Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

Well, technically, you can remove the "phone home" parts from the game while using the free version. But I'm sure their EULA will certainly cover this and legally prevent the "phone home" parts from being removed.

 

I also want money for alle the free work I've done on extensiv bug-reports with hours used to produce reproduction projects.

My rate in the future

Free: A title + what happened + what was expected.
0.02$ per character written for additional information and further correspondence via mail etc.
0.50$ per Screenshot
2.50$ per minute of screen-recordings
150$ per hour or part thereof used to produce a reproduction-project.

Edit: Of course for the first bug report in the future the same fee's have to be paid for previous bug reports

 

The thing is that this so called "phone home" is itself illegal.

I doubt that the engine will prompt every user to opt-in to send data to Unity.

 

What I think is the most telling is there have been quite some posts here from users that have been around for a very long time. And with long time I mean, likely they chased a gray Heron (what it looked like to me back in the day ) on an tropical island into the water. And if those start to consider to use something else, they will very likely have no problem with it either (back in the day there we had to learn everything the 'hard way' from scratch, without much information or tutorial - and any engine now has way more documentation).

I just pulled a copy of https://github.com/Unity-Technologies/UnityCsReference/tree/master just in case if I ever have to copy some functions (e.g. Mathf) to another engine which might share the same language.

I just cannot understand how an organization would distance itself so much from its (future) customers, especially as there are alternatives available.

 

I'm an indie dev....

I have a fairly large mobile game being released soon (tm). I also have my dream game that I've been prototyping and will move full steam ahead once the mobile game is done.

Over the past few years, I've spent thousands of hours and just as much money on unity assets.

This announcement is a major kick in the balls!

I have major concerns and given unity's track record zero confidence that they could pull this off legitimately without screwing us devs in the process. Not to mention the lack of transparency is astounding.

I've loved Unity over the years, this is the last straw of burned trust from this company.

So it is with a heavy heart, but I have decided....

I will be porting both my mobile game and dream game to Godot!

Good luck my fellow devs, I've learned a lot from you but greed has destroyed the product we love.

RIP Unity!!!

 

Yeah exactly, and this would still extract revenue from profitable freemium games without punishing ones with a low revenue to download ratio.

Can someone from Unity please answer this? Please give us a rev share agreement instead. I love this engine and a rev share option would be fair, clear and predictable.

 

Questions:
1. How do you know how much revenue a game earns? What counts as revenue toward the revenue threshold? Net (after paying developers, payment processing fees, and other costs associated with making a game)? or Gross revenue?

2. Have you cleared this with regulators? I believe some countries in Europe have laws against materially changing license terms.

3. Have you run the calculations on the cost to developers? In your example, with $2M in annual revenue and 300K of monthly installs, the monthly fee of $23.5K => an annual feel of $282K/year, which is 14.1% of a company's annual revenue.

Companies can't accommodate new expenses of that magnitude that quickly. A change like this means a significant change to many companies operating model and pricing structure for their games. A $0.99 cent phone game that the user has to re-download every time Apple does an iOS upgrade is now no longer a profit center, but a cost center. A user can easily download the game 5 times over it's lifetime by clicking "update all" in the app store.

Changes like this require at least 10 years of advanced notice so that games can be planned for the new fee model.

 

Thanks unity, for rendering six years of work utterly pointless.

Your decision to use analytics based install fees is a disgusting approach to demanding costs, borne clearly of a need to increase profits well, here is the thing...

YOU HAVE JUST FORCED A MASSIVE NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO STOP USING UNITY ALTOGETHER.

I cannot afford to put myself in a position where you guys can essentially escalate bills endlessly forever.

You have no consideration of your users. This WILL end your software, and, it will make those shareholders rather unhappy when in about 2-3 years your requirement to spend on debt collections and this mixed with the substantial drop in usage of your software will lead to the company filing for bankruptcy.

You just broke that last tenuous bit of trust that remained. I'm just glad i dont have any unity builds released yet.

 

Unity, instead of fixing bugs and polishing the added features, decided to make even more money, bravo. Unity should fire their CEO. Take the example of Unreal Engine, where people think about their engine first.

 

I see some people thinking that only the first install counts. It does not. The QA was updated today and says pretty clearly:

 

I still feels like this is a very bad pricing solution that is going to undermine the trust in Unity products and set an exploitive precedent on how to charge user for using your tools. There is a lot of other available options that would gives the same result without strong backlash and hurting specific genre of games that rely on install volume to support their studios.

