this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
85 points (97.8% liked)

Games

16729 readers
608 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
85
Unity to Cap Runtime Fee to 4% of Revenue Over $1M, Users Will Self-Report Figures (wccftech.com)
submitted 1 year ago by geosoco@kbin.social to c/games@sh.itjust.works
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The overhauled Runtime Fee policy plan being considered by Unity Technologies will cap the fee to 4% of the game's revenues over $1 million.

...

While the changes aren't official yet, Bloomberg got hold of a meeting recording where Unity executives outlined the new plan, which reportedly caps the Runtime Fee at 4% of the game's revenues over one million dollars. Developers will also be asked to report the installation figures themselves instead of being forced to deal with Unity's proprietary technology. Lastly, the installation threshold won't be retroactive, so only new installations made after the policy's announcement will count toward reaching the Runtime Fee thresholds.

...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 45 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Yeah and it won't work this time.

Unity is B2B, they tried to change the deal retrospectively. That's toxic to a business relationship, it's not viable to do business with such a company because they may try to do it again.

The only thing they can do now is fire the CEO.

[–] cooljacob204@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Or add a clause to the TOS banning retroactive updates of TOS to existing games.

[–] Amaltheamannen@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 year ago

Like they already had but sneakily removed

[–] backgroundcow@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AND add a clause to the TOS banning retroactive updates of TOS to existing games.

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Lawyers really are minions of hell, aren't they?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

Oh yeah I'm sure that will work

[–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Which is exactly the plan. Short term cash boost and loss of trust followed by a new CEO who builds that trust again. Rinse and repeat.

The current CEO gets a golden parachute and the investors get some quick cash and likely buy more stock when the value falls.

[–] Electric_Druid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I hope you're right! Just drawing attention to this page of their playbook.