Search Unity

Unity Plus 및 Pro 라이선스 가격 정책 변경 안내 (2020년 1월 1일부 시행)

, 10월 17, 2019

Unity Pro/Plus 제품의 새로운 가격 정책을 사전 안내해 드립니다. 기존에 홈페이지를 통해 구독 중인 시트에는 이번 가격 인상이 적용되지 않습니다. 문의 사항은 자주 묻는 질문(FAQ)을 참고하세요.

2020년 1월 1일부터 새로운 가격 정책 적용

2020년 1월 1일 오전 12시(UTC)를 기준으로 새로 시트를 구매하거나 추가하는 경우 Unity Plus와 Unity Pro의 구독료가 각각 월 미화 40달러, 월 미화 150달러로 인상될 예정입니다. 기존에 홈페이지를 통해 구독 중인 시트에는 이번 가격 인상이 적용되지 않으며, Unity Personal은 계속 무료로 이용 가능합니다(적격한 사용자에 한함). 구독 플랜 및 가격에 대한 자세한 내용은 플랜 및 가격 페이지를 확인하십시오.

매년 수많은 게임과 프로젝트가 Unity로 제작되고 있으며, 수백만 명의 학생, 취미 개발자, 인디 개발자가 Unity 무료 버전을 사용해 개발 능력을 연마하며 성공을 도모하고 있습니다. 지난 3년간 품질 개선부터 플랫폼 저변 확대, 양질의 교육 자료 제공에 이르기까지 유니티는 새로운 기능과 서비스를 추가하여 제품 개발과 개선에 끊임없이 투자하고 있습니다. 2020년에는 모든 산업 분야에서 관심을 가질 만한 더욱 뛰어난 기술과 혁신을 계획하고 있습니다.

곧 출시 예정인 Unity 새 버전에 추가될 최신 기술에 대해 알아보세요. 무료 샘플 게임과 무료 튜토리얼, 구독에 추가되는 혜택도 유니티 웹사이트에서 확인하실 수 있습니다. 유니티는 시대를 선도하는 기술과 직접 제작한 교육 자료로 뛰어난 개발자와 아티스트를 위해 아낌없이 지원하고 있습니다. 이에 따라 2016년에 구독 라이선스를 출시한 이후 처음으로 구독 가격을 변경하기로 결정했습니다.

자주 묻는 질문(FAQ)

구독 가격이 언제, 어떻게 변경되나요?

2020년 1월 1일 오전 12시(UTC)를 기준으로 Unity Plus는 월 미화 40달러, Unity Pro는 월 미화 150달러로 인상될 예정입니다. 새로운 가격 정책은 신규 구독이나 추가 구독되는 모든 시트에 적용됩니다. 다만, 2020년 1월 1일 오전 12시(UTC) 이전에 홈페이지를 통해 구독 중인 시트에는 이번 가격 인상이 적용되지 않습니다. 이번 가격 변경에 대한 자세한 내용이나 질문은 관련 이메일을 확인하거나 고객 서비스팀에 문의하시기 바랍니다.

구독 가격을 인상하는 이유가 무엇인가요?

지난 3년 간 유지해왔던 구독 가격을 인상하는 대신 Unity 크리에이터들을 위해 앞으로도 계속 새로운 기술, 기능 및 서비스에 투자할 예정입니다.

Unity 무료 버전은 계속 이용할 수 있나요?

네. 지난해 매출 또는 자본금(자체 조달이나 모금) 금액이 미화 10만 달러 미만이라면 Unity Personal을 무료로 계속 이용하실 수 있습니다.

현재 시트를 구독 중입니다. 이번 변경으로 제 구독료에도 영향이 있나요?

기존에 홈페이지를 통해 구독 중인 시트에는 이번 가격 인상이 적용되지 않습니다. 2020년 1월 1일 이후에 신규 또는 추가 구독하거나 만료된 계약을 연장하는 경우에는 인상된 가격이 적용됩니다.

기존 고객이 1월 1일, 또는 그 이후에 시트를 추가로 구매하는 경우, 기존 가격 또는 인상 가격 중 어떤 가격이 적용되나요?

2020년 1월 1일 오전 12시(UTC) 이후 기존 구독에 시트를 추가하면 추가하는 시트에는 인상된 가격이 적용됩니다. 하지만 2019년 12월 31일 오후 11시 59분(UTC) 이전에 시트를 추가하면 기존 가격이 적용됩니다. 추가 가능한 시트 수량에 대한 제한은 없습니다.