That Unity has not even figured how to track installs before making an announcement that will be effective in a couple of month does nothing to reassure or make dev trust that the process will work. This also raise massive privacy concern that have basically been answered by "We wont tell you how we're going to do it just trust" that is not acceptable (not to mention that the same answer is given when it come to protect dev from fraudulent installations).

There's a need for transparency from Unity on how they are going to proceed with our data and how they are going to make sure that we will be protected. I plan to get in touch with the European Consumer Protection agency and think of moving away from Unity altogether for my next projects as I don't feel safe at all in the light of this outrageous change.

I also very much question how the talks to make distributors pay the fee is going to work (as they don't have a contract with Unity) and what will prevent the distributor to charge these fees back to the dev.

This do not feel thought through! I understand that Unity needs to be profitable but it seems that a lot of other options are available!

 

I don't think you've understood how the fee's are calculated (I don't blame you, this must be one of the worst communicated announcements I've ever seen). The lower fee's is calculated on a monthly basis, so even if you reach 2M installs it will not be $0.01 after that, next month the first 100k installs will be full priced agan. Look at the example calculation in their FAQ here: https://unity.com/pricing-updates

 

Why would they do that? By their logic, they can just change their TOS and make EVERYONE pay them $100K as a one time fee for using their Runtime at least once.

 

In any case, I have to attach this useless tracking system called Unity runtime to my app just to collect the number of user installations, and users have to be subjected to unintended data collection again.

 

so,If someone wants to sabotage their competitors, they would artificially increase the download count of their opponent's application until it exceeds the specified limit. This would cause the opponent to incur debt to Unity. However, this plan would now backfire and ultimately harm Unity, leading to more user attrition and possibly even abandonment of Unity altogether.

 

Everyone should just start making plans for how to leave Unity right away! For some it can be done immediately, and for some it will take a few years. But the goal for all should be to leave Unity in the dust. This S*** is not acceptable behaviour from a business partner.

 

The Unity Pro calculations are wrong. The charges are done based on installs per month. Without accounting for install counts per month you can only estimate by assuming an equal spread of installs per month, but the calculation needs to account for up to 100,000 installs charged at $0.15 per month, up to 400,000 installs at $0.075 per month, etc.

So for the default values you have in the doc (2,500,000 installs in a year) the estimated result for Pro should be:

2,500,000 installs - 1,000,000 threshold = 1,500,000 chargeable installs

Estimated even month install count:
100,000 installs x 12 months @ $0.15 = $180,000
25,000 installs x 12 months @ $0.075 = $22,500
Total: $202,500 Install Fees for the year

And of course this is all assuming we're in a weird launch year where we'll pretend the 1M threshold sales happened on launch day for calculation convenience.

 

From the 2019 blog post last time they went crazy:

Retroactive TOS changes

When you obtain a version of Unity, and don’t upgrade your project, we think you should be able to stick to that version of the TOS.

In practice, that is only possible if you have access to bug fixes. For this reason, we now allow users to continue to use the TOS for the same major (year-based) version number, including Long Term Stable (LTS) builds that you are using in your project.

Moving forward, we will host TOS changes on Github to give developers full transparency about what changes are happening, and when. The link is https://gitb.com/Unity-Technologies/TermsOfService.​

Source

The community should not accept any 'fee' that is not based on actual revenue.
Charging per install is insanity tbh.

 

Well, in this case there's no way in hell they will be able to track the installs accurately and all their billing will be a subject to endless lawsuits as it will be based on some illusional numbers. There's no way this is going to work when there's no "phone home" system in place.

 

Following these changes on the part of Unity, being a teacher in IT, and an occasional developer for multimedia applications or in more hardware-oriented fields, I used Unity on a personal basis until now, supporting them financially through a license Plus, for the qualities of the UI that I could develop with this tool, and on the other hand, I tried to promote the qualities of Unity to my students. I think all of this was valid before September 2023...

 

The problem is that this "agile" way of creating ToS (updating pages continuously, also for example the WebGL initialization costing money, which has now been removed) is not really a stable "business partner" as indie or large game developer. Projects that take many years need a this stability.

 

Somebody will be rich on a unity scene / prefab to Unreal tool

 

They pretty much admitted they will just make up a number based on … stuff.

