None of it was handled well.
Epic got a lot of hate for merely trying to compete, to weaken the Steam near-monopoly over PC game distribution.
With Unity though, the outrage was over a loss of trust more than the cost of the fees themselves. And it came at a time when it seemed that the engine had been stagnating for years, after they'd made significant redundancies and cancelled the Gigaya project (their attempt to actually make a game themselves with their engine - which could have been very beneficial, creating internal pressure to fix/improve provlem areas), and while the main competition seemed to be adding exciting features at a much more rapid pace.
This whole stunt was a painful communications nightmare but also the rude asymmetric breaking of trust that most people saw in it.
So, this final step was needed for cleaning up that mess (and it still might need some detail work, if one looks at that apology interview), no matter how deeply strategic one wants to look at firing a CEO.
It's also just a plain bad model to retroactively change a license, full stop. If Unity was actually inrotoducing some exciting tech with 2024.1 or whatever it could entice devs to move and take the hit. But they know that they haven't done that in 5+years, so there's that underpinning.
>When Steam and Epic pockets 30%?
Epic pockets 12%, and if you use UE and publish to EGS they waive the engine royalties. Since we're speaking of "doing the right thing and idiots crucified him for it".