Unity 구독에 시트를 어떻게 추가하나요?

구독 플랜에 시트를 추가하는 방법은 여기에서 자세히 확인하실 수 있습니다. 별도의 계약을 맺고 계신 경우는 해당 라이선스 사업 담당자에게 문의하시기 바랍니다. 추가 가능한 시트 수량에 대한 제한은 없습니다.

현재 홈페이지를 통해 선불 약정으로 할인된 가격을 제공받고 있습니다. 제 구독료에도 영향이 있나요?

아니요, 현재 홈페이지를 통해 구독 중인 시트에는 이번 가격 인상이 적용되지 않습니다. 

현재 홈페이지를 통해 프로모션 가격으로 시트를 구독하고 있습니다. 2020년 1월 1일 이후 제 구독 가격은 어떻게 되나요?

프로모션을 포함하여 기존에 홈페이지를 통해 구독 중인 시트에는 이번 가격 인상이 적용되지 않습니다. 이번 가격 변경에 대한 자세한 내용이나 질문은 관련 이메일을 확인하거나 고객 서비스팀에 문의하시기 바랍니다.

그렇다면 현재 구독 중인 시트는 앞으로도 계속 지금 가격으로 사용할 수 있나요?

현재 홈페이지를 통해 구독 중인 시트에는 이번 가격 인상이 적용되지 않지만 향후 계획에는 적용될 수도 있습니다.

유니티 라이선스 사업 담당자를 통해 별도의 계약을 맺었습니다. 이 경우에도 1월 1일부터 가격이 인상되나요?

유니티 라이선스 사업 담당자를 통해 맺은 별도의 계약이 2019년 12월 31일 이후에 종료될 경우, 갱신 시부터 인상된 가격이 적용됩니다. 이번 구독 가격 변경 정책이 적용되기 전에 갱신하고자 하거나 궁금한 점이 있으면 해당 라이선스 사업 담당자에게 문의하시기 바랍니다.

이번 가격 인상은 전 세계적으로 적용되나요?

네. 모든 국가에서 가격 인상이 동일하게 적용됩니다.

구독 가격을 정기적으로 인상할 예정인가요?

현재는 추가 가격 인상 계획이 없으나 유니티에서는 주기적으로 구독 가격을 검토하고 있습니다. 가격 정책이 변경될 경우 운영 계획에 참고할 수 있도록 사전에 고지해드릴 예정입니다.

Unity Pro, Plus 또는 Personal 구독 약관과 관련하여 2020년 1월 1일에 가격 이외에도 변경되는 조항이 있나요?

Unity Plus와 Unity Pro 의 구독 가격만 변경되며 다른 변경 사항은 없습니다.

추가 질문이 있으신가요?

기존 구독자인 경우 고객 서비스팀에 문의하시기 바랍니다. 라이선스 사업 담당자가 있는 경우 해당 담당자에게 직접 문의하시면 됩니다. 

98 코멘트

코멘트 구독

댓글 남기기

사용할 수 있는 HTML 태그 및 속성: <a href=""> <b> <code> <pre>

  1. We really hate that Unity is becoming infested with bloat while simultaneously lacking quality of life features people have been asking for for 5+ years now. Now I have to pay $150 a month just to avoid migraines from light theme and not have a splash screen? All the while not recouping any of my costs because we’re not ready to go to market?

    Alternatives are looking better every day.

  2. “new technology, features and services that will benefit all Unity creators”

    Really? REALLY? Where’s the copy/paste in the Inspector? Nope, still not there. I’m all for less “big” features, and more stability/quality of life.

    Also, where’s the build-machine option?

  3. Unity, your render pipeline has broken many mainline assets, the devs don’t want to upgrade/improve theirs because you apparently have too many forks.. what good is it to invest in the future of Unity if other devs can’t invest the time making their assets in sync with your “improvements” over concern you will change direction and then you increase the cost? I think we’d all want you to make stable Unity releases that are the standard path/direction you’re going so the other developers have trust in your builds that you’re not going to dramatically switch to something else and break everything, then we can talk about price increases, not before.

  4. Wait, so as I understand it plus and pro is only required if you make 100k annually? If so im really confused as to why people are so upset.

