Unity (led by an ex-EA CEO to give you an idea where this is headed) decided to change their pricing model to charging $0.20 per install (if you’re over $200K revenue and 200K installs) – they haven’t clarified how they’re planning on tracking install numbers (ie. can someone use a VM to tank a competitor?) – then someone pointed out they quietly changed their TOS back in April to “allow” this to go through – and apparently they’ve sent out letters saying they’ll wave the install fee if you use their own IronSource ad system instead of the AppLovin ad system – needless to say, devs are panicking, Godot is seeing a huge influx, and Unity has maintained radio silence all weekend … Monday should be “interesting” …
We have heard you. We apologize for the confusion and angst the runtime fee policy we announced on Tuesday caused. We are listening, talking to our team members, community, customers, and partners, and will be making changes to the policy. We will share an update in a couple of days. Thank you for your honest and critical feedback.
Unity (led by an ex-EA CEO to give you an idea where this is headed) decided to change their pricing model to charging $0.20 per install (if you’re over $200K revenue and 200K installs) – they haven’t clarified how they’re planning on tracking install numbers (ie. can someone use a VM to tank a competitor?) – then someone pointed out they quietly changed their TOS back in April to “allow” this to go through – and apparently they’ve sent out letters saying they’ll wave the install fee if you use their own IronSource ad system instead of the AppLovin ad system – needless to say, devs are panicking, Godot is seeing a huge influx, and Unity has maintained radio silence all weekend … Monday should be “interesting” …
You missed their latest response a few hours ago
https://twitter.com/unity/status/1703547752205218265
Hey, no worries, Unity, we weren't confused at all.