aclar00
Member
Or raising PS+ fees :-(
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Unity Claims PlayStation, Xbox & Nintendo Will Pay Its New Runtime Fee On Behalf Of Devs
- Thread starter Thick Thighs Save Lives
- Start date
- News Business Game Dev
Or raising PS+ fees :-(
Wildebeest
Member
Incoming all games using Unity engine delisted from Apple, Google and Steam from Jan 1.
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
Nope. Not at all. MS/Sony/Nintendo/Epic/Steam/etc don't do business with Unity, they do business with the publishers/indie developers who want to put their games on their online stores. If Unity wants more money from devs using their software, they've got to figure out the payment details between themselves.
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
Sony won't raise PS+ fees, since they have nothing to do with this mess. If Unity succeeds in demanding more money from devs using their software, then those devs will have to raise the price of their games to compensate for the additional licensing costs.
That's one example and they way they've always made money would be to sell their sub service to Genshin devs. So no matter the amount of installs, genshin was only worth that sub price.
The difference now is they are either just wanting to finally turn a profit with a new revenue stream or they are worried they won't sell the amount of subs.
KungFucius
King Snowflake
Its still bullshit. If I install a cheap game again in 10 years the devs get charged out of nowhere for something that isn't making money for them anymore.
Yup. I do this on PC gamepass all the time. Heck my PC fucking died pretty much while I was complaining about this. I installed a lot of games on an older PC and will install them on my new one when I get the parts. Why should some dev get charged for that. And sometimes installers run and don't finish. Maybe you forgot to uninstall a game to make room. Dev gets charged twice for that because the Unity CEO is a fucking piece of shit.
cinnamonandgravy
Member
hope the execs who sold stock right before this whole debacle get sued.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
![L*][*N*K](/data/avatars/m/842/842515.jpg?1696510303){kind=avatar}
L*][*N*K
Banned
I wonder how many devs who are early in development have dropped Unity this week, it is never easy to switch engines but early on is a lot more forgiving
Jinzo Prime
Gold Member
Bro, this lawsuit is going to be insane! Board of Directors have a "duty of loyalty" to their organization. Here is the definition:
If this post is true, then the Unity board violated their duty of loyalty and can absolutely be sued by everyone, including the state.
Last edited:
aclar00
Member
The posts were mainly made in jest, but also just pointing out the timing of the recent PS+ price increase and this rumor. Given that Sony said something along the line of continuing to bring great content was the reason for the increase.
There is obviously more to it, but it's a fun anecdotal connection, timing wise anyone. For one, i have now idea how many games use unity and if Sony were to pay this how much would it hurt their pockets on monthly PS+ games l.
Fbh
Member
Honest question: Why thought?
I thought most of these engines work on a royalty based on revenue sytsem like Unreal (who charge a 5% royalty for products that make over a certain amount).
How do subscriptions services change this?
If my indie game made $2.000.000 through sales on Steam/PSN/XBL or I got a $2.000.000 payment from Microsoft to be on Gamepass how does that affect Unity?
Same if my game is F2P but I make $100.000.000 a year on microtransactions, that would still be revenue and the dev/publisher would still owe a percentage of that money to Unity.
The 2 exceptions I can see are first party titles, as I imagine it would be hard to give a specific number for how much revenue a single first party game has made on Gamepass
And bulk deals where Ms/Sony come to an agreement with a dev/publishers to put multiple of their games on their subscription service (as it might not be defined how much they are getting for each game specifically)
Last edited:
Big Baller
Al Pachinko, Konami President
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
I really don't understand why these bastards CEOs have to earn millions.
Why so much?! Why would anyone agree to pay them ?! Why are they even needed at all. The company is not on stock market anyway?!
They just killed it, devalued it and I bet my ass Unity will be sold soon and that is the whole goal of this crap.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
How do they enforce this? Their contract terms of use for their engine is with the developer.
This is like me walking into Best-Buy to buy a new laptop and the store randomly decides it's going to invoice my purchase to PornHub. The latter will just tell them to fuck off, as they don't have a contract with Best-Buy and they weren't involved with the transaction at all.
Sony, MS and Nintendo don't have any say in what middleware engine indie devs use. But if Unity tries this shit, I can totally see them just outright banning Unity games on their store, because they're (rightly) not willing to pay for the privilege of the dev's independent choice of middleware engine.
This is like me walking into Best-Buy to buy a new laptop and the store randomly decides it's going to invoice my purchase to PornHub. The latter will just tell them to fuck off, as they don't have a contract with Best-Buy and they weren't involved with the transaction at all.
Sony, MS and Nintendo don't have any say in what middleware engine indie devs use. But if Unity tries this shit, I can totally see them just outright banning Unity games on their store, because they're (rightly) not willing to pay for the privilege of the dev's independent choice of middleware engine.