    1. Hi there! Unity Personal is designed for individuals, hobbyists, and small organizations – therefore, it is free to anyone with less than $100K of revenue or funds raised in the last 12 months.

  5. Need a cheaper option without an splash screen apple obligation.

    Dark Theme + No Splash Screen = 10$/month (yearly prepaid)

    It will also reduce the use of free version.

    1. Yes im so smart :)

      1. Hi Rovo, we don’t have any news to share right now, but look out for an update on the dark theme in 2020.

  6. What needs to be taken into account here is that the value of the dollar have decreased since 2016. What? No… I can clearly see that the exchange rate puts it higher!! No… don’t confuse exchange rates with monetary value. If anything, the price adjustment (because that is what this is) puts it back to slightly above the same level they initially had. $35 then.. isn’t $35 now. It is more like $33. So putting it at $40 would allow them to keep that price target (barring changes of course) for a longer time. So yes, there is a price increase.. but we’re in the single $ range. Inflation is a thing after all.. and most things have actually decreased in value over time.. we just don’t see it.

  7. The price up is low, $5 in Plus edition is fine, but the problem is that a mundial recesion begins, every time less developers will be can pay for Unity.

  8. If in 2020 Personal version have not Dark Theme then please create a subscription for $5 to have this, some like “Unity Personal Dark Edition”.

  9. It’s only a matter of time until they axe the free version or severely cripple it.

    1. They cant, with Unreal, CryEngine, Lumberyard, Xenko and Godotengine for free axe the Unity Free version would be a big error.

      1. Hi folks, we do not currently have any plans to make changes that impact Unity Personal. That said, look out for an update on the dark theme in 2020.

        1. Careful, the “dark theme for personal or I go to unreal” crowd might explode with hype ;)

  10. The price change is absolutely in line with the rest of the industry. Since it’s been several years since Unity dramatically cut the price, a minor hike like this in return for vast improvements with XR, DOTS and more are 100% acceptable for me.

    Also Builtin renderer has no future (and shouldn’t, if you know what you’re talking about) because Universal Pipeline will replace it – and be much higher performance to boot. The work is not finished yet, but now with the price hike we at least have a reason to ask for more.

    As for me, I’m asking for best performance for mobile VR, as I feel it’s a game changer.

    PS. start complaining about subs when Adobe or Autodesk have you and I’ll listen :P

    1. Angry Autodesk user

      10월 18, 2019 7:04 오후 응답

      Dont get me started on Autodesk :(

    2. The point being it will be years before those are ready, and they could have had all of that in built-in by now, even if it’s dying. URP is not viable until it matches built-in with deferred, etc. Then there’s the assets that don’t support it… It’s about giving us something that is up to date until they get UWP/HDRP ready.

      The performance concerns are not as large as people make out. All Unity mobile games and desktop games were made on built-in, at the end of the day. I have a mobile game from 2012, full 3D, 60fps, and a modern desktop game, 60 fps again. The performance gains will be good, but not worth letting built-in be static for 4 years.

    3. @ Brett M. If Unity does not meet your requirements for a project, then how does the price increase affect it’s suitability for your project one way or the other? The point is that Unity has done work, and that work requires money. You can either use the engine, or not.

  11. There’d be a lot less whining about the price if built-in supported these features:

    – Shader Graph
    – VFX Graph
    – Terrain shader (Diffuse + Normal Map? That is 2003 terrain quality, and the new terrain tools are terrible. We need distance maps, triplanar)
    – Terrain map generator graph (to generate simple noise maps/masks used for height/object/grass placement)
    – Terrain grass (instanced/dots grass like Vegetation Studio Pro that doesn’t tank framerate due to culling/chunk generation)
    – Volumetric fog
    – Better shadows such as optional PCSS
    – Visual scripting (not just DOTS)
    – Small interface improvements such as grouping components into one drop-down.
    – Input system that is the same as current/old but allows in-game remapping.

    At the end of the day, we need the things that make it easier to make a game. You make everything seem so difficult.

    1. In other words, Red Dead Redemption 2 is coming out for PC, so does Unity have the tools to recreate that? The answer should be yes, or almost but not quite, but the answer right now is no way in hell.

      1. You know what? I don’t think you are the one who can make game at scale as Red Dead Redemption 2. Even though Unity already show Mega City which support the idea of how to handle the open world scenes with Unity DOTS.

