Comment by zerocrates
2 years ago
I wonder just how much this change is geared at capturing value from what's already out there, i.e. the retroactivity is the point.
2 years ago
I wonder just how much this change is geared at capturing value from what's already out there, i.e. the retroactivity is the point.
> geared at capturing value from what's already out there
This sounds like a plausible motive. There's a handful of huge games using Unity that together generate upwards of 20bln annually, such as Pokemon GO, Honor of Kings, and Genshin Impact. I'm guessing their soundbite of "developers being excited" over the change is with those behemoths in mind, and not the other games that are barely making ends meet.
These particular successful games are still going to save millions compared to Unreal, while the change means that everyone else would now be more profitable with Unreal. Pokemon GO alone would have made Unreal $100mln+ a year with the 5% royalty, while paying considerably less with Unity's new scheme. Even at a billion downloads it's only $10mln in comparison.
It sounds like Unity is shifting their focus from the long tail where they were successful charging annual subscription fees (and ads), to the head that's generating orders of magnitude more revenue.
Just so you know Genshin and Star Rail is using a heavily customized Unity Engine under Unity China. Unity China is a separate entity from Unity Technologies. They (mihoyo) is also a major shareholders in Unity China.
https://blog.unity.com/news/unity-forms-new-venture-to-manag...
> everyone else would now be more profitable with Unreal
To be fair only F2P games that makes less than ~$2 per user might be more profitable. For almost everyone else above the 1 million threshold Unity would still be cheaper.
Most games on the Switch and Quest devices for sure. A lot of mobile games as well.
Over 1B games sold on the switch: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/1-billion-switch-games-hav...
We can assume at least one game per Quest was sold: https://www.roadtovr.com/quest-sales-20-million-retention-st...
Hard to figure out the mobile numbers.
That list (which is at least half of switch game sales) are nintendo games that don't use Unity. I'd be shocked if half of the remaining 500mn games sold used unity. But if they did, at .20c, that's like 50mn dollars.
As for the quest sales, that's another 4mn.
It seems extremely foolhardy to cause this much damage to their reputation and potential growth as a multi-billion dollar company (market cap of 13bn) for 50-100mn a year of additional revenue.
> at .20c
Zero of them would be paying $0.2 per instal. Probably much closer to $0.03-0.05.
Nobody could ship games in the Switch using the personal edition and nobody who understands basic math would be paying $0.2 even after these prices go into effect