https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/a- … skiller.260370/
https://github.com/R-T-B/UnityAnalyticsKiller/releases
https://www.gog.com/forum/iron_harvest/how_to … unity_analytics
https://forum.unity.com/threads/disable-ugs-a … tirely.1400035/

cdp.cloud.unity3d.com
perf-events.cloud.unity3d.com
config.uca.cloud.unity3d.com

Instead of review bombing, disgruntled gamers will have the option of install bombing.

That is one hell of a greedy (and dumb) pricing model..

appiah4 wrote on 2023-09-13, 06:19:

That is one hell of a greedy (and dumb) pricing model..

Reminds me of something I read about Unity a year ago... I was quite surprised when I saw it... considering Unity has been used in so many places...

Not sure how it will impact the mobile games that have been using Unity for a long time... will wait for a month or two to see what the devs would announce before this year ends...

Talk about self inflicted wounds - Unity just killed itself.

Unity wants to hold Microsoft liable for the GamePass installs fee - this will not end well.

https://www.bluesnews.com/s/263736/unity-per- … l-fee-follow-up

Zoom in: After initially telling Axios earlier Tuesday that a player installing a game, deleting it and installing it again woul […]
Show full quote

Zoom in: After initially telling Axios earlier Tuesday that a player installing a game, deleting it and installing it again would result in multiple fees, Unity's Whitten told Axios that the company would actually only charge for an initial installation. (A spokesperson told Axios that Unity had "regrouped" to discuss the issue.)

He hoped this would allay fears of "install-bombing," where an angry user could keep deleting and re-installing a game to rack up fees to punish a developer.
But an extra fee will be charged if a user installs a game on a second device, say a Steam Deck after installing a game on a PC.

Between the lines: Runtime fees will also not be charged for installations of game demos, Whitten said, unless the demo is part of a download that includes the full game (early access games would be charged for an installation, he noted).

Games offered for charity or included in charities will be exempt from the fees. Unity will provide a way for developers to inform Unity that their games are being offered that way, Whitten said.
As for Game Pass and other subscription services, Whitten said that developers like Aggro Crab would not be on the hook, as the fees are charged to distributors, which in the Game Pass example would be Microsoft.
Runtime fees will also not be charged for installations of game demos, Whitten said, unless the demo is part of a download that includes the full game (early access games would be charged for an installation, he noted).

Of note: Whitten estimates that only about 10% of Unity's developers will wind up having to pay any fees, given the thresholds games need to hit.

I'm confused by all this talk of "installs". The only "installing" that happens nowadays that I'm aware of are stores like GOG that have actual installers (for their non-galaxy installers). Almost all installs by the stores copy over the files and then update the registry, add/remove, start menu and desktop. Why somehow monitor an install ("install" method different per game service) when you gather those stats when the game is ran and telemetry is sent?

I download all my online games, back them up and strip off the DRM. I've never re-download them and never "install" them (unless GOG or similar). I haven't been doing anything for telemetry since it's never prevented the game from working. Of course there doesn't have to be just one method they are using but I doubt they are connecting to some API provided by each "distributor" to track installs and they can't be stupid enough to pull numbers out of their ass. I do a lot of game testing on different hardware and different VMs though so sorry "distributors" guess you'll have to pay up! Are they going to count Unity games from 10 years ago? Old versions of the games? What is the oldest version of Unity they can track installs?

I suppose all my games would be counted as "piracy" even though they were purchased. heh

As for Game Pass and other subscription services, Whitten said that developers like Aggro Crab would not be on the hook, as the fees are charged to distributors, which in the Game Pass example would be Microsoft.

🤣, yeah because that's how the world works riiigghht. Tell that to Amazon, Netflix users and any other subscriber to a service when their subscription fees go up.

Unity's main market is mobile games. Installs/uninstalls there are recorded as well as sales. Games using Unity on PC as a main platform are a much smaller market than mobile. But yeah, terrible idea. That's John Riccetello for you. When he finished with EA he came to Unity as the next victim 😅

I think it's a bit premature to say that Unity is going away anytime soon. The install fee is $0.20 or lower, depending on the plan. For it to kick in with the Personal or Plus plans, your game has to have generated at least $200,000 in revenue and to have had at least 200,000 installs. The revenue and install count is $1,000,000 and 1,000,000 for the Pro and Enterprise plans. Although developers understandably angry over this, I think most would choose to pay the fee rather than port their game to another engine. Porting the game over would certainly require a large investment on their part, and they may just choose to eat the cost. Consider how many months of work would be spent on porting it over, which is time taken away from them working on a new game or new content.