        1. I’m not talking about matching the scale, just features. Lighting, realtime GI, clouds, etc. As far as scale is concerned, a better LOD/culling system would be good too. We just need the systems.

      2. @ Brett M. If Unity does not meet your requirements for a project, you shouldn’t use it. The price increase (the topic of this post) doesn’t affect its suitability one way or the other.
        The point is that Unity has done work, and that work requires money. If you evaluate that it doesn’t meet your project’s requirements , then you should not be using it for that project, regardless of its cost.

      3. “Lighting, realtime GI” – There is PLM, not sure about the future of realtime GI though (they are already working on Raytracing).
        “clouds” – What exactly are you talking about? Is it collaboration? Multiplayer? Storage?
        “a better LOD/culling system…” – Go and watch the Megacity demo and listen to what Joachim has to say.

  12. This is fine. Merely increasing the price from 35$ to 40$ per month is marginal. Why is everyone so upset about this? I mean you do realize inflation is a thing right? I would gladly pay an extra 10$ for plus if it meant giving Unity their money’s worth.
    If you have a problem with a small increase in price such as this; balance it out by changing something in your lifestyle like eating out less or buying fewer coffees that you don’t actually need to survive on planet earth. I bet ya it wouldn’t kill you if you did.

  13. Can’t really complain since I am very grateful using the free version. :-)

    I do have some thoughts lately, that I will post here because I think they pertain to this topic.

    General feeling is that Unity is creating more stuff, but I don’t need or use this stuff.

    I heard from folk that work in Unity there is an inside joke about Unity not making any money (everything is free).
    Money is good! (def not bad), but this does speak about where some of the focus in going.

    My wish for Unity is in line with: drop most of the projects, stimulate others to create packages and sell them through the Asset store.

    New Input manager sucks.
    Multiplayer always sucked, forever (in my limited experience).
    Why not instead step out and let users fill in the gap via Asset store?

    Or hire/create insider teams that focus on certain features. For example ‘architectural visualization package’ is sold independently. It’s not making enough money? Drop the project. Don’t affect all of Unity, just this team.

    Adding more features just seems like flaunting. Unity is becoming bloated with options and features. My impression – just so it can charge money. This post confirms it.

    Focus on the core of the game engine. Make it stable and open as much as possible.
    Let nature run its course. All engines have a life cycle.

    Maybe fork Unity to Unity for Architects, Unity for …
    Make Unity core extendible by using packages.

    I am becoming very wary of following new features. I care less and less because they are so out there (not pertaining to my use case). Unity seems to be doing – “everything”. That is not necessarily a good thing in my experience, when I want to use it as an engine for creating a game.

    1. How does the new Inputsystem suck? My experience with it is a lot better than the old system. Escpecially because it feels like they have a separate team working on this feature, whom are also really active on their own subforum to fix bugs together with the community. Which I think is really nice, and should be a strong focus for all of these subsystems that Unity are developing.

      1. I have to apologize – I jumped the gun with the input control package. I read the blog post and saw the video – without actually trying it out.
        I got a response from Unity clarifying some points about the input package that I was mistaken about.
        I will definitely be giving it a try in my next game.

        Thanks for your comment NeusAap. I love when community jumps in like this.

    2. I disagree. The asset store is the best but also the worst part of Unity. You become reliant on an always-buggy asset just to get a basic feature, and it becomes an excuse for Unity not to implement it themselves, so base Unity ends up missing some really basic features (such as remappable input).

      I installed the new Input system yesterday, set it up, but then it doesn’t have the sensitivity/gravity smoothing settings from the old system, so I uninstalled.

      For me, Unity should have way more stuff built-in. You can’t say it’s bloated if they’re all pacakges.

    3. Im not a fan of selling packages, This is a game engine and should support everything you need. I love using Unity but a buy what you need model would be the end for me, the cool thing now is if you have access too a tool you can experiment with it , Im not going to buy some package in the hopes that is will solve my problem.

      1. Packages are free. Go to Window > Package Manager. “Assets” are the things you have to buy from the store, not Packages.

    4. If you think the new Input System suck, please head to the forums, look for the new input systems section and write your user story. Write down for them why you think the Input system suck. They want to hear it, believe me. I mean if you have any concrete to put on the table other than “it sucks”.

