Unity will retract this. Switch to revenue share or whatever. They'll eat a huge loss of trust because of this idiocy, but they'll remain a relevant game engine. I just can't see any other scenario.
I think "loss of trust" is understating it. This is an existential threat for lots of studios, and I can't imagine them placing future bets on the platform.
What Unity has in its favor is mostly in the Asset Store, but that's shifted towards being a commodity as well.
I am sure there are reasons this is difficult, but with so many industries built on open-source compliant tools, gamedev feels like a no-brainer for it as well.
You under-estimate the degree to which companies can be driven by an exec determined to have their way.
No abuse needed to lose money with this, I’ve probably installed the same games 20+ times over the years.
Does a reinstall of an app on the same device count towards the Unity Runtime Fee?
No, we are not going to charge a fee for reinstalls.
I agree what they are saying isn't workable, but that idea of install based fee could work, and would be better than a royalty for many.
This is the issue.
It would be easier if Unity just said they won't charge for installs past the number of sales. But most of the nightmare scenarios people are coming up with are not real.
Ultimately the main issue is that people made business decisions about using Unity under the assumption that the license and payment structure they were using could not change. That is no longer true by demonstration. I'm sure there's a lot of devs who are simply unwilling to deal with a vendor who changes the terms like this.
Better fixes in no particular order: a grandfather clause, delay the new fees, fire the CEO.