Unity plan pricing and packaging updates | Unity Blog
blog.unity.com
In January 2024, Unity will introduce a new Unity Runtime Fee based on game installs. Prior to this, Unity subscription plans will add cloud-based asset storage, Unity DevOps tools, and AI at runtime at no additional cost.

So today Unity announced changes in how they are going to monetize their game engine, and it is, rightfully might I add, poorly recieved Here is how much youtuber Dani would have to pay unity if they consider his games to gain over $200k in revenue Dani's hypothetical unity payments

Now I don’t know how much tracking crackers and re-packers remove from the games getting cracked, but if unity were to count cracked games as a valid install (and they will count every install of a game they are aware of), thn piracy could seriously bankrupt indie devs. Like, not just losing them revenue, but actively losing them money. While piracy is already in an ethical grey area, I think that is just a bit too much. So, I want to raise awareness of this, and with it I have 2 questions to ask:

  • Do the people that crack games make sure to remove the ability of unity tracking cracked installs?
  • If the answer to the previous question is “no”, how do we make them aware of the fact that it is probably for the better if they do this?
  • armchair_progamer@programming.devEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    I’m not involved in piracy/DRM/gamedev but I really doubt they’ll track cracked installs and if they do, actually get indie devs to pay.

    Because what’s stopping one person from “cracking” a game, then “installing” it 1,000,000 times? Whatever metric they use to track installs has to prevent abuse like this, or you’re giving random devs (of games that aren’t even popular) stupidly high bills.

    When devs see more installs than purchases, they’ll dispute and claim Unity’s numbers are artificially inflated. Which is a big challenge for Unity’s massive legal team, because in the above scenario they really are. Even if Unity successfully defends the extra installs in court, it would be terrible publicity to say “well, if someone manages to install your game 1,000 times without buying it 1,000 times you’re still responsible”. Whatever negative publicity Unity already has for merely charging for installs pales in comparison, and this would actually get most devs to stop using Unity, because nobody will risk going into debt or unexpectedly losing a huge chunk of revenue for a game engine.

    So, the only reasonable metric Unity has to track installs is whatever metric is used to track purchases, because if someone purchases the game 1,000,000 times and installs it, no issue, good for the dev. I just don’t see any other way which prevents easy abuse; even if it’s tied to the DRM, if there’s a way to crack the DRM but not remove the install counter, some troll is going to do it and fake absurd amounts of extra installs.

    • Crazazy [hey hi! :D]@feddit.nlOPEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      Whatever metric they use to track installs has to prevent abuse like this

      I would be eagerly awaiting a follow-up response from unity from this, because as it stands right now, consensus among gamedev circles is that unity won’t prevent abuse at all, which is just awful for multiple groups of people.

      • someone paying for your game and then re-downloading it every hour would cost you $144 a month
      • someone paying for your game and then re-downloading it every 5 minutes would cost you $1728 a month
      • web games exist, and if the Unity Runtime Download metric is used there, well, that is going to be an expensive bill for anyone putting any sense of monetization in their web game
    • Otter@lemmy.caEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      That’s what I was thinking.

      It’s going to be a legal kerfuffle trying to prove that Unity (or a competitor) doesn’t have an installation farm operating somewhere.