 

My opinion after 24 hours

Unity must cancel this initiative immediately. The poor communication, even more ill conceived plan of an Install Tax ( fees per Install ) and potentially unworkable nature of the system, leaves it dead in the water. Leaving this change in place, dangling over the heads of developers for the next few days/weeks/months whilst Unity tries to address it ( assuming Unity does ) is simply unconscionable and will do irreparable harm to Unity and trust in Unity regardless of Unity's eventual decisions.

EDIT - I mean to say, Unity must cancel it, whilst they work out a new or updated plan with the support of the community, not that such an initiative should never happen, though install tax is a bad enough idea that it should probably never be implemented.

I've been around long enough (over 12 years paying customer) to have seen hundreds of 'I am quitting Unity' for a multitude of reasons to know how empty of a gesture that usually is, but this is different. There have been dozens if not more developers in this thread alone saying they cannot work with this system and that new projects will look to new engines. This isn't just a knee jerk response, these are people who are successfully managing a business making games telling you they cannot work with this structure of install taxes and regretfully have to look elsewhere! That should send a chill down any company!


Bring Back Plus Subscription
After all that has been written I cannot see any reason why Plus was retired. Losing a single subscription plan does not simplify anything compared to the added complexity the install tax has added. Restore Plus subscription ( ignoring all the issues with fee per install ) keep it at the same thresholds and fees as it is now if necessary ( though a mid tier rate between personal and Pro is preferred). It sucks as a paid offering with bad fees, but would probably still be acceptable ( even with a inflationary rise ) for many as a way to remove the splashscreen, especially if given the option ahead of time ( officially by Unity ) to upgrade to Pro if approaching the thresholds.

The Install Tax ( that's what I'll call it from now on as that is what it is )
In isolation the actual fees might sound quite good on paper, the problem is they are not in isolation and it is painfully apparent no one at Unity had considered even a few of the basic possibilities of business models that games operate on. Then they release this plan to a community of game developers, whose one of life's main tasks is to examine as many possibilities as possible, to explore puzzle and problem spaces to the fullest - it was doomed to fail!

The problems ( in no particular order )

• Tax (fees to Unity) are unpredictable.
• Tax (fees to Unity) can be substantial unless a developer on Personal/Plus upgrades ahead of time to Pro/Enterprise!
• Tax (fees to Unity) are front loaded - hits indie, low priced games and those that just exceed threshold more.
• Tax (fees to Unity) are monthly, yet revenue to developer may not be paid monthly or regularly or even received prior to Unity's invoice!
• Tax (fees to Unity) are claimed (invoiced) to existing subscription account, and I can only assume taken from the payment system on record which is a massive problem, for example trying to take $10k from a credit card!
• Double dipping - at least in appearance, paying for the editor and installs! It can be framed as pay upfront cost to reduce install tax, and maybe presented better, but still comes across as double dipping, potentially hurting smaller devs the most!
• Suddenly paying additional costs to Unity where previously there were none - maybe for the good of Unity we will have accept this, but it needed better communication and a different business approach.
• Unilaterally deciding to tax ( charge fees ) on existing projects retroactively! This is truly insane, retroactively telling us to start paying money to Unity is a terrible look, it should never have been part of the plan and has eroded trust with Unity to possibly unrecoverable levels!
• Defining and tracking an Install
  • Its a magical blackbox that can only work in Unity's favour, combined with the distrust from having to pay fees for existing projects is again just one of the worst ideas ever.
  • Unity have even said through official channels that 'algorithm for counting installs will change' how does that convey trust?
  • No discussion as to the level of detail such metrics will have, if at all - it might just be as opaque as we think you had x installs this month!
• Removal of Plus - for 'reasons'.
• Convoluted - just look at how easily the basics of the plan have been misunderstood, and then how much management developers will have to do per month for this system, and finally god knows how complex and long the license and T&C will be for this based on just the number of edge cases this thread has shown. You could literally be bankrupted if you cross thresholds with a big enough spike and low enough revenues, not to mention cashflow issues!
• Miscommunication - The blog, FAQ, thread and social media from Unity have already contradicted themselves multiple times. The blog itself presents ambiguity that even now makes it impossible for anyone to claim they know exactly how the tax works in all circumstances and with all possibilities - it is I believe unworkable in its present state. Perhaps the official, legal license/T&C would explain it, but we don't even have that!
• Edit: Personal Subscription required internet connection every 3 days!

