Sorry to hear this from you guys for two reasons;
1. I'm an amateur dev who has been using Unity and I understand, but I'm worried everyone is jumping the gun on this rather than talking with Unity in a calm manner.
2. When I played WFTOW initially I was frustrated with massive frame rate drops to the point it was unplayable, but then you guys fixed the problem and asked me to come back and play. To which it has become one of my top games of all time.

I have two major questions for you regarding your transition.
Are you sure that retraining is the optimal route as it may end up costing you more?
Given that you are retaining and are unlikely to hire Unity devs in the future will you be shutting down your games built on Unity or will you let them fall into disrepair? This is a big issue from a customer perspective because it will hurt us, and all because you had a falling out with Unity.

Originally posted by Antiga:

You're making all the difference here Noontide. As you said, you feel privileged to be communicating with such an understanding community, but it is only because of your continued efforts through the years.
And I would have been surprised if there were absolutely no backlash, no matter what you would've said or done with the regional pricing changes.

Thank you, there's are few pillars to the company that is Brightrock but amongst them is honest and open communication both internally and externally. I believe this is the pillar that enables the general tone of the community to be one of understanding and cooperation between developers and players. I'm proud of what we do here and I am pleased that I am given the freedom and trust to engage with you all in such depth.

All too often do I see communities fall into a state of combat between players and devs, and in fairness I understand why devs extract themselves from these spaces. It's not always easy to face criticism, whether it be warranted or not.

I just hope that engaging with this way helps to educate our customers on what happens in the industry and why decisions like these are made.

Originally posted by Alictron:

1. I'm an amateur dev who has been using Unity and I understand, but I'm worried everyone is jumping the gun on this rather than talking with Unity in a calm manner.

I understand this totally, and I think you're valid to be sceptical over the response Unity has received in this, especially as you're just stepping out.

For long-term developers on the Unity platform this ranks as one of the top 10 anime betrayals of all time. Unity has long been regarded as a platform that exists in service to its clients, developers like yourself.

It's not always been smooth sailing but the communication, the honesty and the fair-treatment afforded to Unity's customer base by unity itself has been the thing that have ensured that Unity deserves the loyalty afforded to it by us.

The announcement last week has shattered that trust that once existed and positioned Unity as a entity hostile to the interests of its clients, and it didn't have to be that way.

Unity has failed multiple attempts at communicating this, it was warned internally by its own engineers how this would go down in its current form, it was advised by Unity insiders (devs like you and I) not to go forward with the announcement because this was the response it would get.

The leadership at Unity were given every opportunity to reconsider and course correct. Unity chose to press forward anyway, although "clarifications" or more likely course adjustments have answered some questions many still remain.

Most importantly the grievous wound has already been inflicted, by changing their terms in this way, retroactively applying it to all engine versions, removing the visible TOS from Github and removing the clauses which allowed developers to remain on older TOS they have proven they are able and willing to change the arrangement at the drop of the hat.

The parallels to Darth Vader "I have altered the deal, pray I do not alter it further" are very, very pertinent. To which the only reply from the users of unity can be "We do not accept the new deal, we can't trust you so we will find someone we can"

Essentially Unity is leveraging its position of power and bulldozing through terms which favour it over its developers under a thin veil that it will "not effect 90% of users" or "it's more reasonable than a revenue share".

No developer, at least in the premium PC, Console space has complaints about the idea of paying more to Unity to continue using it. It's the fear and distrust that Unity has instilled over this poorly thought out, aggressive shift in established arrangements.

It's not even like this couldn't have worked with several qualifications, commitments and assurances from Unity stuff like:

• Unity will never charge more than 5% Gross Revenue via this scheme, ensuring it can never bankrupt a customer and that it remains competitive with Unreal (Who till this point were very hard to justify because of their revenue share)
  
• These new fees would only apply from the Unity Version introduced in the 1st of January 2024, no prior versions of Unity will be subject to new fees.
  
• Developers would not be "on the hook" for unverified installs, pirated copies, duped installs or keys that generate no revenue from sales (Charity, Press, Giveaways, Subscription Services like Gamepass)
  
• The fee would never be charged more than once per customer per platform, even if they install it on another device.
  
• Unity would be contractually obligated to observe the new terms and would not be able to change them "at will".

Even were Unity to walk this back now there's simply very few ways they can win back the trust that they chose to break. It's about as bad as it gets from a customer relations stand-point.

Every day that passes the situation worsens for Unity, their leadership remains silent and one can only presume that they don't intend to avert disaster.

2. When I played WFTOW initially I was frustrated with massive frame rate drops to the point it was unplayable, but then you guys fixed the problem and asked me to come back and play. To which it has become one of my top games of all time.

Really pleased to hear this, Game dev is a long and winding road, fraught with dangers and challenges you never see coming. It can always be incredibly rewarding and unrewarding at the same time.

I wish you the absolute best in your journey!

Are you sure that retraining is the optimal route as it may end up costing you more?

In the short-term there will be costs, but as Unity cannot be trusted to abide by established arrangements and could at any moment seemingly drop bombshell changes to their terms which could end up costing more at any time there's not really much choice.

It's that or stick with a partner who seems to want to sabotage a mutually beneficial relationship.

Unity gives all the impressions of a ship who's captain drunkenly decided to detonate a bomb in the cargo hold and who's only assurances are "The water's not that cold really and it won't sink the ship anyway, trust me bro". Anyone not eyeing up the lifeboats is at huge risk.

