Business Game developers furious as Unity Engine announces new fees - Unity announces a ‘Runtime Fee’, which will charge developers each time a game using the engine is downloaded

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Game developers furious as Unity Engine announces new fees​

Unity announces a ‘Runtime Fee’, which will charge developers each time a game using the engine is downloaded​

Keith Stuart
Tue 12 Sep 2023 14.24 EDT


The company behind the Unity Engine, one of the major game development tools used by independent studios, has announced a controversial new fee. Starting from 1 January, Unity will charge developers each time a game using the engine is downloaded.

The charge will begin when sales reach a threshold of $200,000 in revenue over 12 months, or at 200,000 total installs. Charges will vary depending on the license the developer has with Unity, but will be as high as $0.20 per install.

The fee has been met with anger and incredulity within the game development community. Garry Newman, creator of the hugely successful Garry’s Mod, tweeted, “Unity can just start charging us a tax per install? They can do this unilaterally? They can charge whatever they want? We have to trust their tracking?!” Indie developer Tony Gowland responded, “We pay for our Pro licenses up-front knowing that any revenue then is ours. That after 2 years of dev they can just add this back-end tax if our game happens to be successful? Nah.”

Unity announced the new charge on its website, referring to it as the Unity Runtime Fee, a reference to the Unity Runtime code that executes each game on player devices, and which until now has not been monetised. “An install-based fee allows creators to keep the ongoing financial gains from player engagement,” the company stated in its blogpost. Speaking to the industry news site Game Developer, Unity Create’s president, Marc Whitten, said the company was aiming to “better balance the value exchange” between itself and developers. Later in the interview Whitten stated, “We want to make more money so that we can continue to invest in the engine.”

Several developers have pointed out logistical problems with the charge. Will developers be charged each time a player re-installs the game on a new piece of hardware? And how will this affect developers whose game ends up on a subscriptions service such as Xbox Game Pass or ca harity games collection such as Humble Bundle, where they will suddenly be liable for many thousands of downloads? As veteran game developer and consultant Rami Ismail put it on X, “If you’re a Unity developing studio, good luck if you ever piss off your userbase. Instead of tanking your Metacritic with a mass review campaign they can now straight-up tank you financially by organising a mass install campaign.”

Originally launched in 2005, Unity is a cross-platform game engine, designed to be affordable and flexible. It was widely adopted by the burgeoning independent game design community and used to build acclaimed titles such as Cuphead, Rust and Pokémon GO. The company recently launched Unity Muse and Unity Sentis, two AI tools designed to aid in the development of AI-driven games and experiences.

But Unity has cut staff in recent years, citing the slowing economy. In May, Unity laid off 600 staff, equating to 8% of its workforce. This followed 300 layoffs in January. At that time, Unity’s CEO, John Riccitiello, stated in a letter to employees, “We reassessed our objectives, strategies, goals and priorities in light of the current economic conditions. While we remain focused on the same vision, we decided that we need to be more selective in our investments to come out stronger as a company.” In August the company reported revenue of $533m for the second quarter of 2023, but net losses of $193m.

For game developers, the ramifications of an ongoing per-install charge are profound and many have taken to social media to ask for more details on how the company will track downloads and protect studios whose games end up in bundles or on subscription services or adopt new business models such as free-to-play later in their lifecycle. Commenting on X, Ismail stated, “There is no way Unity talked to a single developer before launching this.”

upload_2023-9-12_14-29-22.png

1694548287499868.png
 
Well, if this isn’t the most obvious sign that they are desperate for money.

You already get a cut of the game, they probably get a cut of the price too and that’s likely after having to have the devs pay to use the engine.

Charging the devs each time the game is downloaded seems scummy to say the least.

And you just know they voted for the man that caused their money pains.

Very funny.
 
“If you’re a Unity developing studio, good luck if you ever piss off your userbase. Instead of tanking your Metacritic with a mass review campaign they can now straight-up tank you financially by organising a mass install campaign.”
I can see people running vpns in VMs making this hilarious.
 
Indie devs won't like this. Small studios and indie devs can't really eat those kinds of fees easily and they can add up fast. Unity could lose alot of their user base over this kind of move
 
If Unity is no longer an option, what other engines are even out there realistically besides Unreal? Source 2 is just Valve now and Crytek has been fumbling with Cryengine. idtech is just id, Godot barely gets used, it feels game engines are just so much more homogenized now.
 
Yeah, uhhh, how do they track it? "We have ways" is not enough. Do the big store fronts track it for them or is there going to be spyware (or whatever other term they prefer) added into it going forward?
 
Can confirm that every game dev I know has basically been talking about this all morning. Most upcoming AAA dev is being done in Unreal though so this is much more hitting the indie space. The rules as written are pretty nonsensical. Especially charging retroactively for new installs of old games. Problem is that indie games are the primary market of Unity users at this point and they are also the most likely to not be able to pay these fees. Really I think that if Unity doesn't roll this back it is just going to cause a death spiral to the engine as everyone jumps ship. Even if they do, it might be a signal of the end as doing this shows they must not have money to take such drastic measures. As to where people will go. Mostly like to Unreal or Gadot (haven't used it, but a lot of more serious devs actually have said good things so it's probably something to look for in the future).
 
Can confirm that every game dev I know has basically been talking about this all morning. Most upcoming AAA dev is being done in Unreal though so this is much more hitting the indie space. The rules as written are pretty nonsensical. Especially charging retroactively for new installs of old games. Problem is that indie games are the primary market of Unity users at this point and they are also the most likely to not be able to pay these fees. Really I think that if Unity doesn't roll this back it is just going to cause a death spiral to the engine as everyone jumps ship. Even if they do, it might be a signal of the end as doing this shows they must not have money to take such drastic measures. As to where people will go. Mostly like to Unreal or Gadot (haven't used it, but a lot of more serious devs actually have said good things so it's probably something to look for in the future).
I wonder what will happen to early access Unity games like shadows of doubt. They got a lot of hype and excitement going for them, but I doubt that will last if they kill the project and start over on a new engine
 
Last edited:
Indie devs won't like this. Small studios and indie devs can't really eat those kinds of fees easily and they can add up fast. Unity could lose alot of their user base over this kind of move
Yeah. Heaven forbid any game gets put in a Humble Bundle. Even at 0.20 that’s a huge amount of cost for the dev to eat, a huge amount of money to lose.
 
This move basically ensures Unity death spirals. The sole reason the company is staying above water is their freeware starting point, overall marketing, and gradual increase of fees as a game becomes successful; indie devs, particularly the smarter ones, will start shopping around, and there are quite a few alternatives now to leverage (albeit less polished or documented). Godot guaranteed are rubbing their hands with this.
 
Really I think that if Unity doesn't roll this back it is just going to cause a death spiral
Too late, the death spiral began earlier this year when Wall Street woke up and realized that a decade on, even at the height of their power, Unity literally never turned a profit. They already announced 600 layoffs (8 percent of their work force) four months ago and its going to get worse, not better.
 
If Unity is no longer an option, what other engines are even out there realistically besides Unreal? Source 2 is just Valve now and Crytek has been fumbling with Cryengine. idtech is just id, Godot barely gets used, it feels game engines are just so much more homogenized now.

Godot is honestly pretty good, and is rapidly improving on the 3D front. I suspect it will gain a larger market share thanks to this move.

I will admit I'm biased as I use Godot for my own projects.
 
Woah I suddenly love shitty horror games made by unbearable communist trannies. I just love replaying them over, and over, and over. Can't get enough of those default Unity assets.
 
Back
Top Bottom