Unity has announced changes to their pricing model, which has led to furor among developers. Is it possible that some of these concerns stem from confusion, or are there valid points that they have to consider too?
In their initial blog, Unity explains the main shift in pricing. Instead of charging developers who use their engine based on how much money they make, they will get charged based on how many installs they get. The new fee is called the Unity Runtime Fee, and is based on the cost of maintaining Unity Runtime. Unity Runtime is the part of the engine that allows their games to work at scale. So, it’s the reason Unity games can be downloaded in the billions monthly. Unity Create president Marc Whitten explained to Game Developer that Unity Runtime is actually expensive to maintain. The company needs more revenue, for the particular purpose of investing back into Runtime.
Thus far, Unity has not charged rates to developers to use their engine like Epic has for Unreal Engine. Instead, they offer services connected to the Unity engine, such as LevelPlay, their built in ad platform. Developers don’t have to use LevelPlay with Unity, but they get a unified system to work on them if they do, and that’s the case with Unity’s other services.
Now, many developers immediately expressed their concerns to the changed. Both Aggro Crab Games, who are developing Another Crab’s Treasure, and Innersloth, who make Among Us, shared their fears that these changes could make it unfeasible for them to stay in business.
It should be stated that there may be some confusion on how the fee is actually applied. Unity has had to clarify multiple times, including their blog and forum, that the fee only applies for installs after January 1, 2024, and not the number of installs to meet the threshold itself.
Still, questions remain about the arrangement, particularly because of Unity’s definition of installs. If a game is reinstalled on the same computer, it is counted as a new install. Unity explains that WebGL and streaming also count, as well as demos. This raises more questions about how much Unity will end up charging developers.
As reported by Video Games Chronicle, there are other concerns too. For example, developer Nic Tringali brings up the scenario that gamers who get angry at a developer could punish them by mass-installing a game, to try to raise costs for said developer.
A lot of the concern around this is based on FUD, as we don’t know how it will play out quite yet. While rivals like Epic are sharing snarky responses to the issue, it is entirely possible Unity will end up making far less than Unreal. A lot depends on how much installs Unity ends up tracking, and if it will prove to be sustainable for developers and Unity themselves.
Unity is currently busy with damage control, and may have to clarify, or revise their plans. Game Developer reported that Marc Whitten contacted developers after their interview, explaining the fees are not retroactive, and they are not perpetual. In Marc’s words:
“A large majority of Unity Editor customers are currently not paying and will NOT be impacted by this change.”
The next few days will be key to whether the industry decides to accept this change or if Unity will be sufficiently shamed into taking it all back. Presumably, Unity has done the math and are certain of their plans, because they aren’t backing down so far.