      1. Thanks for your comment LurkingNinja!
        Reading it I see how much more is happening behind the scenes than I was aware of (continuous contact of Unity’s team with users).
        And thank for inviting me to improve the input package with constructive comments on the forum, thanks man!
        I made an assumption about Input package without trying it (based on the blog & keynote).
        Since my post I also heard from Unity clarifying some things. I was mistaken about how it works.
        I promise to give Input package a real try in my next game before I make any more comments. :-)

  14. Will there be a manual type renew subscription? something like prepaid.

    Like just paid once, if it reach the expiry date just renew it once got the money again.

    I hope you guys understand what i’m talking about. 😄

    1. Thomas "Maru" Richards

      10월 18, 2019 4:18 오후 응답

      Hi Martin,

      If I have understood you correctly, you are referring to prepaid auto-renewals? I can confirm that customers can choose to renew with prepaid instead of month-to-month.

  15. Is there ETA for 2019.3 release?

    1. Thomas "Maru" Richards

      10월 18, 2019 1:08 오후 응답

      Hi there! Unfortunately, we don’t have a precise ETA so far – we’d hate to announce a possible date and then letting users down if we have to delay it. We’ll be sure to release it once it is ready :)

  16. I dont mind the 5$ if you make unity more stable. The LTS version needs more bug fixes and more duration because the lasts versions are so unstable. Please focus on the stability the 2017 LTS version will be deprecated soon and the new versions are not stable enough

  17. Well can’t say I like to pay more for a product, but I understand.
    Hope it will make the product better!

  18. The Studio basically makes no money. I switch to Plus just for the cloud features.
    I would gladly pay 5$ more per month (from my own salary) just if you quit asking my boss every 2 months to switch from Plus to Pro because every time it challenges the Studio division of the company and put me in a bad situation. I wish I could go back to Free but I can’t :-(

  19. Of course, I will be very happy to pay more to use the stable and polished product that is Unity!

    It’s not like using Unity feels like using a beta product, with so many bugs and crashes that it’s considered part of the job to know how to work around engine and editor bugs, and it’s not like there are critical bugs reported 4 years ago that are still not fixed today. /sarcasm

    To be honest I’m pretty happy about the price increase, as the only reason we are still using Unity is the lack of competitors on Mobile, and this increase will leave more room for new competitors to appear.

  20. Not sure why people are complaining about the prices. We have migrated most of our work projects to URP and it is stable enough for production. A lot of 2D tools are also stable to use in production. I’ve been playing with DOTS and it has definitely come a long way since its initial announcement. And even if you do make $100k+, you will only end up paying $99520, which is honestly close to nothing. So I don’t see the reason to complain. New features are being rolled out and constantly updated.

  21. The increase is no that much, yes. but the reasoning for this seems flawed. Many of those additions from the last years are deprecated faster than they had the chance to become stable even, so their value is proportional to the additional expenses in using them. Premium features are locked behind paywalls anyway, and more prominently, more unity users and paying customers means more money anyway, so the increase is just an increase of an already increasing revenue, which gives this a corporate-greedy touch.

  22. I disagree with this wholeheartedly and I’ll tell you why. The average dev does NOT change Unity versions that often. In fact, even LTS versions don’t get the fixes that next-gen versions get which defeats the purpose of LTS. Support is weened away fast and basic fixes “carrot on a stick” you to the next version, even if you don’t want to do it.

    The fact is, the new stuff? Sure charge extra IF you upgrade. However, with Unity deprecating things so fast, my 3rd party libs can’t even keep up. I’m permanently stuck on 2019.1 since even .net 3.5 is deprecated. Gamesparks, for example, doesn’t support 4.0.

    I will NOT use the new features by choice and professional gamedevs are very likely to not use the latest and greatest versions. Not only because of unsupported libs, but since Unity doesn’t use their own game engine to make games, they aren’t catching all these specific bugs because they simply don’t have enough testers. I’ve never had a smooth transition to a new Unity version before which isn’t the way it should be.

    If you’re going to charge more, Unity better hire 20x more testers. However, I’m fairly confident that is not going to happen.

    If you don’t upgrade, you shouldn’t pay more. It’s as simple as that.

    1. I Strongly agree

    2. Just to let you know GameSparks does indeed work with .Net 4. They just didn’t update the #Defines correctly on their latest release in case that was causing you issues.