That being said, I do think this will affect which engine new developers choose to go with, so it might have an impact in the long run. I don't think the cost itself will be a major deterrent, but the bad publicity could be. Gamers can certainly hold a grudge, so I think a lot of people will try to persuade people to choose another engine when the usual "which engine should I learn?" question comes up.

To be clear, I'm not defending or supporting this decision by Unity. I just don't think it will lead to their downfall.

The installation and initialization of a game or app on an end user’s device as well as distribution via streaming is considered an “install.”

if you can run the game, it's an install. To add insult to injury, the fee is retroactive, as "lifetime installs" (ie from the prior years) are counted and taxed.

All determinations, calculations of installs, and revenue related to the Unity Runtime Fee will be made by Unity in its sole discretion.

That's the money shot. Developers will have the option to pay the fee or lose the Unity license, most likely.

Developers can pay the protection racket (1800 USD / 1877 EUR per year) to move to Unity Pro for higher fee thresholds.

source: https://unity.com/runtime-fee

From the updated FAQ page, it seems Unity counts installs on separate devices individually, so problems related to install-bombing as well as unwanted installs (aka piracy) remain open.

The rationale is that they do not want to track identity across different devices, but in today's online ecosystem... such promises are very hard to trust.

I wonder how Unity tracks offline (airgapped) installs. For example, I've a multi-boot system whose Win8.1 (on which I'll be installing the purchased game) cannot connect to Internet due to its onboard 2.5Gbe not having known drivers for older Windows than Win10.

Will there be some mandatory phone-home from now on? The updated FAQ does not explain this in detail, but there are some devs already opted out from the analytics, having tried disabling them code-wise.

The major problem is that some good games can be delisted now. Apparently, Cult of The Lamb developers will delist the game next year.

Ensign Nemo wrote on 2023-09-13, 22:06:

I think it's a bit premature to say that Unity is going away anytime soon.

It won't go away, but now it will be permanently and exclusively associated with asset flop scams and mobile microtransaction garbage.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-09-14, 05:05:

The major problem is that some good games can be delisted now. Apparently, Cult of The Lamb developers will delist the game next year.

Ensign Nemo wrote on 2023-09-13, 22:06:

I think it's a bit premature to say that Unity is going away anytime soon.

It won't go away, but now it will be permanently and exclusively associated with asset flop scams and mobile microtransaction garbage.

Well, if every company is associated with asset flop scams and mobile microtransaction garbage, then no company is. That’s the current direction of tech industry it seems…

Not surprising coming from Riccitiello, the same guy that wanted to charge a fee for each additional ammo clip in a Battlefield.

I was wondering about the "retroactive" aspect of this. Is that even legal? For example, it would be like if you bought a drill 5 years ago, then the manufacturer just demands you pay a fee for each hole you drilled since you bought it!

I don't think this is going to work unless the original EULA had some kind of provision for this scenario. Although knowing these companies, they may be betting on small indie developers not being able to afford legal costs vs. the full power of corporate Unity lawyers.

TheMobRules wrote on 2023-09-15, 23:19:

Not surprising coming from Riccitiello, the same guy that wanted to charge a fee for each additional ammo clip in a Battlefield.

I was wondering about the "retroactive" aspect of this. Is that even legal? For example, it would be like if you bought a drill 5 years ago, then the manufacturer just demands you pay a fee for each hole you drilled since you bought it!

I don't think this is going to work unless the original EULA had some kind of provision for this scenario. Although knowing these companies, they may be betting on small indie developers not being able to afford legal costs vs. the full power of corporate Unity lawyers.

The company who writes TOS, EULA and such will always have the final say on everything, including making changes on them for whatever reasons (such as complying with related laws of certain regions), as well as deciding whether you have violated their terms or not. For the latter, they will not tell you which exact term you have violated or why, because once people know the boundaries, they'll eventually figure out how to work them around.

There's little to do unless you have the incentive to completely stop using their products if the changes in TOS/EULA (which they usually would send a email beforehand) are going to create problems for you. By using them, you have automatically agreed to their updated terms.

EDIT: They can also bend the interpretation of the existing TOS to their favor... like how Reddit handled the backlash of their API changes.

And regarding data collection... I think it's similar to how M$ updated Windows recent to display a personal data consent message on regions covered by related laws. Though you cannot refuse, it made little difference -- data collection has always been there since day one, your data is already there, and M$ is merely doing this so as not to be in direct violation of such laws which could hold them liable.

