Official Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

unity was a waste.

 

what the f are you thinking?
cost per install is such a moronic metric, you kill all the ad revenue supported titles with this.

like what if someone has 1 million downloads and just made 200k revenue? they will have to take it off the app store and it makes absolutly no sense to support the game any further. just take a 5% cut you greedy people

 

this is bad an install is not a sale, an install can not generate money, yet we will have to pay for it. it is wrong, and abusive behavior ...

 

Did you consider that a company needs one Pro license per team member working on Unity projects?

 

I think this is an excellent statement! Do you mind if I share this on Twitter/BlueSky with reference to you of course ?

 

Enough controversy, let's find solutions

 

I'll add my personal opinion. Unity just stop. This plan seems horrible. You should have simply followed the Epic model, undercut them a bit and even reduced the price of pro or just made it free. Instead you came up with this???

I don't blame the Unity devs as I'm sure many if not most of them hate this.

 

I actually have a game shipping in 20 days, I have 4 more cutscenes to make (30~40 seconds) but I opened the editor and closed it. I tried again later that day, I just couldn't focus. So I closed it. This morning I wake up, and see the shortcut for Unity Hub next to the new UE5 shortcut. I deleted the hub shortcut. I don't know why, but I just don't want to see it for now. My stomach feels like its riding a roller coaster when I think of the past 10 years of sweat and blood I put in. I've never been heart broken like this, not even over relationships with other people. I am not sure what exactly I am going through...I am just sitting at my workstation all day.

 

More like "I'm sure Unity could make something at least 1/3 the quality of Genshin with their own engine and come out ahead if they were that desirous of gacha cash"

 

Will be dumping unity and porting my game to another engine. I'm just lucky in in a spot where i can do it with some time and effort thats not too extreme

 

This is a slap to the face of game developers If these unacceptable policies don't get rolled back, the industry as a whole will boycott the company into oblivion. Was it really worth it permanently destroying Unity's reputation and risking to loose ~50% of your userbase for a quick cash grab??

 

3% for above 1.5 milion and that's it. simple. cheaper and everything is good
just an idea.

 

Every great thing about Unity and the reason we all used it for years is thanks to the Developers, and everything bad that put us in this place today is due to corporate suits.

 

If your project is close to be finished I'll say keep working on it and release it asap. Then donate a % of profit to Godot if you make any. (of course don't use Unity a for next project)

 

You should probably stop reading this thread.

You worked on this game for 10 years. Get it out now!
If you do get it to 200,000 installs and $200,000 revenue in the past 12 months, you'll be a happy person.

 

Honestly, a nice little royalty to Unity would be more acceptable.
I work with teens, teaching them Unity along with others from all over the world. As I watch the kids learn and create their own games, I am rewarded when the teen tells me, this is what I want to do. Now I have to realize that these kids who make a phone game will be so disappointed when they realize that they have to be taxed to use Unity. They know nothing about this, they are young and ready to dream. I was in Austin, I was so proud. What happened to Unity.

 

If Epic ever invests the money into a full blown Unity to Unreal converter, the exodus would be a glorious thing to watch.

 

How a company make an announcement this dumb amazes me. I was just thinking - via Steam I have over many years probably demoed a game like FTL several dozen times at least - across a couple of universities and several places of work and dozens of PCs - all via a legal steam install - every one of those would now count as a separate install - even though they were only played once via my steam library - and despite it being my only buying it once. This is how steam works - I can access my stuff anywhere - legally - but now Unity proposes that every use of that is a separate install? That's insanely stupid.... and it's not me that pays but the game developer!

Currently I have over the last year or so alone used it (via steam) on my Laptop, a work laptop I no longer have, my partner's laptop, two old machines that I don't use any more and which sit in the corner, another old laptop propping up a shelf and a steam deck. Not counting logging onto a university machine to demonstrate it in class (yes we have steam installed on every machine - but people can only access games in their account when they log on - and steam has its own rules on that). All legal - all via steam.

And what about DRM free games that can run from a USB drive?

FFS this hasn't been thought through at all and somebody should fall on the sword for this. Who approved this?