Overall with an understanding, or rather the general consensus, based on this thread and the blog and FAQ, and taken in isolation the actual rates and tiers are not grossly out of touch. They are however;

• Front loaded - games that spike over threshold will pay a higher perceived cost as the rate for the initial installs is so much higher.
• Unbalanced for cheaper subscriptions - compare enterprise vs free initial costs. If your game only just exceeds the thresholds you will take a massive hit in terms of the ratio you pay out from revenue.
• Greater impact on lower budget/price games - the pure ratio of money owed to Unity vs your revenue is worse for cheaper games that make up the majority of mobile titles and indie games.
• Installs are not sales and have no relationship to each other - Its a fixed tax per install, but has no relation to any revenue per install. It completely ignores low cost, high number businesses, for example ad driven games, F2P etc.

I think that is a good summary of my opinion and position on the changes. I'm sure I've missed a few things, but its a starting point.

 

They initially said multiple installs would count, then they backtracked that.

 

Didn't they already did that? There is user statistics and analytics something something that was popped up on the new project

Also I just remember Unity once have make some weird guideline, one was about discourage using 3rd party analytics, anyone remember?

edit: Ah, right since 2020. They make this guideline to not make any package to enable analytics. Which was outrageous ever since. They make us cannot include google analytics as package and make google cannot create their own package registry, because it contains google analytics

https://unity.com/legal/terms-of-service/software/package-guidelines

 

Just another +1 here.
8 years of Unity experience, 5 years of making a collection of libraries and tools for Unity for my games (which I fully intended to release later on open source), and thousands of dollars used on the Asset Store just for this to happen. *sigh*

It's too late now for my main game, but I am fully porting my side game (mobile) to another engine, and after my main game is done I am porting my libraries and tools to UE for future games. I just find it hard to trust Unity anymore. It's sad.

 

Just logged in for the last time ever to say goodbye. I’ll be pulling my game from Steam and moving to another engine. Never touching Unity again.

 

This is absolute disgrace, we were paying for Plus plan for years now, and were happy with it. Killing it now is a worst thing to do, and I know that we could use Free version instead but there is Unity Logo that we don't want to have on a mobile title.
Pricing is a scumbag move, really? now after all those talks about Democratising gaming and stuff, what stops you from increasing those prices at will? and putting your hands into our pockets... no comment
I have to reconsider using Unity in the future...Is this even legal to do it retroactive, well I guess you checked with you layers already...

 

That's what they initially said. They have since clarified that they only intend to charge once per purchase.

 

It's either "phone home" or installs count from some publishing platforms. There's no other way. No magic "telepathy". They will need to prove the numbers somehow or they will be stuck in courts for years with people not willing to pay for numbers taken from the ass.

 

I am obviously skeptical that incredulous works for Unity, but these statements still need pushback.

Nobody cares about Sentis or whatever. They care that Plus has been removed and Personal is being locked into a 3-day phone home scheme. If anything has been buried here, it is because Unity chose to bury it.

No, no, no. Charging for installations is not acceptable regardless of how many exceptions or promises you make around it. This is not just a math problem, it is a core fatal flaw of the policy. How exactly do you expect me to explain this to users? "Unity knows when you install the game, somehow, I'm not sure how since they won't tell me either, but I'm sure it's fine, so don't worry about it." Come on. Everyone posting here is a software developer.

Besides the obvious privacy questions, these assurances do not mean anything. Nobody trusts that Unity can or even intends to address these problems, because the company has absolutely no good will to spare, and this very announcement just burned every bit that was left. The very fact that this policy is already being implemented when you admit that Unity doesn't even know how to do it renders any promises irrelevant.

If you do actually work for Unity, you are committing a C-suite level blunder: you are assuming that the reason everyone hates this announcement is that it just wasn't worded correctly.

 

..

I think you were originally answering to someone else, not to me. This thread is hard to follow.

 

Worst decision ever...

 

At this point they just try to mitigate the S***storm

 

Where? Can you please provide a link to an official (a guy with a 1 post and no "unity" badge is not a source of information, sorry if you are legit, dear employee).

 

Raising the price of "remove Made With Unity splash screen" by 500% by removing Unity Plus (399 USD a year). The alternative is now pro which costs 2000 USD a year. Everyone using Unity should just assume that this trend will continue and make their engine decisions accordingly. Maybe 2 years from now it will go from 2k to who knows what.

