Unity will start charging developers each time their game is installed
Unity will start charging developers each time their game is installed
www.engadget.com
Unity will start charging developers each time their game is installed
55 comments
-
-
-
Darn! Beat me to it! Been using it for 7 years after switching from unity and haven't looked back!
-
-
The enshittification of the tech industry continues...who's next? Place your bets.
-
Wikipedia incorporates pay-to-win mechanics, lootboxes, microtransactions and cosmetics. There will also be a convoluted crafting system with decaying materials and several incompatible currencies for every purpose imaginable.
-
What a gift for epic games. Glad I never wasted my time learning Unity.
-
Yep, hopefully Godot ends up being the real winner, because with as many AAA studios that have started to abandon their own in-house engines in favor of Unreal, it's starting to feel a bit like Epic is going to end up with more than a healthy share of the market.
-
The cheapest ad campaign for Unreal Engine in history lmao
-
Or arguably, the most expensive. Just not for Epic.
-
-
-
-
I'm going to install games heaps of times so I can bankrupt any small game companies
-
You you really are a jerk Spez.
-
I was shocked until I read the username
-
Calm down, Satan.
-
The in game ads already do that these days.
Just try to hit that X, haha, tricked you! Installing.
Any touch of the phone for 30 seconds auto installs...
-
Use a firewall app to block that game from accessing the internet (this obviously defeats the purpose of online multiplayer games.)
-
-
From a Cybersecurity point of view, I think this is a legit attack. Imagine a server that has many virtual machines, all of which automatically trigger the reinstall mechanism as fast as possible.
If there is not some kind of limitation on that rule, depending on how their mechanism works, you could cost the game creater a lot of money.
-
-
Goodbye, unity. It's been okayish.
-
Why tech companies keep getting worse and worse and worse?
-
Enshittification
-
-
-
Do you know how many times I install and uninstall a game before I even play it? I could probably destroy a small game company on my own with this fee structure, and I'm sure I'm not alone with the constant installing and uninstalling.
-
Where were you when unity killed itself?
-
On the shitter. That's when I browse the news at least.
-
-
The entire Unity userbase:
-
As if Epic needed any more help completely obliterating Unity in every conceivable way.
-
Must have come from the Reddit play book
-
I brought this up in another thread:
They expect Game Pass titles to have their bill footed by Microsoft.
There's kicking the nest, and then there's kicking the fucking queen bee.
-
I mean what are they going to do with xcloud plays? Is it just 1 install on the remote Xbox or does it count per player, which means it’s an install every single time someone plays?
I imagine a lot of the doomsday stuff people are saying are not going to come to pass (and some will!). But it’s this kind of ambiguity that always leads to this kind of speculation.
-
-
Good way to kill your business. Way to go, you greedy jerks.
-
Finally, the company announced that it’s discontinuing Unity Plus subscriptions starting today to “simplify the number of plans we offer.” It says existing members on that tier will receive “an offer to upgrade to Unity Pro, for one year, at the current Unity Plus price” via email in mid-October.
Well sssshhhiitt
-
It's kinda amazing how Unity shot themselves in the chest with this one. No, I don't mean foot, they are now actively bleeding from the torso.
No Dev or Publisher is going to be okay with this, none. This basically leaves Devs on the hook for unlimited liability. Even with their walk back of "only initial installs" doesn't help. I myself have both a Desktop and a SteamDeck. That's possibly two installs out of the gate from one customer. Then any time I make an upgrade in the future, or heck maybe even switch Proton versions on my Deck, the Dev could be on the hook for more cash. There's zero transparency with how these "installs" are detected or counted, so there is no way to budget or plan for the expenses.
Businesses hate unpredictable fees.
They'll deal with utilities upping rates, because who are you gonna switch to in a monopoly? But if you're just a tool for them, they'll ditch you as soon as they're able and never use you again.
And again, publishers will care about this too, since their whole job is distribution. Any Dev looking to sign with a publisher, even a subscription service like GamePass, will now be asked which engine they're using, and I bet you 9/10 times the Dev will get rejected if they're using Unity now. That puts even more pressure on Devs not to use Unity.
Unity will price gouge their existing customers(Devs), but will ensure that nobody ever buys their product ever again. At this point I doubt their reputation will ever recover even if they can walk this back. The fact that they believe they can unilaterally add enormous fees at the drop of a hat means they've ruined any trust their customers had in them.