 

I think Unity will ultimately run into trouble enforcing this plan. Whether it's invasive tracking that probably violates the GDPR, or wishy-washy error-prone metrics, I don't see how you can charge someone for "installs" and then not divulge how that number is computed. I don't even think it's legal to charge on that basis, let alone try to enforce it retroactively.

Especially if you're still using an older version of Unity, I don't see how anyone agreed to such changes and I don't think they could be compelled to pay anything extra.

And what about those of us who buy games in bundles but don't get around to installing them until years later? Do these installations become ongoing liabilities/risks?

The games under the biggest risk are the ones with high installs, high revenue, low profit (i.e. high cost). You'd get hit with a bill you couldn't pay, and be forced to either raise prices and possibly have to shut down, or complain to Unity and try to get your fee waived. Which is still ridiculous.

Granted, most apps probably don't fall into this category. It does seem like the spirit of these changes is for Unity to get their piece of the pie from the big profitable apps:

"We set high revenue and game install thresholds to avoid impacting those who have yet to find scale, meaning they don’t need to pay the fee until they have reached significant success."

That said, considering how many false positives would likely result from all this, it just seems like an ill-conceived plan. Even if they walk everything back, the damage is done as far as trust goes. If I am a new dev looking to pick an engine to throw in with for the next 5-10 years, why would I pick Unity when they have now proven themselves to be a volatile and risky pick? I wouldn't want to be on the hook for whatever nonsense they try to pull next.

 

So if someone releases a game and it gets 1,000,000 downloads, and it made the developer $200K in a year....

That developer went from only giving Unity $20K total, to now $200K per month. In one year it will cost them 120x more.

That's the fastest change in price structure I've seen. A game went from making you $200K in one year, to costing you $200K in one month. Making $200K is a huge win for a developer, the new structure will wipe that out and cost them $2.2 million in the same time frame.

This is very reckless and irresponsible by Unity.

 

This chart makes a bold assumption that the game in question required only a single developer with a single Unity Pro install. Multiply it by a team of 4, or 8, and re-run the numbers. That's the amount left over to re-invest, or else take the payday split among 4-8

 

Uhm, no. Unless they make a lot of sales. 200,000 installs for a game made by a kid? That happens maybe once every decade.

 

I'm a bit late to the party, but it is a good idea to NOT get attached to your tools. Because situations like this are possible. Tools come and go. If you're attached, it may hurt.

Likewise it is a good idea to always keep in mind, that a company is not really your friend or family, even if it acts like one. Interests that may align now, may stop aligning at some point in the future.

 

I've worked with Unreal before and it would take more than this to make me get back there.)) Especially considering that Unreal sales team can do the same twist in a couple of years. Taking care of my mental health looks easier if I stick with transparent licensing model of Godot engine.

 

Hello,

I am a total noob who got the Adventure Creator plugin on sale from the asset store/started watching tutorials deciding to finally chase putting a story I've written into something...but to Godot I go, I guess. The obvious answer is probably no, but I assume that Adventure Creator can't be used in Godot and that is just lost money? If not does anyone know if there's something similar?

Really sad to see this, the plan will probably never effect me but the massive rug pull is enough to warrant stopping while I'm ahead and moving to something that can't do something like this in the future. Everyone's passion behind the pushback is inspiring, if more people reacted this way when being mistreated there might be less systemic financial abuse by these corps.

 

The license literally says they can change the terms at any point, yes. And it says if they do that, you can opt to remain on the current terms and not upgrade to the next years product.

 

Meanwhile u can read source code for Lumen and Nanite

 

I have been a Unity evangelist at the university where I teach (against the Unreal tide) - but this really makes me want to just abandon unity completely - especially on the back of the insane monetization gaffs last year. You need a new CEO.

 

This is such dumb business model change that I wonder if securities commission should visit UT's office to check it for insider fraud.

 

What are you doing Unity?

 

I do. They are just as responsible. They are also part of this. They should have stopped this. They should have tried to talk to us. This is not something they are free from. The only case they will be exempt from this bs is if it was kept completely secret. But looking at the way they reacted, the tweets, the changing of TOS secretly the selling of stocks....seems like more than enough people knew about it. It is not just the CEO or the CTO. Those who knew are just as responsible. And more than 24 hours have passed, and no one speaks up. It is radio silent. They are ALL HOPING that this will blow over. They are part of it one way or another.

