Worse than that, if you use Unity for a non game purpose (I.e. AR for a school or museum or non profit, or make a fitness app, or anything non game with it) you cannot use personal. You are considered industry, and require a pro license at a minimum. Additionally your revenue is now calculated on the company you are freelancing too and any of their clients revenue, not yours. Which means if they or their customers have over $1m in revenue (which they probably do) you now must buy Industry... for 5k/yr. For everyone on your team. Gotta love their industry and freelancer pricing.

that's crazy

If they enforce this they are killing so much Unity freelancing that was around...

@yakdoggames they've been enforcing it over the last year. It'll make someone's blood boil a little bit, and its a very tense experience. After we paid last time, they made a mistake and accidentally disabled our company licenses anyway. It was a whole thing. I'm still mad about it. I don't think I even got an apology.

I've never heard this before and it's terrifying. So as a side gig if I make $150 contributing to a prototype for a project that goes on to make that company big bucks, I would be forced to buy a Pro license that costs hundreds or thousands more than I actually made?

That's the best you can come with? Okay

Its unlikely but not impossible. Its a scary thought though. 😢

At worst, you'd lose the Editor. But all your code and art assets would be just fine. If Unity goes away, you'd have to port to a new engine anyway, so being unable to use the Editor seems like a given.

Unity going bankrupt? That’s like being an IPhone user and being worried about Apple going bankrupt, that’s too extreme lol

Not only that. What if you made a game 24 years ago and want to fix a bug or whatever? I mean even 4 years? Adding DRM to a game engine. That is what this is. At the very minimum it should not be more sustainable to run a pirated version of the engine then the paid and licensed one. Yet with a call home to someone else's computer for digital right management? That means you own nothing and should be happy!

That's usually the case. YT doesn't operate on morals but on who is paying.

​@@Elwaves2925 the single moral they'd have to abide by is to not serve malvare. Be happy, you seeing that ad is bleeding money from adobe as you will never convert into a paying customer.

That's due to the stupid ad algo.

@@frontrider3240 I didn't see the ad and I have paid for Adobe products. It would be better if they catered for more morals but that won't happen with Google.

Thank God it wasn't just me. I thought it was the crystals kicking in.

Idk don't you have to work with a company in godot to port your game to consoles? And that costs money. I don't think you can publish on consoles for free because console owners don't give out theirs sdk to everyone and certainly not for free. I could be wrong though

Exactly. Being unable to get started with console personal makes them lose potential good games on console. Crazy. I myself am switching to other engine. You know the people who run Unity don't know anything about games and definitely don't even play games.

alone, it's not that easy to get on console. and if you go through a publisher, they will pay the unity fee.

i'm pretty sure you need to get accepted on the dev platform of those consoles first. Xbox is the only exception since you can apparently use UWP builds on an Xbox in dev mode, at least that's what i read a while ago

@@ZedDevStuff xbox is not an exception, while making games for it is similar to making for windows you still have to apply to be a partner to get access to the dev kit.

indie devs in general don't get access to consoles, only if you have a publisher with the right connections or if your game is already popular enough. even some popular indies get ghosted by consoles and have to get a publisher.

Nah, the consoles still include a couple free Pro licenses once you're approved as a developer. And the decision to require Pro licenses for console was made *by* the consoles, several years ago. Plenty of blog posts about it.

@@mandisaw Nope, not anymore that change form june 2024

Yeah you maybe start the development years ago and now you can publish nothing in the sony platforms, so you are force to pay for pro, or no publish to consoles anymore

@@Migeruangel I haven't seen anything from any of the Big 3 consoles saying they're changing that aspect of their developer program. YT will block links, but if you have a source or article title, that'd be appreciated

The issue is their old price model wasn't profitable. If we want this to be sustainable and continue to be updated they need to make money somehow, which is why they needed to change the price model

Education & academic non-profit (incl museum pieces) already qualify for free / discounted licenses. You just have to provide the appropriate gov't docs. This stuff isn't really new, it's just that a lot of entities were abusing the Personal tier.

