Unity is perhaps the most repeated word in the video game sector during the last week. But why? What is Unity and why is it on everyone's lips? The short summary is that Unity is one of the most used game development tools in the world – called a graphics engine – and now plans to charge development studios, in addition to an annual fee, a fee for each time someone installs his game. Faced with this news, published on September 12, many independent studios protested, saying that these changes in rates were going to lead them to ruin.
The fact of the matter is that Unity plans to charge for each installation of a game. In the case of those companies that use the free version of the graphics engine, the fee will be 20 cents for each installation. For those companies that pay for the Pro or Enterprise version of the tool – between $1,877 and $4,554 annually – fees will range between $0.15 and $0.01, depending on the number of installations. It can be clearly seen in the following table.
These rates will only apply if a game meets two goals: that it has generated $200,000 gross in the last 12 months and that it has been installed more than 200,000 times. This is in the case of the free engine license. For Pro and Enterprise licenses these goals increase to 1,000,000 gross dollars and 1,000,000 installations.
These changes in Unity rates will not affect the majority of independent developers, since they will hardly reach the goals established by the company. The fees for the free plan – $0.20 per install – are outrageous, since a game that grosses $200,000 and is installed 200,000 times would have to pay $40,000 to Unity. Clearly this fee is a deterrent and the objective is to make the majority of studios pay the annual Pro and Enterprise fees, which end up being cheaper than paying the fee.
But other doubts arise. According to Unity, these fees will only be charged for the first installation of each game and demos or gifted games will not be counted. But the company hasn't explained exactly how it will know how many times a game has been installed. Nor have they shown how they are able to differentiate the first ones from the rest of the installations, discriminate between the origin of the game or if, for example, it has been pirated. On the other hand, there are doubts regarding security: to what extent is it legal for Unity to install tracking systems on my computer to see what programs I install?
Most of the doubts regarding these changes revolve around those independent video games that have hit it big, but that have not made their developers make gold either. Clear examples are Hollow Knight, the recent Blasphemous II, Cult of the Lamb or Darkest Dungeon II. Very successful titles made by small companies. But this could also affect large studios, since games like Pokémon GO or Genshin Impact are also made with Unity.
With these new rates, studios could have to pay exorbitant sums for offering their game on services such as Xbox Game Pass – an on-demand gaming platform – or for giving away their title in Humble Bundle packs or simply because they have pirated the game and Unity is not able to discern between legal and illegal copies. Beyond the rates, the fear of developers is based on the insecurity that this new situation generates.
Many of Unity's shareholders knew that these measures would be unpopular. Especially its CEO, John Riccitiello, one of the most hated figures – and rightly so – in the video game industry. Let us remember that this man is the one who led Electronic Arts to close dozens of studios, who made the most aberrant and abusive monetization practices in the sector fashionable, and a man who even considered charging players for each time they reloaded their weapon in the game. Battlefield 3 multiplayer.
John Riccitiello on September 6, six days before announcing the changes in Unity rates, sold 2,000 shares of the company. After the announcement and in the last five days, Unity Technologies Inc has plummeted almost 11% on the US stock market. And these 2,000 shares are added to the more than 50,000 that John Riccitiello has already sold throughout 2023. In fact, voices have emerged suggesting that this is market manipulation and that it could be reported.
Unity is much more than the graphics engine most used by independent developers. There are many people who have made a career and specialized in the use of this technology, who have spent decades training and accumulating experience. In addition, many people who do not develop video games per se have specialized in creating content for Unity and then selling it.
(Translation of the tweet: "Buy Cult of the Lamb now because we are removing it on January 1st.")
Around this technology there is an entire human and business ecosystem that is now reeling from a crisis of trust. Studios like Massive Monster – creators of Cult of the Lamb – have announced that they will withdraw their game from stores on January 1, 2024 because they do not want to risk going bankrupt with these new rates.
Unity, for its part, has apologized and has pulled out all the stops. But he has done it in an uncoordinated manner by launching messages on Twitter and on his website, but without much coherence. In the coming days they will announce the changes of the changes and rethink their new rates, but the damage has already been done. They have already eroded the trust of their users too much and have opened a gap that will be very difficult to close.
