Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

No the information is correct.

 

I made a web-based fee calculator. PRs welcome: https://skidvis.github.io/unity-fee-calculator/

 

That is the thing, none.

 

That is just straight up disgusting...wow. So they knew what they were doing?
They were waiting for us to get fat, so that they can have a turkey shoot.
Wow...this feels amazing.

 

Fingers crossed that stocks keep falling because us complaining or saying we'll switch engines is possibly a "non issue" for the executives that took this decision but shareholders complaining is a different story.

It would also be good to have some declaration from a big third-party (consoles or Steam, for example), I bet they weren't informed of this ahead of time and the idea that the third-party is the one that needs to pay should be an issue (even if they just decide to take it from a game's revenue directly like Steam does with taxes).

In my case, the fee doesn't affect me directly but I fear this will be a deathblow to Unity's ecosystem and that definitely affects me. If you can't pitch to a publisher a game made in Unity or there's less customers in the Asset Store or can't find freelance work because all middle sized studios are avoiding it then it's also a problem for the little guy.

 

Cause that means they have no argument left.

 

So I keep thinking about this... What about "name your own price" model?
Imagine in a year you get 200k installs and earn $200k. Then in the following months for whatever reason you suddenly have a couple million people download your game without paying... But you have to pay the fee for their installs anyway, right? So now you owe Unity more money than your game ever made in revenue. Not even profits - revenue. You had to pay taxes, the store's share, etc. from that, so in reality it doesn't even have to be a million installs to put you in the red.
Am I understanding this right?

 

You understand it correctly. Installs are not directly corelated with revenue. And there's no cap to installs they can't even properly track, just guestimate. EDIT: But first you'd get Pro license to raise the cap.

 

Unfortunately, Unity Technologies does not operate as a democracy.

 

If a demo can progress to the full game it is counted as an install, this is to cover a loophole where a demo download can be "unlocked". I don't think they ever really back tracked on demos they just didn't clarify until stating this.

I don't think you need to maintain separate projects but it might simplify tracking on the back end.

 

You do realize who is running the company right?

 

The leadership of UT apparently has the same people as you, so now the community is facing a serious crisis.

 

Guys stop trying to salvage this sinking ship.
We didn't sink it, and those who sunk it can't fix it.
We can't fix it, as most paying users will leave, and then they will bump up pricing even further.
Just conclude your current project and move on.

 

I know it, coming from Blitz3D over BlitzMax and later Monkey but Mark Sibly a genius has given up T_T

 

Who said games brought down BEFORE this takes place are safe? Pirates can simply enable the system on a previously released game they have already hacked. NOONE is safe from this. Literally. This is the biggest F*** up in the history of tech.

How does Unity even track your revenue? If they send false sales or installs back using a simple packet sniffer (no need for an actual reinstall) it's the end of all times for everyone.

The only solution to this is to get Unity to court. It's the ONLY hope for any dev who has ever worked in Unity and released a game.

 

Unless these factor in time they're basically useless.

 

What a joke.... GL Unity. Looks like you DONE. Sad, very sad.

 

Speaking of which I would start downloading all of the assets that you care about from the store.

 

This is my concern. I may or may not ever release a game, I find it fun just to reproduce game features i see in other games like the Tarkov inventory system for example, but if Unity becomes a shell of its former self, the environment isn't good to stay.

Godot looks promising, I just got the .NET version working with C# support, but I don't know its features and limitations yet, the games made with it are mostly 2D rpgs and the few 3D games look like something from 2005 Unity.

As for Unreal, the last time I messed with it I couldn't just use scripts, like C++ is fine, but it forced me to use a node system instead of scripts and there were little to no tutorials on the use of C++ scripts for it. maybe I'll take another look.

Best case scenario: Unity is somehow saved and this is turned around with new management.

Apart form that we flock to one other IDE together, because the true value is in the community, so I'm basically waiting to hear the plan. Perhaps there should be a Unity Exiles Emergency Planning Discord, I would look to somebody senior in the community set it up. And again, just as a contingency, I would still like to see Unity survive.

 

Unity have no way of telling if the demo can progress to the full game. It's not technically possible unless they force us to adapt some kind of a new API that would differentiate.

 

I do wonder, if all the money spent on paying this ignorant leadership + buying other companies went into a game. Like Fortnite for Unreal. We might have had a different outcome. Or am I being too kind?

 

So if that's not enough to reverse the FULL announcement with immediate effect....

 

Well... SHEEEEEEEEEIT. It was an impressive showcase nonetheless. I still play Crysis til this day.

If Unity wants to redeem themselves, revert these silly choices, make an actual game demo WITH the built-in tools (no mods), no corporate marketing bullcrap, no extra S*** in it. And have some damn confidence in the product.

