That being said, even before the drama, unity was a sinking ship that was not profitable. Something will have to give eventually.
1. Actually scrapped the install fee
2. Scrapped their ads product that this bullshit was all supposed to push
3. Made a binding commitment to not try this shit again in the future
4. Fired the board that hired JR
Didn't they cap it by revenue? That's the impression I got.
Surely the new pricing is the solution to that? The fact that we have these massive companies, creating complex software, used by tens of thousands of people to build their own companies, and they are unprofitable is insane. Their original pricing scheme was a mess, but charging more generally and becoming profitable is good for them and therefore good for the tens of thousands of companies building their businesses using Unity software (given that Unity doesn't die and they don't have to retool their entire dev stack).
So the only question remaining is this: Did they announce these changes with the intent to walk them back to something else, or are they really that stupid?
My bet is on the latter, honestly.
> Our terms of service provide that Unity may add or change fees at any time. We are providing more than three months advance notice of the Unity Runtime Fee before it goes into effect. Consent is not required for additional fees to take effect, and the only version of our terms is the most current version; you simply cannot choose to comply with a prior version. Further, our terms are governed by California law, notwithstanding the country of the customer.
The communication around this rollout was absolute rubbish. Even employees were trying to get clarity, and they were forced to figure it out and real time.
[1]: https://forum.unity.com/threads/unity-plan-pricing-and-packa...
So presumably if you’re a customer in the EU you’re still doing business directly with their CA HQ and not an office registered in Ireland/Luxemburg/etc. (pretty much how every other major company does it?)?
Then again why wouldn’t you say stuff like that as a lawyer? The fees from all the lawsuits would’ve been pretty immense (regardless of who wins..)
That, combined with the fact that there was no safeguard for the install fee to be capped at some percentage of gross revenue made it so clear that they were trying to get something out of their free to play market specifically, which seems to have been to force their F2P customers to use their Unity Ads service over Applovin or similar competitors since they gave credits towards the runtime fee if you vertically integrated with Unity.
Almost nobody who could do basic math would’ve paid the $0.2 fee. They would’ve just upgraded to pro (considering that’s something they already had to do if their company’s revenue* was above 200k under the old model).
* the fact that Unity switched from a per company rev. limit to a per project one was also a significant discount to some users (e.g. if you work in an actual company but need Unity for a temporary/side project you now get it for free).
I’m not sure why folks appeal to a smug sense of “well I can do math”. You most certainly cannot account for every single case.
Free to play based on their initial plan of install based metrics with no revenue cap would have become infeasible unless you also happened to use Unity’s ad network.
Considering how high CPI is for mobile game ads ($0.2 to $2.5 or so depending on country) I don’t believe that would have been the case.
Of course the fees would still be significant for a large proportion of F2P developers and possibly crushing for those who make very little per user.
> I’m not sure why folks appeal to a smug sense of “well I can do math”
I was aiming that entirely towards the people who were focusing on the $.20 fee. Doesn’t make Unity’s announcement/model any less stupid but I’ll reiterate that only those who can’t do basic math would’ve ended up paying that much.
Not directly.
$1,625,000,000USD spent buying Wētā.
$4,400,000,000USD spent buying IronSource (I think? It's a weird deal).
At 20c per install, every person in the world would have to install four Unity games just to make back what was spent on those two deals. At the lower 1c per install rate, everyone in the world needs to install 75 Unity games.
I've probably got the actual cost of the IronSource dal wrong, but there's also salary for what is apparently 9000 employees. Maybe $500,000,000USD/year for that?
It seems like the goal is to use promises of not having to pay the fee as leverage to get devs buying their brand of related services. For instance, they suggest you might earn "credits on the Unity Runtime Fee based on the adoption of Unity services beyond the Editor, such as Unity Gaming Services or Unity LevelPlay mediation for mobile ad-supported games."