Unity's self-combustion engine | This Week in Business
This Week in Business is our weekly recap column, a collection of stats and quotes from recent stories presented with a…
www.gamesindustry.biz
Considering how full of debits Unity is in the last few years, this is litterally take the money and run
March Climber
Gold Member
I hope one day people will look back on Shawn Layden's legacy with appreciation. He's sort of the 'forgotten' Sony lead even though looking back, PS4 has been a great generation for Sony.
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
Presumably, Unity's angle is that platform holders need to pay them or they'll refuse to make engine updates/future functionality available on those platforms. Engine providers do a lot of work with each individual platform, so it's a plausible approach.
It won't work, of course, but they might think it will.
STARSBarry
Gold Member
So i just realised this mentions an install for the runtime right?
Now hear me out... what if games ran off a disc? Like what would happen if the runtime was never installed and console just read the data off the disc?
Now hear me out... what if games ran off a disc? Like what would happen if the runtime was never installed and console just read the data off the disc?
HerjansEagleFeeder
Member
Well if you're Microsoft, Google or Nvidia. It works.
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
Well... no, they'd probably tie it to however many server instances of a game are created, which is arguably equivalent to installs. Not that this whole scheme will even get to that point, but yeah.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
It's immaterial to platform holders though. Fundamentally, the choice of engine lies with the devs, so there isn't a logical justification for platform holders being levied to pay for that.
From the platform holder's perspective, devs can use a different engine. And it's in Unity's best interest to continually update its middleware to support all major platforms because that informs its ability to compete against its competitors, e.g. UE5. If they decide to try to stick one over on a platform holder with engine updates, they're actively making their engine less marketable to devs making games for multi-platforms.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Unity says the darndest things!
Dr.brain64
Member
Uhhh????
Squarehard
Member
Unity also claims this new plan would be a good idea.
Squarehard
Member
Last edited:
Barakov
Gold Member
All three of those guys sound like scumbags who don't know how just fucked they are at this moment. It's telling that even Riccitello(who has own terrible ideas about monetization) knew that this was a bad idea.
Sounds like most of the board are pretty clueless on how to run the company and are putting profits over everything else. Hope they get theirs for this.
EDIT : There's no way any one of the big three would agree with this.
Last edited:
Zekra Dezivad
Member
Basically it's the death of unity games over games subscriptions
Bkdk
Member
Interesting, this might very well force Microsoft to buy unity outright. They MS’s strategy is to get as many games in their game pass as possible, last thing MS wants is to have unreal being the dominant player with their business strategy, the fees will be so much higher if unreal is left. Game engines is not a competitive field with only very few big players for massive amount of game studios, other forms of in house game engines exist but only suitable for very small amount of titles and only unreal left would likely increase MS’s cost for game pass titles by a large margin in the long run.
That would be some seriously genius 4D chess, if the goal was to tank the company, then get Microsoft to over pay for it and save it. The share holders would be escastic. Of course if they go into bankrupcty, that might change things.
Squarehard
Member
Or Microsoft secretly had somebody planted on Unity's board, that suggested they should roll out this tactic knowing it would backfire, and then once they file bankruptcy, and THEN they get bought out by Microsoft on the cheap. 20D Chess!
Last edited:
cartman414
Member
The fireworks if this sort of thing were done during a Yamauchi-led Nintendo...
IAmRei
Member
and destroy many of smaller competitor (smaller gamedev) in their way
Kataploom
Gold Member
I'd believe that if they were colluding with other big studios under the table, but that's way beyond speculation to me lol
cartman414
Member
Additional afterthought, if the internet was as widespread 30 years ago, is it possible there would be people calling for the heads of Irving Gould and Mehdi Ali following the bankruptcy of Commodore?
Cyberpunkd
Gold Member
I can guarantee you this is not the case and this was not agreed with Sony or others, otherwise you would have joint press release. Someone at Unity fucked up and Sony and others are probably preparing a response.
Negotiator101
Member
Surely they know, if we know, they know.
Bkdk
Member
This situation is interesting. Sony and Nintendo are the ones eating popcorn as they rely most on first party studios and they have in house engine. MS relies somewhat on indies due to their game pass strategy, while apple will have to make tough decision here, they could cut unity off but they would have to deal with Tim Sweeney for their gaming app revenue, or apple would have to create their own engine which will cost them a lot of money and time, also taking risks of messing up quite a bit during the development phase. Apple also dislike charging new service cheap so they will likely face the same complaints once pricing model is revealed.
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
I wonder if old Unity games will start to be pulled from the stores? Like how Disney is pulling shows because they don't want to pay residuals.
Similar threads
- Locked