3 ms·
> Unreal-style revshare where you just give them a small % is super reasonable in comparison The per install fee is still going to be significantly lower for e
by wwtrv 3y ago
> Unreal-style revshare where you just give them a small % is super reasonable in comparison
The per install fee is still going to be significantly lower for everyone making > $2 per user than what Unreal charges. And I assume Unity's best paying customers are doing that. A rev share model would have been much more likely to scare them off. It almost feels that killing the low revenue per user F2P developer user-base might have been a conscious calculated choice (I'm probably giving too much credit to their upper management though).
- mjan22640 3y agoSo the royalties are going to be negligible for large succesfull projects, while potentially an unbreakable barrier for small projects (ie growing free installs first and monetizing later is not viable). This is going to harm their ecosystem, from which the large succesfull projects grow. Why dont they use same principle license as Unreal?
- wwtrv 3y ago> Why dont they use same principle license as Unreal? Their largest customers will probably push back against that more than the install fees. You're losing most of you revenue from China (and some other countries). Companies there will cheat and underreport their revenue (Unity historically had issues even having them to pay for licenses, studios would just buy 1 license per 10-20 developers etc.)