3 ms·
> This seems unusually high. Looking at Unity wanting to charge 20 cents and the game development industry falling over itself to explain how that will never e
by Aachen 3y ago
> This seems unusually high.
Looking at Unity wanting to charge 20 cents and the game development industry falling over itself to explain how that will never ever work for them... I dunno, maybe other app types (firefox, a mastodon client, osmand, local public transport.. looking at random examples from my homescreen) make enough money from their users and this will be doable for them when microtransaction-laden games couldn't make 2/5ths of that price work out
- callalex 3y agoThat fee was per install, not per install-user-year.
- Aachen 3y agoSo that's worse right? Not 100k€ once but 100k€ every year
- lilyball 3y agoUnity wanted to charge for every single "install", where that category was defined so broadly that even loading the game in a web browser was an "install", and someone downloading and deleting and downloading the app over and over on a device was also repeated "installs". Here Apple is tracking an install across the entire user account per year, so even if you have tons of devices and install the app on every single one of them, that's still just one "install".
- KomoD 3y agoUnity kept revising it over and over again so these two got removed IIRC: > that even loading the game in a web browser was an "install", and someone downloading and deleting and downloading the app over and over on a device was also repeated "installs".
- Teledhil 3y agoUsers can create multiple accounts
- legobmw99 3y agoUnity also wanted it to be retroactive to some extent IIRC
- dagmx 3y agoUnity wanted to change their existing pricing structures in place. The Apple change isn’t really comparable (not saying it’s good or bad) because Apple are introducing a new pricing structure. Most genuine critics of Unity’s proposed changes were fine if it wasn’t replacing what existed.