I actually wasn’t aware Major Nelson is new, hm old Microsoft guy. Thats a hell of job to do PR for.
God I hope Unity is easy in comparison lmao.
To be fair there was a lot of outright misinformation being circulated online shortly after the announcement. Namely one or two popular meme devs pushing incorrect assessments of the runtime fee, which then circled into the mainstream gaming media.
Pretty much every non-game dev friend of mine who came to me about it had only read the misinformation. No one actually read the actual blog post or accurate information.
Honestly even if Unity nailed the original announcement, misinformation would’ve still been peddled and taken over.
4 Likes
Thats good for you… but until you back out the mandatory industry pricing and assessing licenses based on our clients revenue, we arent coming back.
Take on one small project for a big client and your licenses jump to 5k/year/dev.
Anti small business practices means less small businesses using your engine. And cancelling our licenses felt so good.
Still, this is an obvious step forward for sure because people have been refusing to upgrade to avoid being forced to a new EULA, but dont pretend you arent forcing people to new terms elsewhere 
1 Like
That’s the thing, small businesses can’t sustain Unity anymore. Their pricing reflects that.
This is true but at least then Unity wouldn’t be to blame lmao.
Personally, I don’t think it did past Unity 5 release anyway. Maybe they lost a lot of customers when they no longer had to pay for basic shit like shadows and render textures.
For a while I thought it was actually quite intentional. Competing with us for contracts through their finger food aquisition, and then forcing us to a new eula and pricing punishment to stop us all from competing with them.
Then they started losing all their bids, we all moved clients and post secondaries to unreal and finally Unity sold off their finger foods group to cap gemini just to finish with their rubtime fee. Now I’m not sure what their goal was.
Beats me. They did a lot of nonsense back when Riccitiello was steering the ship. He wanted to go into all industries possible and failed at most of them. Now we’re dealing with the fallout of that.
1 Like
This is great. I want to however inquire unity to reconsider having contract workers to use unity pro when working with a team that does use the pro system. If a project is grossing 200-250k a year and has 5 employees which all pay 2k a year for their seats, hiring people for some “fairly minor” contracting work is costly isnt it since it automatically adds flat 2k USD on top of the cost, no matter what time frame or minor the work. I wish this would be more simple akin to Unreal engine.
I also wish we could get an option to drop all the pricing plans and opt in for a revenue share model of a fair % like Epic but with this, no pro plans or anything, you profit much nicer by your customers success without the developers having to deal with seat plans etc. Maybe its just me
1 Like
Will you also be considering a replacement for the unity plus licence or will it only be personal, pro, and enterprise moving forward?
1 Like
that is not true and I honestly don’t understand why your are minimizing this, people understood the shenanigans quite correctly and took action. unity wanted to implement retroactive rules with the idea of make claims on past revenues. when they figured out that others have lawyers too and this would not hold up in court, they started dancing around changing this and that, every time managing to make it worse.
so don’t blame this on “misinformation” hurting poor unity
2 Likes
IMO Unity would lose a large number of subscriptions if they did that. I know I’ve never worked for a company that wasn’t mostly if not entirely contractors.
2 Likes
Sorry but there were notable figures going on about how they were going to owe Unity tons of money, when they weren’t actually going to owe anything. It can be attributed to Unity’s poor delivery, but at the end of the day it’s still false and incorrect information.
Like I said, most non-game dev people I talked to directly only knew of the incorrect information spread about the runtime fee. They believed things that weren’t true, pushed by such figures.
1 Like
I’ve not had this issue, it’s not like contractors are making builds 
. I just get the work and move on lol. I could have a flawed interpretation of this tho. But functionally it works so ¯_(ツ)_/¯?
No people were severely misinformed by unity and then made that information much worse. Even the stuff you’re saying is just wrong nonsense.
4 Likes
Just a little FYI, if you don’t want the logo in your production build and are willing to spend a couple dollars you can always modify the ProjectSettings.asset to m_ShowUnitySplashLogo: 0, push it to your repo and use Unity cloud build. All their machines are fully licensed and use the ProjectSettings to determine if it should be shown. Works well for a one off but probably more costly if your doing it all the time.
3 Likes
I would have preferred if they had only kept the 2.5% and released the source like Unreal
1 Like
I am pleased to see unity walk this back - I was a paying plus subscriber for quite a while happily enjoying supporting unity a bit and removing my splash screens. This decision certainly caused a great deal of controversy and pushed many away from the engine and community. While it is nice to see this change happen I can’t help but still feel that at the end of the day users like me got a pretty raw deal.
See - what happened in my situation is that first I was upset to hear of the new model with the runtime fee and assumed this would cause me to be spending more than I had been on plus, as it sounded at first a whole lot more, because my income per-user was very low (free ad supported apps) and it looked like I’d be spending potentially more than I’d make to pay off the runtime fee.
What turned out to happen was that I didn’t make enough to have to pay that runtime fee (thankfully) - however in that time you had pulled plus out from under me. When that happened my apps basically went into a freeze of updates because I didn’t want to stick a splash screen into my production builds that had never had one.
That had two effects - one is that I stopped using unity for a while as I had to scramble to think of alternatives to use going forward, and secondly it put a nice dent in what was already not fantastic income I had spent years slowly creating. It has never recovered since. I cannot blame unity entirely for that, but that situation absolutely had an impact.
I’m still using unity, and working on 6 to create new games without a splash screen going forwards - but it feels important to me to point out how I was caught in the fallout of this and pushed away from continuing to use unity in production. It had a direct impact on any possibility I had to maintain anything I had live on the app stores and even though the splash screen wasn’t where all the controversy was focused it turned out to be the big thing that hurt me as an indie.
I’m gonna keep using unity. I love making games and using the unity engine. I hope this is a sign of things to come and that going forwards something like this won’t happen again, and that we can build trust in unity as a company once again - and that I won’t look back with regret for sticking around after the fiasco.
4 Likes
Excellent step in the right direction!
It will take a long time to repair the trust, but It’s super refreshing to finally see a big tech company/ceo admit their mistakes and fix it.
1 Like
Non-gaming Industry customers are not impacted by this modification.
I’d like to confirm, is this mean that the Runtime Fee still applies to Unity Industry?
I’ve heard from many game developers that they cannot get internal approval for the Runtime Fee, and the same goes for non-gaming companies as well.
3 Likes
Yeah, it does, the wording there is intentional.
They still count our revenue by including the revenue of our clients, and I’ve been told by an employee they are still planning to roll out the runtime fee there in the coming months. Given the wording and silence otherwise I’m inclinded to believe it.
2 Likes