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.

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.

…

  • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
    321·
    10 months ago

    You know whats better? Not reporting shit, I just published my game. I don’t want to report a bunch of numbers to Unity each month. I want to push updates to fix issues my users are complaining about. How the fuck are the biggest chucklefucks in charge of every company? Give me the fucking reigns I can do better than this.

    • noyouEnglish
      261·
      10 months ago

      It’s the infinite growth bullshit that every publicly traded company suffers from. They’re making enough money, but with capitalism it’s never enough…

    • BaskinRobbins@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      231·
      10 months ago

      I saw a theory from another lemmy user a while back that made a lot of sense. Basically shareholders get to a point where the want cash now. So they make a deal with the current CEO to do something shitty for short term profits. The shareholders get paid in the short term and then once the share price takes a hit they buy more shares at a discount. They then fire the current CEO who takes a nice exit fee and install someone else to do damage control and grow the stock price again. This is the only thing that makes sense to me because the alternative is that the current CEO is just actually that dumb.

    • filister@lemmy.worldEnglish
      111·
      10 months ago

      For me the problem is that the shareholders are putting enormous pressure on publicly traded companies requiring ever lasting exponential growth.

      Back then I posted a thread about why I think publicly traded companies are bad for our society, as an unpopular opinion and I got severely downvoted, but hey isn’t this another example for the latter?

      This SaaS model was born exactly out of this and it is the worst offender.

      Back then we were able to own our own software/hardware, now everything is leasing and perpetual paying for things you need/use everyday. Thank God we have foss apps that in most cases are better alternatives.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        91·
        10 months ago

        Wow, thats amazing! You know what is even more trivial? Not having to do it at all.

          • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            10 months ago

            I can when I didn’t have to do it before and this policy is forced upon me by an established vendor. Thats like saying you can’t bitch about material vendors in the construction industry, you absolutely can because they make your business work and you’ve entrusted them not to fuck you.

              • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                10 months ago

                Its not the tracking of sales thats the issue. Its having to report it to someone so they can take even more of my money when we haven’t been doing that for years.