The scope of the retraining required depends on what engine we choose to use for our next project. Moving to Unreal for example would probably be more significant as our coders are fluent in C# not C++ while the general engine knowledge would still be required across the team.

Given that you are retaining and are unlikely to hire Unity devs in the future will you be shutting down your games built on Unity or will you let them fall into disrepair? This is a big issue from a customer perspective because it will hurt us, and all because you had a falling out with Unity.

We'll be retaining a high degree of institutional knowledge with Unity, unless there's a mass exodus from our team that skill isn't going anywhere it just won't develop further in favour of learning new skills.

Everyone on the core team who worked on War for the Overworld on an artistic and technical level post-release, including the entire programming team is still at the company and unless something goes horribly wrong we don't see that changing.

War for the Overworld will continue in maintenance mode, Galacticare will receive post-release support relative to its success up to and including DLC/Expansions and will then enjoy the same maintenance that WFTO currently has.

We're not going to abandon our customers... unless Unity arbitrarily decides to start charging us $0.20 for each hour played per user making it unfeasible to continue operating the game. Which before all this anyone would have considered impossible and absurd, but... well... it seems unity now cannot be relied upon to not sabotage a business relationship.

Thank you for the reply, actually the best response to the situation I have seen, along with educational group Gamedev.tv.

You guys being open to the consumer and committing yourselves to us is one of the many reasons I will keep buying your games (provided they appeal to me).
I understand your mistrust in Unity regarding this, frankly I have felt the same way about many developers, particularly in the AAA market.

I wish you the best of luck moving forward, just remember how you guys felt about this and don't do it to us.

Originally posted by Alictron:

Thank you for the reply, actually the best response to the situation I have seen, along with educational group Gamedev.tv.

I'm glad the post was elucidating, I tried my best to make it relatable for everyone reading while still covering most of the ground where my personal concerns lie. I'm sure the concerns of individual developers vary because it is a very broad topic.

The scale of the response to Unity should make one thing clear however, this isn't a small mistake on their part, that it could even see the light of day is warning signs enough that their leadership is critically out of touch.

I'm particularly interested in how they're planning to "Charge" Microsoft or Sony for the Runtime fee instead when it comes to Gamepass and the likes. I'm sure that'll go down really well with the platform holders... I'm sure it won't either face legal challenge or result in Unity games being banned from such services *shrug*

You guys being open to the consumer and committing yourselves to us is one of the many reasons I will keep buying your games (provided they appeal to me).
I understand your mistrust in Unity regarding this, frankly I have felt the same way about many developers, particularly in the AAA market.

Got to say I totally understand, as I said in reply to the other user I see so many spaces where it feels like open combat between the conflicting interests of devs and customers. This is especially true in AAA where community managers are disempowered, but also in Indie where developers are overly precious and sensitive to criticism.

The most important thing is to listen and understand. If I had one bit of advice on that for an aspiring dev it'd be to always listen and empathise with your customer, even if you cannot resolve their complaint 100% or even 1% try your best to explain the perspective you have so they can appreciate why decisions are being made.

The last thing you want to do is appear arbitrary, uncaring and out of touch as you rule from your throne on high... maybe there's a engine developer who could learn something from that.

I wish you the best of luck moving forward, just remember how you guys felt about this and don't do it to us.

Sorry, as of now each tile your workers claim will incur a $0.01 surcharge directly to your Steam Wallet.

unity royally screwing it's developer base, it's the dumbest PR and business move they could have made, especially now that Unreal 5 is so sophisticated, they basically help Unreal gain further market share.

Finallt this game is on Geforce now. I still don't understand why no more games are the. But hey THX

Thank you for your fair and detailed transparency concerning the change in pricing!

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Unity... what the hell, will you switch to Unreal?

Is it even legal for them to apply this to prior releases?! Seems like that's something people would take them to court over...

hey come on now john riccitiello needed a 20th mansion can you really blame the guy

I guess the Unity people didn't bother to see what happened with Wizards of the Coast when they tried the same b.s.

Originally posted by Spleeter:

I guess the Unity people didn't bother to see what happened with Wizards of the Coast when they tried the same b.s.

True!

Originally posted by Spleeter:

I guess the Unity people didn't bother to see what happened with Wizards of the Coast when they tried the same b.s.

Remember people! Consequences Are just Things That Happen To Other People, never to yourself! What failed for someone else was because they just weren't YOU. If you do the exact same thing for the same reasons, it'll work for YOU because *you're* doing it. This is of course doubly true if you are wealthy.

Sorry, I misspoke, there when I said "people" at the top, I forgot, anyone who isn't wealthy isn't a person at all, are they? Nonrich entities are just a barrier to you and YOUR money that needs to be mined like an errant gold tile in the dungeon.



(How bad a world it is we live in that actual real humans in charge of things are becoming r have become more cartoonishly evil than most of fiction's ACTUAL evil villains?)

This behaviour exhibited by Unity is truly unacceptable. I sincerely hope that this marks a turning point for them and serves as a lesson for any other companies considering such anti-development and anti-consumer practices.

Unity is ♥♥♥♥ ? What ? XD
Did you guys really thought they will miss an opertunity like that ?
It was so clear this was a"trap"...
"Let people use our engine for thousands of games, then few years later we will ask for a fee when devs will be confortable using our engine so they won't change for an other one"... XD XD XD