Support us on Patreon
PayPalIf you'll recall from our previous coverage, Unity Software last week came out with a plan to change runtime policies into what could be mistaken for a suicide note. That plan involved game developers paying a fee of up to $0.20 for every game install after the 200,000 lifetime mark and $200,000 a year in revenue. This change would be retroactive as well, for games already released. It was a plan that left devs both asking questions as to the feasibility of tracking every install and being enraged at what would be a death blow to their operations.
The backlash to this scheme was immediate and painful. Indie devs announced they would either be pulling their games or swapping to a new engine. CEO John Riccitiello got put back on the radar as everyone's CEO to hate after he had done so well to avoid the spotlight since ruining EA. Death threats were sent in which forced an office closure. And Unity's stock price plunged in the following days as doubts over the company's future were cast.
In response, Unity sent out a feckless apology last night and promised changes. However, they kept hush about what those changes would be, which only served to open them up to more mockery and hate. Now, as reported by Jason Schreier of Bloomberg, Unity has laid out a tentative plan to try and repair its reputation while still wringing money out of devs.
Unity will now limit fees to 4% of revenue, it will only apply to games making over $1 million and that reaching the install threshold will no longer be retroactive. On top of this, instead of using tracking software, devs will now simply self-report how many installs of a game were made. CEO John Riccitiello also emphasized that this would only affect the top 10% of users, though whether that's true or not remains to be seen.
On the face of it, this is better good news for devs. The problem, at least on Unity's end, is that they've shattered developer trust. How can people trust them to not try and bring those disastrous policies back when no one is looking?
The idea of taking a small share of revenue was something devs had proposed as a potential monetization idea for Unity. If Unity had done that in the first place it would have avoided this whole embarrassing mess it finds itself in. More embarrassingly for Unity, one could assume that the swap to an install reporting scheme seems to be admitting the install tracking was either unfeasible or a bad idea entirely. Which it is a bad idea, and we should all be glad they're dropping it. But simply put, the whole thing has turned into a gigantic mess that could have been avoided if Unity had simply talked with it's users first about these changes to monetization.
As these plans are tentative however, it remains to be seen whether this is the path Unity goes down or not. Regardless, I think it's safe to say that Unity's days as the game engine of choice for many devs are over.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Quoting: LummontUnreal Engine's pricing is 5% flat for all revenue over a million dollars, so that's even technically a better price, which is nice.
Do you think that Epic could have managed that pricing without their Fortnite income?
Quoting: LummontRather than "installs" I'd like them to say "downloads".
That doesn't help. It still means that Unity's fees per sale are uncapped, making it impossible to budget.
Quoting: LummontUnity can't be trusted with my livelihood.
It's another one of those "all eggs in one basket" examples. After Unity there are still many of those left.
Arehandoro Sep 19, 2023
Quoting: dibzConsidering how the people at the top sold so much of their stock prior to the announcement, they knew what the reaction would be like. I suppose it's possible they underestimated it figuring themselves too big to fail.
Hopefully people just move on from the slimy company and be done with it.
I'm really hoping they get charged with insider trading offense.
Besides the meme, that is a maneuver from behemoth companies that damage the reputation on a way it can't be easily regenerated...
Last edited by nwildner on 19 September 2023 at 2:36 pm UTC
Quoting: BotonoskiSeems like so many tech companies lately are making hair brained greedy decisions, I'm used to them doing that but not so soon ome after another... Is this an effort on the part of the rich sorts to consolidate their wealth before the recession hits hard? If so they need to cut it out, just making things worse like the TP panic buyers. Wait... it was only really worse for those who didn't panic buy.Here's r/gachagaming (yes…) discussing this trend. Interest rates rising after COVID are mentioned down the thread as a cause of such pressure. I don't know if it affects publicly traded companies the same way as pre-IPO startups. Unity could have done well for itself building a popular engine, but it wanted to corner the market, spent money in unreasonable ways (billions on acquiring movie effect companies, a hundred million a year on its top executives…). Now it's suddenly finding debts are expensive and trying to squeeze everybody else.
soulsource Sep 19, 2023
If yes: That's going to go just fiiiiine on the European market, especially for small indies that don't have a permanent legal team.
Quoting: MamboThe modern way of big business is all about debt. If you want to make money, you could invest money you have and make a return on it. But if you can take on a lot of debt and invest money you don't have, that would mean you're making a return on a lot more money. As long as you can make sure the returns you're making are a higher rate than the interest you're paying on the debt, you're ahead. And greedy people are often optimistic about this stuff. Then they're either wrong about the rate of return, or interest rates go up, or both, and they're underwater. Or rather, the company they're associated with is underwater; the actual people probably take huge bonuses and compensation packages and a few other clever forms of remuneration from the corpse of the company before they jump to the next scam--limited liability FTW.Quoting: BotonoskiSeems like so many tech companies lately are making hair brained greedy decisions, I'm used to them doing that but not so soon ome after another... Is this an effort on the part of the rich sorts to consolidate their wealth before the recession hits hard? If so they need to cut it out, just making things worse like the TP panic buyers. Wait... it was only really worse for those who didn't panic buy.Here's r/gachagaming (yes…) discussing this trend. Interest rates rising after COVID are mentioned down the thread as a cause of such pressure. I don't know if it affects publicly traded companies the same way as pre-IPO startups. Unity could have done well for itself building a popular engine, but it wanted to corner the market, spent money in unreasonable ways (billions on acquiring movie effect companies, a hundred million a year on its top executives…). Now it's suddenly finding debts are expensive and trying to squeeze everybody else.
Kimyrielle Sep 19, 2023
Quoting: Purple Library GuyThen they're either wrong about the rate of return, or interest rates go up, or both, and they're underwater. Or rather, the company they're associated with is underwater; the actual people probably take huge bonuses and compensation packages and a few other clever forms of remuneration from the corpse of the company before they jump to the next scam--limited liability FTW.
Still no problem, at least if you're "too big to fail". Just ask for taxpayer bailout money and carry on gambling.
Philadelphus Sep 19, 2023
BlackBloodRum Sep 19, 2023
This is the usual case of the larger entity which everyone has become to depend on thinking "Well, everyone needs us now. We shall ramp up our prices and earn more money, they can't do anything about it anyway!". (Swapping out game engines is a big task)
It is also why I personally felt it was a mistake for CDPR to switch to unity from their own engine (Red Engine), for precisely this reason.
I mean that absolutely building your own engine is hard, it is a lot of work and it takes a lot of maintenance, without a doubt. But it is better than being tied to another business in such a way that your entire product depends on them.
I guess I'm just old at this point, where we wanted things our way and not dependant on another entity.
/me carries on rambling like a drunk old man.
See more from me