It still doesn't return the broken trust or conformation that the people running Unity are insane, but this is a good move and devs don't need to alarmingly port their current projects to other engines.
I want to start with this: I am sorry.
Translation: damn, we really didn't get away with this.
The Runtime Fee policy will only apply beginning with the next LTS version of Unity shipping in 2024 and beyond.
We will make sure that you can stay on the terms applicable for the version of Unity editor you are using
Good. This is how it should've been from the start. If they bake that into the license I think people will be comfortable staying on Unity for the time being.
For games that are subject to the runtime fee, we are giving you a choice of either a 2.5% revenue share or the calculated amount based on the number of new people engaging with your game each month. Both of these numbers are self-reported from data you already have available. You will always be billed the lesser amount.
Also good. It should've been revshare from the start. I still don't understand how they would trust self-reported numbers but we'll see.
These are good changes. The damage isn't undone but at least current Unity devs won't be thrown under the bus. I still think they should switch to something open source in the future but they get a lot more time to decide now.
Yep, this is good as in won't rail someone already developing or have developed something on Unity, but it has a lot of "and I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you meddlesome kids!" energy to it.
I still don’t understand how they would trust self-reported numbers but we’ll see.
Because this was primarily about mobile. And because they can sanity check by looking at home many "installs" are reported by Apple and Google. I'm convinced that's half the reason why they did the weird move of basing this on installs and not purchases (the other half or so being that they needed some way they can get more money from the bajillion free-to-play mobile games out there that Unity dominates)
And they can sanity check SOME numbers being reported by Steam/Sony/etc though console and PC matter less to them.
Also - how are they currently getting metrics for game revenue that they'd bill off of? Seems like a lot of self-reporting would be happening there too? And enforced with contracts, etc.
I still don't understand how they would trust self-reported numbers but we'll see.
This is just how this stuff works. Unity already operates with some self-reporting reliance (although afaik they don't even require a report on the personal license), since the different tiers have a maximum revenue cap before you must upgrade. Software audits are a thing, and trying to skirt them by lying on your numbers is an easy way to get fined or sued.
Every single thing they wrote there is anchored on "trust us" and trusting them is what we used to do until they broke that trust, massivelly so.
So far they have done zero to restore the trust: their entire reaction has been to pull back on the face of the massive pushback and there is not even genuine remorse at having tried it - they purelly adjusted their demands in response to the reaction, rather than show true regret, make amends and make sure people have at least some way of trusting it won't happen again.
It's like the bully that's about to punch the little kid on the face for his lunch money and a teacher appears so has to stop. He didn't "learn his lesson" and nothing has happenned to convince him to "never do it again", so he's just going to try it again at an occasion when it looks more likely to succeed.
As others pointed out, the current CEO and board at Unity must go and a legally ironclad guarantee they can't try this again needs to be put in place before any serious game developers are willing to risk using Unity again.
It still doesn't return the broken trust or conformation that the people running Unity are insane, but this is a good move and devs don't need to alarmingly port their current projects to other engines.
Translation: damn, we really didn't get away with this.
Good. This is how it should've been from the start. If they bake that into the license I think people will be comfortable staying on Unity for the time being.
Also good. It should've been revshare from the start. I still don't understand how they would trust self-reported numbers but we'll see.
These are good changes. The damage isn't undone but at least current Unity devs won't be thrown under the bus. I still think they should switch to something open source in the future but they get a lot more time to decide now.
Yep, this is good as in won't rail someone already developing or have developed something on Unity, but it has a lot of "and I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you meddlesome kids!" energy to it.
Because this was primarily about mobile. And because they can sanity check by looking at home many "installs" are reported by Apple and Google. I'm convinced that's half the reason why they did the weird move of basing this on installs and not purchases (the other half or so being that they needed some way they can get more money from the bajillion free-to-play mobile games out there that Unity dominates)
And they can sanity check SOME numbers being reported by Steam/Sony/etc though console and PC matter less to them.
Also - how are they currently getting metrics for game revenue that they'd bill off of? Seems like a lot of self-reporting would be happening there too? And enforced with contracts, etc.
This is just how this stuff works. Unity already operates with some self-reporting reliance (although afaik they don't even require a report on the personal license), since the different tiers have a maximum revenue cap before you must upgrade. Software audits are a thing, and trying to skirt them by lying on your numbers is an easy way to get fined or sued.
Every single thing they wrote there is anchored on "trust us" and trusting them is what we used to do until they broke that trust, massivelly so.
So far they have done zero to restore the trust: their entire reaction has been to pull back on the face of the massive pushback and there is not even genuine remorse at having tried it - they purelly adjusted their demands in response to the reaction, rather than show true regret, make amends and make sure people have at least some way of trusting it won't happen again.
It's like the bully that's about to punch the little kid on the face for his lunch money and a teacher appears so has to stop. He didn't "learn his lesson" and nothing has happenned to convince him to "never do it again", so he's just going to try it again at an occasion when it looks more likely to succeed.
As others pointed out, the current CEO and board at Unity must go and a legally ironclad guarantee they can't try this again needs to be put in place before any serious game developers are willing to risk using Unity again.