I was just starting to learn Unity for a game I’ve been wanting to make for years. I don’t how I feel continuing with it knowing that at anytime they can pull shit like this.
Unity to introduce runtime fee based on installs
Submitted 1 year ago by abobla@lemm.ee to programming@programming.dev
https://blog.unity.com/news/plan-pricing-and-packaging-updates
Comments
nnullzz@lemmy.world 1 year ago
LoafyLemon@kbin.social 1 year ago
Try Godot. It's not exactly the same, but similar enough to let you switch relatively quickly.
ryan@the.coolest.zone 1 year ago
I'm seeing a couple pieces of misinformation in here so I just wanted to clarify:
- This applies to the free Unity and Unity Plus - the enterprise version has different thresholds.
- The fee will apply to games that have made $200,000 USD or more in the last 12 months AND have at least 200,000 per-game lifetime installs.
- Even then, the costs are different depending on which country you are in - "emerging market" is only $0.02 vs $0.20 for other countries.
Essentially it looks to me like you have to have made a significant amount of money already to be charged these fees - someone releasing a free game that goes viral won't be charged. One thing I haven't found is whether those first 200,000 installs will or won't be back-charged. If the initial installs aren't back-charged then I would consider this very reasonable, frankly, and cheaper than Unreal provided the game you release costs more than $4.00 (since Unreal takes a flat 5% of revenue I believe).
Unity does need to make money to be able to keep developing their engine, and right now as far as I understand it they aren't making money.
FeatherConstrictor@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Genuine question, are they not making money, or are they not making more money than they did last year? I just tend to hear that companies aren’t making money when all they really mean is that profits aren’t growing, but they’re still making a big profit.
ryan@the.coolest.zone 1 year ago
I'm just looking at Wikipedia here but their net income in 2022 was US$ –921 million. Granted I'm not a financial wizard but I am at least somewhat confident that a negative number for net income is bad, like they're not actually making money after their expenses.
mounderfod@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
$0.20 per install when you’re over the threshold… Yikes
kicksystem@lemmy.world 1 year ago
For a game engine that does all the hard work? Why is this unreasonable. Have you any idea how much work goes into Unity?
Kushan@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Unity already has a business model, it’s licensed to the developers. That’s how they have operated for years. This change is retroactive and frankly dangerous.
kiwifoxtrot@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s retroactive and it’s not based on sales, it’s based on installs. So for example, I purchase a game on steam and I own a PC, a steam deck, and I have a kid with a PC. That’s 3x the fees for one sale even though I can only play it on one device at a time. Maybe I get bored of the game and uninstall it. A year later I want to play it again, there’s a new fee for the same sale and PC that unity gets.
Lodra@programming.dev 1 year ago
Yes, unity costs money to develop and a fee is reasonable. But I think the are a few risks with this model.
How do they track installations? Metrics from steam and other platforms? Convecting to a license server at install time? Or maybe at runtime? I don’t know the answers but they all seem to have implications for users regarding privacy and/or offline gaming.
It’s also a variable fee to game developers. A single user can install the device on multiple devices despite buying the game once. Similarly, a game can be installed repeatedly over time. This is a financial risk to game development companies. I could see them mitigating this risk in several ways. First, they can pass the fee to the end user. So every install costs $0.20. Secondly, they can limit the number of installs per user. Do you want to install more than 5 times ever? Buy the game again! Thirdly, they could simply shut down the fireflies service, making me installations impossible. None of this is good for a gamers.
And what happens to games made by companies that shut down entirely? Today, games remain available through steam, etc. But with this new pricing model, games running unity will continue to cost money over. Who pays the bill after the company is gone? This reminds me of Worlds Adrift, a game that used a licensed library. When the developer company shutdown, they were unable to release their server source code because the third party couldn’t can’t send bills to the open source community. Thus, the servers were destroyed and running the client (still vailable via steam!) just gives the user an error message about license issues or something. Users paid for a game that they are now unable to use.
shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol 1 year ago
Tell me you’re not a developer without saying you’re not a developer.
dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Them freeloading developers stealing the hard work of Unity.
Lmaydev@programming.dev 1 year ago
It deals with the problems that all games face and that have well established solutions.