NOTE: If you do live in such a country, but you have set your country setting to a different one that is not covered by such laws, you will not see that message and everything, including data collection, will continue to function as-is.

Don't know what will happen among the devs in the next 3 months. Unity is not the only C#-based engine, but it can be a lot of work if some functions present in Unity do not exist in the target engine of your choice, as well as when it comes to graphics-related stuffs.

https://www.eurogamer.net/unity-will-quietly- … -service-report

LSS10999 wrote on 2023-09-16, 05:45:

The company who writes TOS, EULA and such will always have the final say on everything

This depends on to the extent such terms can be enforced though. There are times when companies have tried to enforce a term of an EULA and then lost in court (Vernor v. Autodesk comes to mind).

The whole runtime fee thing makes me wonder how Unity is able to enforce it in the first place. Can Unity somehow prevent games from running from companies that don't pay? Are they going to start taking game development studies and publishers to court if those companies don't pay?

It'll be interesting to see what the ultimate ramifications of this are.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-09-14, 05:05:

The major problem is that some good games can be delisted now. Apparently, Cult of The Lamb developers will delist the game next year.

They've already backflipped on this, calling it a "joke that was taken seriously".

But yeah, there's so many problems with the changes. My brother who's a software dev was telling me about all the weird edge cases that the policy could have - there were dozens just that we came up with!

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-09-17, 12:13:

This depends on to the extent such terms can be enforced though. There are times when companies have tried to enforce a term of an EULA and then lost in court (Vernor v. Autodesk comes to mind).

The whole runtime fee thing makes me wonder how Unity is able to enforce it in the first place. Can Unity somehow prevent games from running from companies that don't pay? Are they going to start taking game development studies and publishers to court if those companies don't pay?

It'll be interesting to see what the ultimate ramifications of this are.

AFAIK of pretty much every service I use the provider reserves the right to amend TOS/EULA when needed, as well as the right of final interpretation.

The problem people were complaining is that Unity wants to apply this change retroactively. That is, taking devs' data before the changes take effect into consideration (especially, lifetime install count). Not sure how many devs have already reached said threshold by the time the Runtime Fee takes effect (so they risk being billed by Unity immediately starting with 2024 for new installs).

Q: Who is charged the Unity Runtime Fee? […]
Show full quote

Q: Who is charged the Unity Runtime Fee?

A: The Unity Runtime Fee will be charged to the entity that distributes the runtime.

Q: Will developers be charged the Unity Runtime Fee for subscription-based games?

A: No, in this case the developer is not distributing it so we’re not going to invoice the developer on subscription-based games (e.g. Apple Arcade, Xbox Game Pass, PlayStation Plus, Netflix Games, etc.)

I'm not sure what does the entity that distributes the runtime mean in this context. The developers themselves, or the app stores on which the games are provided for download/install? From what the FAQ mentions about subscription services (Game Pass, etc.), I suspect it might be the latter, though I could not find a clear answer of this question from the current FAQ at the time of writing this. This so-called "Runtime Fee" change has raised too many questions that the FAQ is constantly being updated.

Q: Does a reinstall of an app on the same device count towards the Unity Runtime Fee? […]
Show full quote

Q: Does a reinstall of an app on the same device count towards the Unity Runtime Fee?

A: No, we are not going to charge a fee for reinstalls.

Q: Do installs of the same game by the same user across multiple devices count as different installs?

A: We treat different devices as different installs. We don’t want to track identity across different devices.

Regardless, someone has to be the one bearing that cost. A worst case scenario, however, would be that Google, Apple, etc., will start charging users a few cents for every new device install so as to cover the cost the app stores would have to pay for Unity, which in turn provides Unity a more accurate number on valid installs... Well, it's up to Unity to explain this further in detail...

PS: Someone in the Unity forum actually asked ChatGPT about "charging per install per device" and ChatGPT appeared to be against this idea.

UPDATE (Sep 24): It seems Unity published an open letter on Sep 22nd and overhauled the page, so for now the concerns I've been having after reading the initial version may not happen in the immediate future... but who knows...

Namely the fee no longer applies to older supported Unity versions and no longer applies to the free tier (Personal and Plus), only Pro and Enterprise. Devs are to self-report their initial engagements and revenues (with existing data) so hopefully no changes on telemetry...

Will see how this development continues...

So now Unity is backpedaling, with further information to be announced. But probably not really.