 

I did the math, on Pro License you would owe Unity $300k per month based on those download numbers and yearly revenue. On Enterprise License you would owe Unity $166.5k per month using the same metrics. Therefore you would be losing anywhere from $200k to $66.5k per month if you add in the 100k revenue you make per month.

This change literally destroys any mobile game like this using Unity. Worst of all, you'd be expected to pay these fees regardless if you update your game, use the newest runtimes, or just leave it on the marketplace as-is.

 

To further add to this, the older terms are still listed on Unity's site (you may want to save a copy for your records):
Terms of Service Software Legacy (unity.com)

And that clause was not removed until October 2022. Therefore, anyone using Unity 2022 or earlier could be operating under that license and could choose to continue to do so instead of accepting the new license Unity has put forth. That means you can continue to use your Unity version, say 2022 LTS without paying any install fees.

 

* Why is it by install and not revenue percentage. You can try all you want to disingenuously "solve" all the problems and edge cases. But why invent problems to try to find some dumb half-measure solutions for them.

* Why is any form of sharing an option in the first place. You are already getting a yearly subscription fee, per year per seat. What gives you the right to share/steal any of our success.

* Who in their right mind would trust you again, when you can change up the pricing at any point. Even after someone makes their game and are no longer using your software.

* Side note: With this terrible change, Unity Personal users would pay way more than Pro users if they make even a third of what a Pro user makes. Why are they still getting the splash screen and less options. Do the hobbyist developers which already don't make any money (and most likely are the ones mostly buying assets from your store) bother you that much.

 

Nah man, everything is all good with Unity. You can trust them to make the fair deal for everyone based on...

 

That's actually a very good advice. Will do it now now. Thanks! Much appreciated.

 

I, too, want to express my concern about where Unity is going as a company

 

Aww yeah that's the one! I work as a freelancer for a company which still uses it for quite some very successful titles (making 3-digit million revenue per year).

 

If they sentence you to death, then swap it for a lifetime in prison you still didn't gain anything. Don't bite when they backtrack.

 

Amazon threw billions at gamedev and failed. Unity would most likely fail as well. Still, imagine all those billions going into gamedev R&D. We could've really gotten some next gen tools instead of living a decade in the past.

 

This tread literally moves faster than I can read it. Every time I get to the bottom, there's a new page

 

Well, it's time to switch unreal i guess

 

That's if you expect the sudden influx of downloaders/installs. I don't suppose the Pro license's extended thresholds apply retroactively, do they?

 

Guys, the time has come to make our voices heard. I have created this petition (https://chng.it/rwKcWpcC5h), share it and sign it. Creating magical moments for people is what we do best and we all want to continue to create freely. Let's raise our voices

 

Unity stoppp!!!

 

Build version and platform would be one way to determine this.

I don't think it would be that big a deal to work out.

 

Just throwing in my +1 for calling this really silly.
Yes, it's likely that the terms will change in the near future, and this is the issue. It's really unprofessional of them to rodeo this PR gag that just plays with their developers' trust in them acting reasonably and reliably.
They tried this in the past with their server-based app TOS change that got redacted too.
But this time it's enough playing around with sneaky anti-user/developer changes, we'll look into migrating to a more trustworthy software foundation.

 

TL DR: sorry, it's a bit long, but, I am just trying to clarify.

Dear Mr. Geig, Unity Technologies, am writing here hoping that it gets read (and not in the void)

please confirm/clarify (if you can, I understand this is an internal in-progress conversation/company revision of the terms/of service/TOS) some of the (still) confusion.

If that is true, that - only the first install would count, how does your mechanism works to know that, other users said there is no way to determine so; you wrote that, ''Unity knows, because the customer was licensed;''

licensed game/product/app = 1 install ?.. if they reinstall/uninstall/reinstall/uninstall ...rinse,repeat....is is still 1 install, (it has too, or is not very fair recharging, to you fair...to dev not really) because they were 1-time licensed; 1 license = 1 install (the first time is installed, the license is 'taken' and counted as
'1 install'; if they uninstall/reinstall....it does not count, because Only the 1ST install counts - that the 1st license/was licensed...
Is this correct or am misunderstanding?

How do you know/determine that it was a 1st install, I mean could you err and end up counting '1st installS' with an s...and 'think' that they are 1st installs...but Actually, they are RE-installs/uninstalls repeatedly, from same person etc...

I mean, if that is 'a trade-off/compromise you have to take'...ok..but, please say it; so we know that if we are overcharged...we 'accepted that possibility of happening' for continuing usage of engine. I know there could be risks...
just like using Assets that might be illegit/stolen and the dev does not know....uses them completely unknowing, has accepted the 'legal copyright infringment risk' that comes with using assets, that might not be legit on asset store; as you said in your Asset store EULA.