Don't forget gambling. If you have for example an online card game with real money then it's likely you will need Unitys most expensive licence

@@avp2501 Pretty sure they want 25% of your soul with that license too :D

​@@avp2501 A lot of game engines have issues with gambling games. You better make your game from scratch if it's gonna be a gambling game.

@@stickguy9109 This is likely why Godot gets lots of backing from pub and gambling companies.

Also, who cares

TO EVERYONE IN THIS CHAT: *THE JUDGEMENT OF GOD IS DRAWING NIGH.* REPENT TODAY AND GIVE YOUR LIFE TO JESUS TO ESCAPE ETERNAL DAMNATION!.

I agree. After watching this video I'm still confused about how much it costs to use Unity.

@@eitkoml nothing, unless your game profitable alot

Unreal isn't any better. Maybe people will look elsewhere.

Nah, won't happen. They have monopoly for tools that have set an industry standard, so won't happen fast if ever. You just can't create new 3d Max clone and sell for less.

They can't bcs they are used by big companies and businesses so it can't be

​@@Renegen1i am a godot chil so maybe one day they can compete 🤔😂

​@@charcoalPandaähmm Blender?

and you are about to lose more

@@Migeruangel Well I just purchased shares at low 15s last week and sold them today at close for 17 made a quick 23k profit. Not bad for a 2 weeks work. will do it again next week when it falls back to 15

Microsoft or Meta is going to buy Unity. It's the primary tool used to make VR and XR apps.

To confuse you into paying more.

it's really not

@@Livia-ej3lv you should read Microsofts server licenses. Wonder if they still do BSA raids and audits.

​@@HietakissaSo many folks can't do math, or understand/read the explanation terms or table. They added the calculator because of it, and still folks say they can't follow. I feel for ppl, but if this is too confusing, then how were you ever going to manage a game business? This is like the easiest part of the process.

​​@@mandisaw for indie dev, this one is still more confusing compared to other engine like gamemaker, UE, gdevelop, their payment plan are MUCH simpler

Consoles already required Pro licensing, for several years at this point. But they do grant you a couple Pro licenses once you're approved.

Might want to check unreal and see if you can stomach their woke coding procedures and recommendations. Or they might just not help you out, when their software bugs out (Not saying it will happen or not but for me? the implications are implied). Programming is hard enough without them trying to change programming standards, just to use "their" game engine.

@@yeost187 That's the thing I hate most about unreal. It is so bloated that sometimes it can crush out of nowhere. And damn that compilation time is just ridiculous. The only thing that unreal has better than other engines is good graphics out of the box. In unity everything is customizable so output files it creates(exe, apk) are so small compared to unreal's. But with all that bs they're trying to do I don't want to use unity anymore. So I might as well just write my own engine.

@@yeost187 that woke coding procedure was nothing but a virtue signal. There is no possible way that they can legally force you to do that. That would cause massive law suits.

@@DurmanHimself Yeah, its a shame.

Unless you are making the next call of duty, you honestly dont need Unreal Godot is more than enough these days If Godot's 3D capabilities aren't enough, you can try Stride 3D or Flax

How is counting the installs going to be a problem? They have systems for that reason..

how is it intrusive? And it's not them counting the installs, as they are self-reported

@@Hietakissa I think you mean "automatically reported"? But, I think people like the OP has bo idea what they're talking about.

@@GHOSTSTARSCREAM in the very first iteration of the runtime fee Unity was planning to use some black magic to automatically report installs, but as it stands now (and has for some time) both metrics will be self-reported by the developer

@@GHOSTSTARSCREAM it's self reported, not automatic

not sure man

I suspect they've already figured for that. The real money is in support services, enterprise-level pricing, and the like. Most of us indies never made over the old $100k threshold - the appeal of Plus was in the splashscreen removal. Pro licenses for consoles were already required for a few years - that's unlikely to change much.

