Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

Hi, is this an ads in disguise for Unreal Engine ?

 

Here in Canada, and over in France and the EU... that kind of stuff doesn't typically fly. For utilities, you are accepting an ongoing rate, but we never accepted that for Unity, it's not a utility-based service where rates set what they can charge and even then if they tried to change the TYPE of services provided, IE only provides one part of a service where you originally agreed on 2 types of services, that would be a breach of contract.

Like this one for instance it is an outright breach of the original contract we agreed upon and there's a point clauses are just, not an excuse. Especially in the EU, I can't see Unity having any legal ground to stand on here, so long as you are willing to reject the new terms and stay on the older engine/not receive new services or updates.

 

L + ratio + TOS-backflip x 10 + insider traded + class action + pirated + reverse-engineered + moved to unreal + assets stolen + hold on (busy for 16:43:06)

 

Also we might not even need the install to go through at all, just enough for the runtime to phone home

 

So Unity is in damage control mode now
contradictory information from poorly formed sources

We have devolved into a twitter at this point I think

I am for Unity turning a profit
I am not for Unity consuming all my profit (100+% royalty bill due to moronic per-install metric)

Unity should have years ago dropped sub fees altogether and done 5% royalty direct compete with UE on that point

And yes trying to run a biz at scale that just does a game engine ... even if you add live and dev ops to it ... that is going to be damn hard. They should have pushed more into publishing, marketing, etc. ... not ads ... but marketing e.g. publisher services sort of thing

As it is they have gutted features and serves earning a google like reputation for killing projects at the drop of a hat. They have eroded trust/faith with the bulk of there customer base and they still don't have a solid plan forward for growth that doesn't involve pissing off the world.

Anyway "should have could have"

Where they are now is a bit screwed
This little mess will have evaporated any remaining faith they had with most so even a back-peddle wont be enough some method to ensure retroactive price gouging won't be a thing will be required ... Epic has such and that will be thrown in their face ... a lot

How they address this mess will be interesting ... I honestly don't see a good path forward for them

 

Notice it still counts as multiple installations when using multiple devices.

 

This is so moronic I just can't comprehend... and maybe I'm not understanding correctly.

So let's say a very successful mobile game that has a running ~10mm user base of installs. You mean to tell me that every time a new device is released, like a brand new iPhone, those users that are simply migrating their data to their new phones, and then opens the app will get treated as a brand new install? So a company could theoretically get hit with a multi-million dollar bill just because a hot new device comes out?

 

I mean I am interested, but do you have more to go on? This kinda looks like a phishing thing just posted like this.

 

I don't think you have a full understanding of how downloading and HWIDs can interact. They can pair device hardware to the game download(s) easily. While your statement contains fallacies, it does bring up a good point. You could actually still write malware that tricks the system and continually reinstalls games by modifying device HWIDs. They will still need to clarify on this potential vulnerability and how they will protect developers from this specific form of exploitation. Unity should consider just making it .20 cents per purchase and call it a day. That would be a form of direct royalties though...

 

This is absolutely bonkers. I've made games with Unity for 7 years now. Three games available on Steam. I am the definition of small time. My games are clunky and amateur but I'm proud of having made a few hundred dollars from them. I've taught myself 2D animation, 3D modelling, rigging, how to release games on Steam, and much much more. I even recently paid my first voice actor. It's incredibly fun, indescribably rewarding and I was looking up towards higher goals and a future.

The fact that you have made me fear greater success is not something you should be proud of. Even if this new setup will never effect me as it's currently described we all know this is only how you get your foot in the door. Eventually it will rise past $0.20 per installation and the monetary and installation requirements to begin being charged will lower as well. This form of greed does not stop.

I've cancelled my Unity subscription which is all I can do. I can't code, moving engines is out of the question for me. I use tools on the Asset Store by More Mountains so I'm screwed unless those tools are made available elsewhere which is obviously a pipe dream. I won't release games knowing that I can wake up one morning with massive bills from Unity, with fees that you calculate with magic fairy dust as far as I'm concerned. People can reinstall my games and I would owe you money. People can steal my games and I would owe you money. Absolutely not. I quit.

Unlike the people at the Unity offices I actually play video games. I've reinstalled my Steam games thousands of times on different hardware, to move it to another drive, to play it on my laptop, on my Steam Deck, and for countless other reasons. I know exactly how often one gamer can reinstall a game that they love. The level of shortsightedness and empty-headedness that goes into the planning, announcement and implementation of a policy like this simply boggles the mind.

