Unity’s new “per-install” pricing enrages the game development community | Fees of up to $0.20 per install threaten to upend large chunks of the industry.::Fees of up to $0.20 per install threaten to upend large chunks of the industry.

    • PHLAK
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -52 years ago

      While I’m a huge open source advocate this has little to do with open vs closed source software.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        142 years ago

        This has everything to do with FOSS.

        If a company can get away with pulling the rug on you, they will.

        Once you’ve heavily invested in using a a piece of software, the company behind it has leverage over you, but if you could pay for updates to that software from another company, the original company has no leverage over you.

        The only reason these companies refuse to release the source code is because they are planning on fucking you over in the future. As consumers we need to demand open source products to prevent this sort of abuse.

  • ???
    link
    fedilink
    English
    262 years ago

    So out of every 1M downloads, that’s $200,000 to Unity’s pocket and out of the pockets of developers. Am I doing this math right?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      672 years ago

      Not downloads. Installs. They also count re installs. So if you. Install a game, play it, remove it, then install again later that is an additional charge to the dev.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        172 years ago

        How does that even work if say I buy a game at $10 and then I uninstall and install 51 times?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          292 years ago

          You’ve entered into a brand new era of trolling game developers by directing costing them for the fun of it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          They don’t count reinstalls.

          You can tell because they totally promise and definitely won’t let you see how their system works because it’s “proprietary”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        So… if your game becomes the most pirated game in history, you’re on the hook for millions off zero income.

        Way to go Unity…

      • Captain Aggravated
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        If I’ve read this right, they don’t count re-installs on the same hardware, so just “I don’t want to play this anymore” uninstall -later- “I want to play this again” reinstall won’t count as two installs. But reinstalls of the same license on different hardware does, so “I just bought a game! Let’s play it on my aging gaming PC” installs I just bought a new gaming PC, let’s see what that game looks like on high graphics settings installs again does count as two installs and the studio will…bewilderingly…be charged twice for that one sale.

          • Captain Aggravated
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            You’re not the first to consider that possibility. It seems possible to grief a studio by repeatedly installing games in virtual machines and running up their Unity bill.

            The question of “what about pirated games” has also come up. Are developers going to be charged per install of pirated games? Unity’s answer to this has been an LTT brand “Trust me, bro.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      162 years ago

      Plus on top of all the other subscription fees.

      it’s not even really about the money, even if it will fuck the devs and ruin projects and lives, but the breach of trust and a mark that more shit is probably on it’s way if this goes through. Unity owns a ecosystem that many people depend on and now they really start squeezing. It’s not right.

      This is why things that act as commons should be either nationalised or replaced with free software.

      • ???
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        I agree. This dipping of fingers into the pockets of devs errodes trust.

    • Ms. ArmoredThirteen
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      Not necessarily. It depends on the Unity license being used and it scales based on installs. So higher tier license and more installs makes each additional install cheaper. But if they are using the free license, it stays at 20c per install no ‘discount’ at any install counts. It is a bit convoluted: https://unity.com/runtime-fee

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      Basically unless you’re going to make a sellout game, it might cost you money to make a game.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    172 years ago

    Is there any legitimate reason for this other than “shareholders go wahhhh!” Like is there a financial burden on unity every time someone installs a game?

    If not this is insanely disgusting…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      212 years ago

      There is a reason. The current CEO is EA’s former CEO. Dude was kicked out of EA for pulling something similar.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 years ago

          He was kicked out of EA. Even EA isn’t this bad lol. Seriously, while EA has had some controversies with nickle and diming, have they ever retroactively started making things cost money?

          • Echo Dot
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            EA realised that it would be illegal and would get them sued. This guy either didn’t ask the lawyers, or didn’t listen to the lawyers.

            A contract, is a contract, is a contract. You can’t change it halfway through without getting confirmation from all parties, and obviously they haven’t got that

    • Echo Dot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      Unity do not suffer financial hit just because someone installs the game.

      They don’t host the code. You use their code but the code itself is hosted by the likes of Valve or Microsoft or Sony. So no they have no legitimate reason, other than they like money and they reckon this will generate them some.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    92 years ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    That goodwill has now been largely thrown out the window due to Unity’s Tuesday announcement of a new fee structure that will start charging developers on a “per-install” basis after certain minimum thresholds are met.

    The newly introduced Unity Runtime Fee—which will go into effect on January 1, 2024—will impose different per-install costs based on the company’s different subscription tiers.

    Outside of those countries, an “emerging markets rate” ranging from $0.005 (for Enterprise subscriptions) to $0.02 (for Unity Personal users) will apply after the minimum thresholds are met.

    This is a major change from Unity’s previous structure, which allowed developers making less than $100,000 per month to avoid fees altogether on the Personal tier.

    Larger developers making $200,000 or more per month, meanwhile, paid only per-seat subscription fees for access to the latest, full-featured version of the Unity Editor under the Pro or Enterprise tiers.

    “Gloomwood will definitely be my last Unity game, likely even if they roll back the changes,” developer Dillon Rogers wrote on social media.


    The original article contains 506 words, the summary contains 168 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!