🤣

Yep this was my exact thought. They hate developers. It costs your dignity to partner up with that

Maybe you should consider making your own engine from scratch using Java with eclipse, learn how to make 3d scenes... Yeah deffinetly more worth it ~

@@wicgamesdev if you consider making your own engine with java and eclipse in 2024 then you have a lot more to consider than using or not using Unity....

@@wicgamesdev Unreal is better for 3D than unity

That's so, sorry to say i diot move, unreal for 3d and godot for 2d? Bro, they are completely different engine, different workflow, different script, all different, the only thing they share is they both game engine.... And beside that 2 engine, you also need learn graphic design(ilustrator, photoshop, etc), blender, not music yet.... Really bro? How smart are you

Logging into Unity Hub is the issue. If I've downloaded Unity and the Hub, why would I need to log in more than once on a personal license? The program doesn't know my revenue so can't say it is tracking that part of the license and it is free so no need to phone home to see if I paid up for the month. That's the problem we have with it!

​@@WeenieWalkerGamesSoftware patches, mainly. Platforms (console & mobile) require you to update your game periodically to keep up with their SDK changes.

Iirc the new pricing only applies to new Unity versions

you're required to buy Unity Pro after $200K revenue additionally, you're required to pay the runtime fee after $1M revenue AND 1M initial engagements

Big fixes, dlc, patches.

@@gamefromscratch or you made more money then you thought you would. Them's the rules. If you don't like it, don't use unity. Also the rules, they can change the rules at any time and all you can do is deal with it.

It's literally just 2.5% or less, not that complex

@@BruhZerk Unreal and Godot are still a better financial bet.

It's objectively untrue that there've been no engine updates - new packages, core features, improvements to tools, etc. What is it you're looking for that you haven't seen?

@@mandisaw Sure, I'm exaggerating when I say there are "no" improvements, but in my eyes they only do the bare minimum and send you to the asset store instead. Odin inspector is the best example. It provides a lot of smaller and bigger improvements to the editor. Unity could easily just copy many ideas from them, but that will not happen. First of all, what signal would that send to the developers? Everyone would think twice before they start developing tools since unity can just make them obsolete. Second of all, unity makes money if anyone buys these tools. So they shoot themselves in the foot twice, if they copy them. That lowers unitys interest in making the engine better and as a side effect making your decision to leave unity harder when you already invested a lot of money into these tools. Of course they could just buy it. They did that before and acquired textmeshpro, cinemachine, probuilder, polybrush, bolt and probably more. These are all great, but of course just buying them is so much easier and cheaper to do rather than unity developing them. Often times they also hired the developers for a limited amount of time. And what happened after that time? Now they are no longer being actively developed anymore. No new features only a few bug fixes for years. Cinemachine being the exception (and maybe bolt I don't know about that). And what about their own systems? Look at mecanim. I don't know anyone that likes working with it. Did they make any improvements especially when it comes to usability? No, instead they are joking that the graph always end up being a mess during public speeches. What about their terrain tools, the animator, their audio solution? Were there any significant updates in the last years? Recently they introduced AI navigation 2.0 but that was just a merge with the experimental package that was out for many years already without anything new. They are working on their new UI solution for a while now. It is just too clunky to use and I don't think many people have adopted it. Not everything is bad, they did a good job with shader graph or the new input system. But the input system is also something only they can do. For me it is like they are working on something until it is "good enough" to make us happy and then move on leaving us with a half-assed system. And besides this, they keep adding more and more services so you give them more money and your players data. Now compare that to blender where basically every aspect of the software is constantly improving. Or UE...

@@rw969 Hard to follow your logic there. The stuff they bought and improved/expanded-upon (Cinemachine, TMP) doesn't count? The stuff they built in-house and stabilized from preview to GA (Tilemap, Pathfinding, UITK) doesn't count? The stuff they built that works great but that folks misuse or misunderstand (Mecanim, Timeline/Playables, new Input System, XR) doesn't count? As for Odin, Bolt, and similar WYSIWYG "must-haves", those are assets for folks who just want a different workflow to what's built into the software. That's fine to have options - but I don't see how it's Unity's fault if some folks just don't have the know-how or motivation to learn to use the built-in tools. Unity is a code-centric tool, with a lot of parts that may or may not apply to any particular project or team. There are definitely complaints to be made, but saying they haven't made anything useful in 6yrs because you personally don't like the stuff that was made - that doesn't make any sense. _"That's like, just your opinion, man"_ LOL Just say you don't like what they made, or you wish they'd focus on other stuff, that's perfectly reasonable. Don't need to make false claims.