My suggestion to you is that you walk this back immediately, and completely. Altering this does not help. Changing it from all installations to only the first installation does not help. Introducing exemptions for fringe cases does not help. Lowering the amount of money per installation does not help.

Abolishing it does.

 

Yes. I've been using Unity since version 3 and I loved that I was able to get into game development and learn the process, and not have any operating costs until I sell a game. I was also planning on selling stuff on the asset store, but I'll wait until this mess cools down.

 

Can one user generate enough fees to cost you more than the sale of the game?
Let's say that you release a $1 game on steam, after steams cut your cut is .70 cents.

after the 200k revenue is made a new purchase of the game you get .70 cents - .20 cents(28%) for their first install, then possibly multiple installs on laptop or kids computers, etc all on the same steam account that already only allows you to be online on once pc at a time?

with unreal at a 5% one time fee how is your fees justifiable?

 

I don't know if you got swamped and couldn't see, but what happens if I do not consent to these new terms,a nd I wish to simply stay on an older distribution and receive ZERO new updates and remain on the originally agreed upon contract between our studio and Unity.

In my nation and our nation of business, changing a contract like this is actually illegal. FULL ASS illegal. So my studio opt out of these bullshit changes? Thanks.

 

This is the most egregious part. Users on steam already spam down votes to protest one thing or another and now they can more directly cost developers money by repeatedly reinstalling the game.

Just make it one charge per purchase instead. Simple.

 

thank you... i think suits needs to think of it, because that is really unfair. Also the "trust me bro" on your own methods to track installs that we don't have access and info on how that system works, is pretty unfair.

 

Thank you, really appreciate it.

I'll stay hopeful. I can't imagine that Unity would be comfortable charging developers 20+% revenue share.

 

what I meant is be nice to Antonia, she is giving out info and that is all she can do.
Just a reminder to not insult ppl

 

Per install fees make no sense. If there is a revenue limit, then the fees should somehow be limited to a percentage of the revenue ABOVE limit, otherwise it is possible for the fees to gouge the revenue to the point where it no longer meets the threshold. As many people have already said, these installs are ALWAYS a fee, but they are NOT always revenue.

I don't realistically expect my games to cross these thresholds, but this is shady af, full of potential exploits and black box opaque wording. I am not willing to enter into a contract that obligates me to pay fees if you're not going to explain PRECISELY how the install counts that define those fees are determined SO THAT I CAN CONTEST THEM, you don't get to hide behind proprietary privilege and expect me to just go along with it.

The removal of Unity plus is also annoying. I pay to remove the splash screen, and to get access to render textures, and that is all. When I start a new Unity project, it gets a thorough "take the default cube behind the shed" treatment, so I don't want any of your extra nonsense, and I DON'T want your 'success team' to hound me for consultations either. I was happy just being left to work in peace!

Finally, the suggestion that this should apply retroactively to projects released under any previous contracts is unconscionable. If you're going to change the terms of contracts already signed, then parties to those contracts need the opportunity to tear them up.

You have a great many of us who are neck-deep in projects with Unity already bent over a barrel on this, but at this point many of us will only be staying in the marriage for the kids. Once they leave the nest, we're gone. Possibly forced to pay child support.

 

Theoretically yes, the Phasmaphobia dev is talking about how much this would cost and.. if you are a free to play developer who makes about 200k ish if you ended up getting like 28mil downloads/installs which isn't outside the realm of possibility, you could be in the red with Unity. You would lose money on releasing a game, 28mil downloads would cost you what, $600k on this, if you make just $200k you now owe Unity $400,000.

 

No, I do not believe in them now

 

It's me or it's another case of unity don't make games, therefore don't understand the minutia of the business?
Same old, same old.

 

When will Unity just announce the revenue share they want to add together with paying a monthly fee and stop with this nonsense. They want a bigger piece of the pie for no improvements on the engine anyway, there's no need to think solutions on the fly to the broken fee per install pricing scheme, unless the plan was to all abandon Unity as soon as we are done with whatever game we have at hand right now.

 

Very important. I hope this get clarified properly!!!!

Does the pricing tier install threshold resets each month?
For example, pro users, assuming threshold has been reached

Jan - 500,000 downloads
Feb - 500,000 downloads
March 500,000 downloads,

For March, is it
(0.15 * 100,000) + (0.075 * 400,000)
or
(0.02 * 500,000)

 

It's spam from an account just created with 1 post. Ignore it.

 

In the EU that sort of sneaky contract-changing has a hard-time flying as well. Most countries will have consumer laws against it. I also believe that there is also some EU legislation about it too.