Unity: I can charge you any fees I want, any time I want.
-
Time for Godot to shine brighter
-
Is this a cry for help? Do we need to get them some therapy?
-
Fuck unity tech, they haven't made a single intelligent decision in 10 years.
The engine was perfectly fine and they ruined ALL OF IT.
I wasted so much fucking time because of them, everything they do is garbage.
Just let them go bankrupcy.
-
As someone who's been following Unity's development since 2.0, this doesn't surprise me. They've always struck me as a company that doesn't care about developers. And while all companies are trying to make money, there's a difference between "pay for our product because we need money to operate" and "we love Adobe's subscription model and want to outdo them - and we will squeeze you as much as possible." Have a little heart, Unity.
-
Can't wait to see what damage control mode looks like on this one.
-
Just another example of 2023: Enshittification.
-
-
Wᴇ ᴀrᴇ ᴛʜᴇ Cʏʙᴇrᴛʜᴇᴍ. Uᴘɢrᴀᴅᴇs ᴀrᴇ ᴄᴏᴍᴘᴜʟsᴏrʏ!
(I commented in the wrong thread, but am still getting upvotes...)
-
Don't worry, Devs. I won't be buying any unity trash ever again.
-
They do know unreal engine 5 is a thing, yeah?
-
This only makes sense. Unity is a very big part of what makes a game work and building and maintaining the Unity engine costs a lot of work. They deserve some share of the money made on a game. That share should ideally be proportional to how much money is made by the developer, which should be proportional to the amount of times the game is downloaded. And this is only one of their plans. There are other plans as well. So maybe someone can explain to me why this is not just a sound business decision apart from: I don't want to pay any money?
-
Unity already charges money once you hit a certain revenue from your game, it's only free if you don't get a lot of sales.
More importantly, according to the article, when questioned it seems Unity hasn't given any proper thought into this model.
If a user installs the game and then uninstalls and reinstalls, it counts as 2 installs that must be paid for. Not only is that unfair, it can lead to abuse. Angry with a change the developer made? Uninstall and reinstall 30 times (automate it) and you will actually cost the Dev money.
What about pirated copies? Unity will still "phone home" and the result will be a developer paying for 1mil installs that he earned nothing from.
What if your game is free to play?
There were some other issues like that mentioned too (in the twitter post in the article).
-
which should be proportional to the amount of times the game is downloaded
I have a 500GB SSD and >300 games. Do you have any idea how often I uninstall and reinstall games? Even smaller Indy games?
-
This comment section has you covered: to bankrupt a small game company, let's reinstall the games numerous times!
Also, their previous monetization methods are already proportional AFAIK.
-
"This only makes sense. Ovens are a very big part of what makes food and designing and building the ovens costs a lot of work. They deserve some share of the food made in the oven. That food should ideally be proportional to how many edibles items are made by the chef, which should be proportional to the amount of times the food is baked. And this is only one of their plans. There are other plans as well. So maybe someone can explain to me why this is not just a sound business decision apart from: I don’t want to give away my baked food?"
-
They deserve some share of the money made on a game. That share should ideally be proportional to how much money is made by the developer
Yes, and that is what they already do, as does Unreal.
which should be proportional to the amount of times the game is downloaded
Eh, no. How many unique times a game is uninstalled, perhaps, but not how many over all. That's clearly stupid.
-
-
I agree with the essence of your post, but the part about Unity already charging devs proportionally based on sales is not true. The editor is currently licensed per-seats and there is currently no cap to how much money you can make if you run the enterprise license, which is 5k/year per employee.
-
-
By that logic Microsoft should also be able to charge for any software installation that happens on windows. That also means any and all installations for the customer should be single use, because now all installations cost money.
Would you be willing to pay a certain amount of money any time you want to install some software, doesn't even matter if you've already paid for it? Because that's the business plan you call "sound".
I call that stupid.
-
55 comments
RIP Unity. First they partnered with Ironsource. Who are the people behind InstallCore it's a wrapper for bundling software installations. It tricks people into installing enough browser toolbars and other bloat to hurt their PCs. Windows Defender and MalwareBytes blocks it. Now Unity does this shit.