@@mandisaw Clearly you didn't read my essay since I gave them credit where credit is due. It's always easy to blame people to misuse something. Or maybe you just want to miss my point. Look what blender is doing, look at unreal. Do you think unity has done a similar job as they have in the last years?

@@rw969 You gave them faint praise for a couple systems, but still seemed nonplussed 🤷 Blender is decent, and tries to do a lot (maybe too much). I liked it for learning (free!), but after several years & UI overhauls I jumped ship to Maya - better support for industry formats, more intuitive interface, and I don't have to constantly lookup new tutorials for stuff I already learned how to do. At this stage of my career, paying money for convenience & not-wasted time is the better option. Unreal isn't suitable for any project I want to work on - poor mobile support, no/limited custom editor tooling, and Blueprints can't do most of what I need. The docs are functionally nonexistent. I can code in C++, but C# & Unity is a much more pleasant development experience.

Or at all.

The forest? Gtfo?

​@@altongames1787 OP meant Unity the company not the engine. Unity had a project were they were making a game to learn what devs need, Unity giving up on the project just showed that even they had issues and it was going to be hard to implement all fixes and features needed to make a complete game even if it's a small one, devs usually use the asset store to fix a lot of the issues or write their own solutions for things you would get out of the box in UE5. Personally I think both UE5 and Unity have serious issues, but that project would have helped Unity improve the engine.

@@MAKIUSO . The sad thing is that many people were really excited about the Gigaya project, and myself included. It actually looked really interesting. Now I mainly use Unreal for 3D and Godot for 2D. I tried Unity 6, but it made me feel icky and gross. 😂

​@@etherealregions2676 Godot has decent 3D though. Yeah it maybe not as optimized as Unity but still pretty usable

Unity can be simple too: pay $2K/year after $200K, 2.5% extra after $1M

Godot is free yeah but they are backed by community and donations.

2k a year is fucking INSANELY expensive 😂 ​@@Hietakissa

​@@DeavtheDev Not when you're making 200k

@@DeavtheDev not when you make >200K revenue

It's not broken, it's because you pay based on how many monthly initial engagements you have, if your initial engagements stay the same it doesn't matter how high your revenue is

Unreal is your safest bet.

If your company is using Unity, that means your company is making a mobile game, right? Unity is indeed the best game engine for mobile games.

That depends on you and the type of game you are making. There are so many other game engines out there out side of the big two, Unreal and Unity. They all have their pros and cons. GameFromScratch has tons of videos going over all the different engines.

Unity isn't going anywhere, it's as valid of an option as Unreal or even Godot. With that said, if you're already using Unity at your job, then it of course could make more sense to use it just based on that.

@@Hietakissa That's my problem with it. Unity is too big to fail. They know that, thus they was so confident in pushing out bs. Dev have no agency over them.

That would cost people more than the current pricing model though lol.. It's 2.5% or less right now

You should try Unreal 5 lmao, you will be waiting 100 years

There are already Unity to Godot converters.

Look more into GamesFromScratch's youtube channel. He's done multiple videos on how to export assets between Unreal, Unity, and Godot!

​@@hunter7777Only for raw art assets like models & textures. Anything code related, shaders & materials, physics, VFX are engine-locked. And stuff like packages, project config, lighting, etc are also non-portable.

Until you release you need a lot of money just to build a pc that can run ue5, yet you cried about fee that's most likely you will never meet to pay, hahahs

The only alternative in godot I can see is not finished/only a foundation for it.