In general terms I think that they can't force you to accept a change to your existing contract, without providing you with a viable alternative and even so, in some cases you are free to keep your existing terms. I actually know a case of someone who still owns a DLS connection, must like one of the two in the country, but the carrier cannot force them to change although they don't offer it commercially anymore.

 

A little bit offtopic, but oh gosh, 42 pages already? I think this is already a much faster pace than the time when Unity was introducing the initial Plus and bumping Pro.

I'm proud of you folks

 

Yep, at the moment the only calculation I'm making is whether I'm too far along in my current project to ditch Unity immediately or not. I'll probably have to waste a few days getting familiar enough with Godot to make the decision.

But I can say with 100% certainty that after this project, I am gone. Fvk Unity and fvk predatory business practices.

 

I crunched some numbers and actually think this is going to be a good thing for the majority of indie developers.

Let's assume you sold your game on steam for $20 and where lucky enough to get 2 million downloads (equating to $40,000,000 revenue).

You would pay unity $46,500 + $2000/yr license.
You would pay Unreal $500,000.

Unreal is over 1000% more expensive.

Any game that makes more than $0.93 per download is CHEAPER to use Unity than Unreal. In other words, if your game is a runaway success, you're better off using Unity, and if it isn't, you're not going to pay anything anyway.

Unity gets more funds from big developers to make tools and features that indie devs get to use for free.

The only thing I'm curious about, is this pretty much makes hyper casual game unviable with unity (they make $0.01 - $0.2 profit per download). Hyper Casuals are also the largest share of Unity Runtime Downloads. The only genre of games that this pricing models kills of is also their largest market share? Doesn't make sense.

 

Learn to code. Whatever editor or language you think is right, godot?
I (almost) guarantee you after 1-2 weeks that writing code is more fun for you than using paid assets.

 

So if I'm reading this right, I have to pay $2k a year to remove the Unity logo splash screen from my free to play game that makes a few bucks a year.

Do I have that right?

 

And dont ever try to pull anything like this again…

 

i started creating a game based on the previous TOS, sadly i'm just an indie, but if you can, go to your lawyers

 

Yeah that's what I understand too, and in SOME states in the USA too there are laws against contract changes like this. I have ZERO idea how Unity believes this can fly? And you CANNOT block people from doing class action etc in reality if you really do screw around.

 

@Tautvydas-Zilys Honestly as a human being I'm so sad for you to have to face all this. Please do yourself any good and find a better company to work for soon. No employee should have to handle that mess while your white-collar boss counts his multi-million-dollar salary...

 

The probability for the lucky indie dev to be on the pro license is really low ATM, for this first explosive month it will get charged full price 2'000'000 * .20 = 400'000$

And I don't count multiple downloads per user

 

We are indies too, mid-sized and we make the threshold... the shame is we are barely riding what is needed for getting by, but yeah it might be worth it for us to just pool money together and try to drive it home and state to Unity we WILL NOT be abiding by the new licensing crap and we WILL continue to operate on our originally agreed contract.

 

Hmm, have Unity started generating roadmap ideas using ChatGPT?

 

But, it also means you'd have to trust unity's install numbers, and you can't have the game go on sale.

 

While financials are calculated yearly, they do say that installs are accrued as life time where hitting the threshold is concerned.

 

I only see one path: Revert and start hunting for a new CEO.

 

It seems like this new model punishes those who have success selling games with tight margins. If the average profit per download is 40 cents when calculating IAP or something, then Unity is taking half the profits off the top? Meanwhile somebody who sells less copies but at a higher price keeps a much higher percent? Am I missing something?

 

Per install (apparently now only on different devices), not per user or download. And it's not going to be a good thing, because it will always be more expensive than what was before. Infinitely more expensive when accounting for pirated copies and bad actors inflating the install count.

And it still kills some monetization schemes that were viable before like spending on ads to make a small net revenue at the end, now that would mean going over both the thresholds and owing Unity more money than you made after expenses.

Unity is ∞ more expensive than Unreal and all other engines right now.

 

> Hmm, have Unity started generating roadmap ideas using ChatGPT?

Nah, they are using ChatMBA. No engineer thought this was a good idea.

 

This is going to be a nightmare for unity for 2 reasons.

- Hackers are definitely going to abuse this, people are going to receive bills for $100,000 for there games that only have 15 legitimate players.
- Cracked version of Unity Runtime are going to become popular.

 

It should be possible to catch it in the process of happening.

 

Or, Unity can simply tie their royalties to revenue removing the guess work for various monetization models.

 

On the plus side Verse looks great and now I have a reason to learn it.

 

maybe, maybe not, the fact that the cost of the charges are unpredictable compared to a % model is here

 

Class action.