 

From the FAQ:

Q: Does this affect WebGL and streamed games?
A: Games on all platforms are eligible for the fee but will only incur costs if both the install and revenue thresholds are crossed. Installs - which involves initialization of the runtime on a client device - are counted on all platforms the same way (WebGL and streaming included).

This is unclear to me. You say this works the same on all platforms, and thats great and all, but webGL is extremely different in terms of exactly this. What I would like clarified is this:

If a user loads my webGL game, plays, then closes down the browser, and comes back some time later, am I going to pay for the next time the user comes back as well? Will this count as one or as two installs? Clearly, i the user revisits the game from a different browser, I guess it IS a "new install" ?

If I understand this wrong, please clarify.

 

https://www.axios.com/2023/09/13/unity-runtime-fee-policy-marc-whitten

 

It is still "per install" in the pricing table for a reason It's still a black box in terms of how they will detect whether a game is reinstalled or not.

 

https://forum.unity.com/threads/uni...ackaging-updates.1482750/page-62#post-9300791

Loner_Cat's post is right. This is the thing - there's no point plugging your numbers in to a calculator/spreadsheet and trying to work anything out... the fact they've decided they can do this for games which are already out is a huge problem - you've already paid your license fee! You already released it under that agreement - but not any more, apparently!!

The numbers are almost completely irrelevant knowing that. They could do this again. You could work it all out nicely in your spreadsheet and be perfectly happy with the new January 2024 pricing. Then in 2025 they decide, actually, we're going to charge for something else... or change these prices... or change the thresholds... oh, and we're also charging for this now. - and this. and this other thing. on all your already released games. etc...

 

I'm looking at godot and other open source engines right now. And they look awesome. I'm done with proprietary engines and that includes unreal. While I trust unreal way more than unity we can't be absolutely sure that maybe five years from now the CEO of unity will end up as unreal CEO. Yeah, chances are slim but can you guarantee it will not happen? Nope.


So open source it is!

 

As the QA currently stands EVERY reinstall AND update counts. This is pure insanity.

 

For some studios this fee will take actually more than their revenue...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Unity3D/comments/16hgmqm/unity_wants_108_of_our_gross_revenue/

 

Yes, this is maybe my favourite part. Oh yes, please protect your no doubt next level amazing data model rather than be transparent with the developers you're intending on charging obscene amounts of money all of a sudden.

I'm in a position where I will be charged come 2024. Right now with the state of this I won't be paying. I don't trust these people and I don't trust their hidden proprietary data model. They are not extraordinary geniuses and they are dealing with an industry of people with the same skillsets as they have and 15 years of evidence of their degree of competence and trustworthiness.

They can not charge per install regardless of how sanitised they believe their solution is. I've got many issues with this, but one big one is that I will not pay any fraction of a cent for any pirated copies of my game of which there have been at least hundreds of thousands and most likely multiple millions so far.

 

What a load of garbage, did Unity start hiring monkeys to make these decisions to cut costs? Are their shareholders just a bunch of great apes? Who even designs such a cash-grabbing, disrespectful way to making money.

Might as well break some developer's legs and make him pay a protection fee from there on out.

And not to forget; your ability to sense game reinstalls & piracy is completely idiotic and will be abused so bad it's gonna cost everyone, but yourself.. A lot of money. But y'all want some data to chew on right? I'll help out!
smh time to learn Unreal Engine.

 

@ Unity: Please reconsider this decision. Issuing apology and explanation to the community would be a good first step to mend the wound you caused by this announcement.

 

You forgot to multiply by Time.deltaTime

 

Okay the frustration must now times out!

WHAT SHOULD THAT BE?
For starters, you change the licenses 2021, and thus verleztzt ALL Indis who can not afford a plus, pro or higher, because it is perhaps their first game THERE, the console release now compulsorily require a subscription! That in return for your actual license statement that 200 k would be the cap.

After that, you annoy one with:
URP, HDRP, and dances on 2 weddings.
You kick out 30% of the staff, and talk your way out.
In reality, the thing is like this:

Unreal, was a few years ago significantly worse than Unity! It had the worse licensing model, it had the more expensive costs, and it had the smaller community.

