Today we found out that Unity is introducing a disasterous "Runtime Fee" policy.
Will they walk it back and reverse this descision?
At the end of the month if they have not announced a reversal of the policy this market resolves NO.
Otherwise at the end of the month this market resolves YES.
Clarification from the comments:
"The key thing is that whatever they do it has to feel like a total walkback and not just a slight downgrade / sidegrade into something PR viable. At a minimum no installation/runtime fees before we even need to think about it."
https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/unity-to-start-charging-fee-pegged-to-game-installs
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ795 | |
| 2 | Ṁ530 | |
| 3 | Ṁ167 | |
| 4 | Ṁ128 | |
| 5 | Ṁ99 |
People are also trading
Unity announced some major changes today.
https://blog.unity.com/news/open-letter-on-runtime-fee
They removed it from the personal license entirely and have made some major changes to the professional licenses. It's now optional whether the license holder wants a revenue share or the install fee. It's now up to whether OP considers this a "total walkback" or not.
@JohnKossa The per-install fee has been removed though: "For games that are subject to the runtime fee, we are giving you a choice of either a 2.5% revenue share or the calculated amount based on the number of new people engaging with your game each month."
@DavePanfilo A rev share model like Unreal is not a runtime fee. I also object that the details meaningfully changed. Literally the description said "reverse this decision" and that has not happened.
@ThomasS What would be a non inconsistent title in your eyes? I think the spirit of this market has always been upfront from day 1.
@SneakySly "Will Unity fully reverse their new "Runtime Fee" policy by the end of September" sounds more like the description.
The description doesn't describe walking back. It describes a full reversal.
@ThomasS I was thinking those are the same, and reversal was in the original description. I'll edit the title for further clarity though thanks.
This says self reported install numbers and a cap of 4% of revenue above $1 mil
Only a total reversal counts, or if they make changes most people including the Mega Crit studio are happy about would count to?
@SneakySly would be good to clarify in the description as you did in the comments that a simple change to the terms of the install fees is not enough to resolve this market to yes. It would have to completely get rid of install fees. But let's say they changed it to rev share, does that still count?
@HenryE Good point I will update the description!
I think the key thing is that whatever they do it has to feel like a total walkback and not just a slight downgrade / sidegrade into something PR viable. At a minimum no installation/runtime fees before we even need to think about it.
@nottelling2ccc The backlash to this has gotten so extreme that I think Unity might seriously consider walking this back. Though I don’t think it would repair much trust at this point…