Because, this ''Yes. The creator will need to pay for all future installs.'' That's ok, but it'S not ok to be 'double-charged', 'triple-charged', 'quadruple-charged', 'five-times charged'.. etc etc etc...one time - per one install, is fair(er), not twice, thrice...etc.. again, to you it would be fair..because you decide, but devs can decide it's not fair to be multiple-times charged for over 1 install - per 1 person/computer. Because, it's as if that person bought the game 50 times...but only installed/re-installed the game 50 times...and you would charge us/the devs...50 times...for that 1 person on 1 computer...that is not fair from dev side.

But/As you say/said, the first license/when first licensed 'licensed first time' 'for 1 game/app', should determine the 'first install' and after that, the developer should not be charged Again if the user uninstalls the game/app and reinstalls it; Because in the market.. that is called 'double-charging' 'triple...etc'.,, or 'double-dipping' 'tripple-dipping' etc...

I understand that you say .. ''the reason [why] is that Unity doesn't receive end-player information, just aggregate data.''.

Thus, there might be some 'unaccurate' counting...overcounting/undercounting.

How do you break it down (this aggregated data) to count (and account) the number of installs, but correctly/accurately; because, it does not seem accurate (or could be abused, though you say you prevent fraud via your system) and as such, the numbers could inflated/deflated...

When you said: 'Unique hardware installs'....you mean, unique hardware/computer, so the game/app is only - on - that specific computer...this would be how you determine that it was installed on it (precise hardware/computer number) as '1 install'...and then if they uninstall/re-install again repeteadly...Knowing it is this computer, you would only Count 1 Single Install...no matter how many times they uninstall/reinstall game...

I hope I am somewhat getting it...I mean, it seems quite simple/straight forward...no need to (self) overcomplicate (my) understanding of it, but there seems (still) some confusion.

I empathise and sympathise with people for whom it would be greatly unadvantageous and can imagine why they would (feel) that this is a wrong move (understandably; and, I also empathise, with you Unity/the company, are trying to survive 'as business', financially and needs to recoup (all for-profit businesses must make a profit to continue in existence because dollar/capital runs things and workers are paid/salaried, not working free. I understand, this hits smaller companies that now have this 'tacked-on' new charge they did not ask; but, of course, you are the maker of the engine and therefore have the last word; you, Unity, are the one trying to make money...like any other company...); hence, these steps);

Thanks for reading, and if you can, clarifying.

 

On the bright side, looks like all my realtime lighting concerns have been solved overnight! And all it cost was some dumbass corporate decisions and an entire port of the project! Thanks Unity!

 

If you're not planning on jumping on Unity Pro from day one you might as well not use Unity. If you thought the backlash from seeing a splash screen was bad before it's likely going to be way worse with this nonsense.

 

It could apply retroactively if they don't track license from installed builds. But we just don't know. It's a complete S***show.

 

I meant making a game as Unity. Not R&D. Well, I guess it is sort of R&D.

 

Not exactly because they state:
Updated Terms adversely impact your rights, you may elect to continue to use any current-year versions of the Unity Software according to the terms that applied just prior to the Updated Terms

If you are operating under the terms of the linked license, since the next license change removes this clause (and therefore impacts your rights), you may opt to stay on the existing license instead of accepting the license that removed the modification clause. That license also does not contain the new install fees being added to the lates license.

 

I'm right now downloading the Unreal Engine. I want to taste it while I wait for Unity to say something, if they say something, before next tuesday. Not just an apology, but a real solution to this matter. I don't expect a big change, so this download can be the beginning of a great friendship.

 

Like building every important piece of tech require often to change stuff in the engine before being release safely to public? I do understand that

 

We could always wait for the stick prices to bottom out, buy in and then watch as Unity figures a way to boot the current execs who decided this was such a great idea to watch the stock start to rise again

 

I remember the day Unity came in and asked what we could do for climate change. My team, 7 of us now, started working. My college kids work for me, they do the art and music and are amazing. I am not worried about the revenue as this is a passion game for us, but if by some chance we do well and our game is fun and wonderful. We are open-minded, we are role players, we are LGBTQ, we are allies, we love diversity. What if some dude, and yeah, I know dudes, decide they hate us, for whatever reason, a trans music guy, a person with brown skin, just being a woman who leads the team. Our game is too "woke" whatever they hate and try to take us down. Consider the fees that we might have to pay for if pirated or reinstalled many times or using bots. No doubt this will happen to someone, and that a class action suit will be following unless they can prove will not be injured. Shame on Unity and its bigwigs. Why are you making it harder for us.

 

That's the Amazon part of it. Amazon with endless amounts of cash failed at launching multiple games studios and multiple video game projects at the highest end of AAA. They hired AAA veterans and everything. The AAA studios of today are a result of decades long processes, it's not something you can spin up on a whim. Unity are not much better positioned than Amazon was.