VRChat can't switch to anything because they would have to build their own tools from scratch and break the years of community work. Unity can load pretty much a whole game inside another one as long as it's packed correctly

Wait how do you make vrchat worlds in unity

I want the Chinese version so much!

@@Dave102693 +1000 social credit

It lost all my trust the moment the runtime fee fiasco happened. So now? I'd rather fail at Godot, over Unity...

agreed

Tbh, I don't care that you don't care ;-)

@gordzen123 Also is Unreal. The issue with Unity is that there are solid replacements for it, unlike Adobe Lightroom for example...

@@tonyzaddo just said my opinion, i respect yours

Outside of PC/Steam, all other platforms require you to keep up with SDK updates. Those are built into Unity, but only if you continue updating.

juce also did a very similar thing, and removed after the change as well, where they required their splash screen for paid or closed source plugins, unless you paid them. so either it was open source and you didn’t have to have that, or you paid money to not have that. so again, it was the small commercial offerings which were branded with juce, which of course does not look good. although at least before this open source plugins didn’t have to have that, so a difference there with unity. but now, like unity, that’s gone. def some parallels there lol.

oh and juce didn’t try to apply stuff retroactively, but they would only sell old licenses before the new one was available or something, so it basically forced new devs into it, or anyone who wanted to use an internal web browser for ui (sounds dumb to me, idk why people like it)

Its the same hazzle you have with Unreal, you need to report there as well. And Godot is a great engine, but still far from what you get from Unity.

@@SunSailor Unreal isn't this same hassle at all. You just pay a percentage of revenue for roalties after you have made $1,000,000 USD. You know. Pretty much how any normal license works. Untiy is making this super dumb and convoluted.

@@StevenSudweeks Everyone is ignoring the fact that you can choose to do the same with Unity, only with 2.5% instead of 5%. It doesn't need to be a hassle if you don't want it to be.

@@SunSailor Unity not only requires sales figures but unique engagement for their runtime fee. That means we need to track that garbage. Unreal also has basically one lic4ense (well 2 if you count corporate suupport). You use the enigne, oyu make X ammount? you owe x percentage. Done.

@@EricLefebvrePhotography How do you calculate one without the other? You‘re not running a studio with real sales, are you?

Well you probably don’t make any money anyway

And just in case MonoGame and Stride are also C# they are just have a smaller user base.

@@G5349 I looked at MonoGame (it's good, just not right for me) but never heard of stride. I'll have a look at it the next time I have a bit of free time.

@@G5349 I tried Stride and I ran into so many bugs within the 30 minutes trying it.

"What happened to sticking to prior licensing terms?" You'd still be on the same terms, as you said it was Plus *or* Pro, so naturally if Plus isn't an option you'd have to go for Pro

@@Hietakissa Except that is the classic definition of a "bait-and-switch." They give you two options, one of which is materially more expensive, and then stop offering the cheaper option that you could have taken; so no, it doesn't comply with the terms as stated. Like I said, I'm not a lawyer, but I fully support any developer who gets into this situation and wants to fight back legally.

@@WeenieWalkerGames unless they explicitly stated "you will forever be able to stay on the plus license" in the terms, how is it not complying with them? The terms stated you have to buy Plus or Pro, to my knowledge it made no guarantees both would be available to purchase

@@Hietakissa Like I said, bait-and-switch. They offered two significantly different pricing tiers. They chose to eliminate the cheaper option. That's like me signing a contract with you to rent you a car and saying, "You get either a Honda Civic or a Bentley and you only have to pay the price of the car you select" and then when it comes time for you to pick up the car, I say, "We only have Bentley and the price is now double what it was." They can talk all they want about staying on the prior license but unless I can get the same deal I had in 2019 or 2021, then I am not made whole by staying on the licensing terms we agreed to when I downloaded their engine.

@@WeenieWalkerGames Your allegory is valid other than the fact that "the price is now double what it was" is not, the prices for the options are the same, the only thing that changed was the collection of possible options, which was never guaranteed to stay the same. The terms were buying Plus/Pro, you can still buy Pro, so the terms are the same and valid even if Plus is no longer available.