."

That does not seem to be what Unity is saying. Not sure what the point of them sharing anything is then?. Might as well leave the page in question as it is and leave this thread continue on for some time yet.

Think for once I am speechless now so will withdraw and be quiet. For a while at least.

Happy Game Making.

Regards

Peter

 

I didn't say retroactively.
I just said that they will have to find a way to increase the revenue and that means milking the costumers...
Only apply retroactively fees if the user agrees, then it's imoral and i think it should be illegal!

 

"Both Fees AND Rev Share is a ugly deal." - unreal does i for consoles. I don't say it's not ugly, i say that is happens
"Changing terms to include millions in fees is unacceptable." - not really. 5% is "millions in fees" for example...

the problem is neither of those. the problem is retroactive changes and unpredictable fees.
i didn't suggest any kind of deal. I only said they have to make more money. IDN why all of you presume i agree with retroactive changes or with the runtime fee. I don't!

I think that unity must find the time to explain to us why they need more money and to find a way to earn more money that is acceptable to unity and to it's costumers alike