 

If I was a Godot or Epic owner, I'd be real happy right now. More business heading their way.

 

Speaking of exodus...

https://github.com/NegInfinity/ProjectExodus

 

No matter how they twist it, in the end, Unity can't stop people from using scripts to spoof their hardware and install a game thousands of times.

 

I'm sorry for inform you that they're just getting started.

https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/co...oidcss&utm_source=share&utm_term=13&rdt=39012

 

Yeah, that is not enough. The board is responsible as well. They each sold millions of dollars in Unity stock this year leading up to this announcement. They got their payday. They couldn't give two S***s about what happens now. They all can say, "We tried to make Unity profitable with this new, awesome pricing structure. We couldn't have predicted how unreasonable game developers are being" when shareholders come for their heads. Unity is rotting from the top to the bottom, regardless of how much the devs actually trying to work to make Unity better try.

 

LMAO https://x.com/andytouch/status/1702013575458410675?s=20

 

i agree

 

It's probably a combination of profound embarrassment, dismay at what's happening to their stock options, and fear of being laid off.

We don't blame you guys!

 

Damage is already done. Even if they do rewind it the reputation and trust damage wont be healed by just a back pedal. Nothing stops Unity for trying it again or something like it in few months again . All we had was trust and thats is shaken.

 

No they won't - you only pay the fee upon $200k revenue within the previous 12 months, plus 200k lifetime installations. Fee per installation is awful, but it doesn't affect those kids.

 

Unfortunately, I deleted this and it came back. LOL Good old forums

 

No, I worked on Unity for 10 years. I shipped like 5~6 games (I say 5~6 because one of them got cancelled right after release!)

I should really stop coming here. But I feel like I need to keep the fire alive to give my current project a chance. I am definitely moving to Unreal no doubt. But my current project is still bound by this new fee, and I would like to be free from it. I am literally flipping coins to decide if I should just dump the project and move on.

 

this whole situation is S*** but paroting wrong numbers wont help either. $200K per month is just not true. In your example the developer was probably sensible enough to upgrade to pro, so he has to pay $0.10 for 800k downloads above threshold once. This would amount to $80k. This is still a S*** ton of money that they claim to just take from the developer just because the game performs well, but 200k per month is just nonsense.

 

This is the way.

 

Could someone clarify who is gonna pay at this end?

"Third parties who publish or distribute the Unity Runtime on behalf of creators are responsible for paying the Unity Runtime Fee. Creators and these third parties remain obligated to pay the Unity Runtime Fee until the payment is verified."

Are Steam going to be charged for games they release?

 

Unity to Unreal converter.

 

The way in which Unity Technologies announces a change like this and has no good answers to even the most obvious periphery questions, like "How do you determine legitimate installs?" or "Are updates considered new installs?" is endemic of the exact problem this company has had for years - nothing is thought through.

This feels like yet another dart at the dartboard of genius ideas that the bean counters and suits of this company have decided might generate more profit, maybe, alongside the continued alienation of its users. This is no longer a game engine, it's cleverly disguised extortion.

Greed ate this company alive.

Take it private again, truly invest in Unity's development, offer revenue share model for free, and offer reasonable enterprise licensing with royalty-free ownership. Join the 21st century in open development instead of operating like malware. Stop punishing your users. I can't recommend Unity to anyone unless fundamental changes are made to the structure of this company at this point.

 

This article says Unity has "clarified" a few points, but no, they haven't addressed all the edge cases and risks:
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/unity-clarifies-new-fee-plans-amid-developer-backlash

They say a subscription platform would be on the hook for the fee, not the individual developer/publishers. Can anyone imagine Apple (Arcade) agreeing to this? Can anyone imagine Steam, Microsoft GamePass, etc, agreeing to this? They could simply just refuse Unity games. They wouldn't agree without getting something in return from Unity. "...to make sure that we have the right value exchange" to put it in Marc Whitten's own words (source: the article linked above). What could Unity offer in exchange?

For Apple and Google, it would be a great way to keep out asset flips and low quality hypercasuals from flooding the App Store, but it's throwing out the baby with the bathwater, as they say.