Today, however, we have 3 render pipelines. 2 of which ( URP and HDRP ) are toys for fools. That's just good for wasting your time in a technically outdated engine to learn "new" stuff again, which doesn't bring better results than before.

with 2022 you "proudly" release water. Great. Unreal has had that loosely in the bag since the 4th, and worst of all. It looks stock to this day better than yours, and URP what you supposedly also so maintains, a cheap RP the leediglich with worse settings performance buys (wiee shorter visibilities etc.) does not even get water.


You celebrate this as the big update.
Besides, the assetstore explodes of more and more garbage! When I count how much garbage we have received in the last few months, and this is called : "Unity quality standard".

to top it off, you even interfere in the return situation between Asset Seller and Dev, that Asset Selleres are now not even allowed to e.g. Unity 2019 reinschrebien, no, everything must compulsively on newer versions. I DO NOT! I STAY with 2019 (so far) in History! would probably be better formulated.


After the stroke of genius to bring the new input system, which slows down every dev process by 50-80%, is more complicated, and technically worse in performance, which also becomes a constraint in HDRP, and again put trainees who have to learn the same engine again from scratch, although no progress has really been made, because the old one is wonderful, until today, and much better -

brings you afterwards the increases in license fees of Pro and Plus. But that's still not enough, no, you go on.


Even hints that standard free stuff like characters are offered here in the assetstore FOR BUY, from free community projects like MakeHuman, are ignored. That's the great quality here, yes?

After that, you are now coming around the corner to punish EVERYONE WHO EVER DEVELOPED A GAME WITH UNITY

by WANTING MONEY for - INSTALLATIONS ?

Do you know what this looks like FOR ME ?
Like a company, which is at the end. and from the previous mass, wants to collect money for eternity. That's what it looks like!

Because everyone who once had a success, must now pay into eternity.
Since new projects appear more and more wenniger with Unity, AND THAT IS HIGHLY UNDERSTANDABLE AFTER THE DEVELOPMENT!!!! AND A JUST PUNISHMENT YOU GET WITH IT!

The smart model is to take MONEY away from all the devs and portals that were so hopeful to build their project with Unity.
A customer base of millions of customers in games purchased from the past, which when reinstalled, now cost every dev money.

I mean: we have here in Germany, one of the worst governments in the world. But to be honest: You guys top that.
This is the real hammer! Unbelievable!

I'm very happy about one thing: I haven't released a game yet.
yet, I can switch to Unreal.
Thank you for giving me 2 - 3 more years of patience, which I need until I master Unreal like Unity.

I actually wanted to finish my project and then switch to Unreal.
Now I feel compelled to move both of them into Unreal Engine. So let's start from the beginning.

If I just think about it: you buy Veggi Studio Pro here, unreal has it for free.

Here you buy crest, unity brings "NOW" where everyone has spent money, n water for HDRP.

Here you need Sector Complete, Gena, Gaia or something else to have world streaming at all, Unreal has it for free.

Why do you need so much money? You're already taking in enough!

While Unreal is developing Nanite and Lumen, you're coming up with a ridiculous physics expansion, and Unreal has even made it better out of the box.


Instead of developing something sensible, your Unity is Bussy now brings windows that paralyze half the editor, 2021 core bugs that kill entire projects, impossible updates within the engines because the Unity core cannot update itself, and much more. The main thing is that we have click programming languages, Schader graphs, and 3 renders, not one of which even comes close to Unreal, regardless of whether it's the light, the sharpness, or the technical finesse. and now, do you want to really rip off everyone who has ever had even the slightest bit of success with Unity? This is the policy that you are committed to? As a descending engine, technically measured against the constantly new and further developed Unreal Engine, which offers more comfort, more listening for the community, licenses for teams, not for "SEATS", which in itself is an impudence only offers disadvantages, but no longer offers any joy - keep a community?


So this is the answer to the community's trust and belief in a FAIR OPEN ENGINE FOR EVERYONE and an ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE MODEL? All you want from everything is MONEY MONEY MONEY! But your further developments are a joke! Instead, do you want the really big Reibach? I hope that more devs will comment on this behavior here! It's no surprise that Unreal is getting more and more market share. I won't start with HDRP or URP or Input System either! The time I need to realize this again is better off building an ENGINE THAT IS DEVELOPED WITH THE COMMUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY! namely THIS! what you! - US - who MADE YOU GREAT - you promised! Instead, we are just your dairy cows! The ever-increasing greed is slowly getting enough!

 

Kicking out John Riccitiello would be an awesome second step too