  23. Unity user here – will there still be the 20ish% discount on year-long renewals of the Plus license?

    1. Hi Sean,
      Current annual prepaid subscriptions are not impacted unless you unsubscribe at the end of the term or if your custom agreement expires. Contact our Customer Service team so they can look at your specific situation https://unity.com/support-services

      1. I think the question is, what is the Annual plan, prepaid pricing. Right now if you pay monthly, it’s $35 on the plus, and $299 if you pay for a full year.(about $10 a month saving) So on the new plan is it $40 monthly and $360 if you pay for the full year?

        1. Hi Chris & Sean – just confirming the prepaid offer for Plus is currently still available for new subscriptions and renewals (select Immediate or Scheduled Renewal in Manage Subscription). We’ll share new prepaid Plus options later this year.

  24. Considering the amount of work done to Unity in the past few years- and it has been noticeable– it’s unreasonable to whine that the cost increased. We can either demand more features, or complain about a price increase, but not both. Doesn’t work that way.

    1. Have to agree. Unity grows and so needs more put into it to keep it growing. Plus, times change. I’ve actually been surprised it’s taking so long. Just happy it’s not turned into a royalties model like unreal…

      1. ***edit: taken so long***

  25. You probably shouldn’t use FPS Sample as part of the value proposition since it hasn’t been updated in 7 months and doesn’t run on the latest Unity. It’s vaporware at this point. https://github.com/Unity-Technologies/FPSSample

  26. This is bad news. It would have been reasonable if this was a new tier with better offerings.
    Justifying this by saying it is happening now because there are millions of users makes little sense. This is a subscription!! More users automatically means your user base is paying you more on a continuing basis.

    At least this should have been tied to revenue numbers.

    Disappointed.

  27. I unironically expect this price change is to stabilize Unity. With so many bugs and crashes on the latest LTS, I suppose you are going to use the extra money to fix Unity and not to add even more incomplete things to it :)

  28. Please just put some resources into making the standard character animation tools good.

  29. I’m sure I don’t speak for myself when I say that Unity is still the obvious choice for developers who want a modern engine with a royalty free license. There’s simply no competing with Unity when it comes to the amount of resources and the size of the community.

  30. As someone who has used Unity for over four years as a hobby, I personally don’t mind the price increase at all. If I’m making money off my game, I should pay back to the engine developers for all these awesome tools.

    One of the biggest weaknesses Unity still hasn’t fixed is the lack of access to the engine’s source code, which should be free for all Unity developers. Almost every other big game engine out there has released their source code for developers: Unreal Engine, CryEngine and Godot for instance. This allows for developers to understand the game engine better, add better features, make various improvements, and fix critical bugs the Unity team may have missed. Unity has already been open sourcing a large amount of their c# code in the form of packages, and this is a fantastic first step. There’s still a lot of important C++ Code that is completely hidden away for most Unity developers (unless you want to fork over thousands of $$$), and a good portion of C# bindings that was released in a restrictive reference license.

    I believe allowing Unity devs to build their own Unity executables would lead to important improvements and bug fixes lead by the open source community. It would only make the engine better.

  31. In the end, it’s just +$5 for Plus and +$25 for Pro. Nothing to get worked up over, imo.

  32. To be honest, Unity adding tech over tech without consumers being able to choose/pick is exactly the problem I have with this engine. I *wish* there would be more modularity, where I can choose not to pay for plugins (e.g. terrain) that I don’t currently use at all.

    1. That would require the individual systems to be actually worth something and complete for them to be worth splitting into separate addons, but yes. Unity throws more and more stuff over the unstable foundation and that isn’t worth a price hike :P

      1. Pretty much this. The excuse was “for new features”. Actual professionals rarely even use the cutting edge features since they’re so unstable. I want to pay for STABILITY. Why does my entire project refresh when I save an empty scene? Why so many bug fixes don’t come to LTS? It’s the hobbyists that are on the tree tier using all the new stuff.

        I just want the old stuff to work. I love Unity, but at the same time it’s stability had become a meme. LTS means “barely more stable compared to everything else”.

        When do we get EDITOR stability? When do we get fixes to existing bugs? What am I even paying for?

  33. i will switch to Godot

  34. Such a shame. We were evaluating which engine to use for our up coming project. It was literally a 3-way tie between the engines and we were hesitating in using Unity because of the price point. But now this made the decision easier. We cannot afford to have Unity up the price on whim mid-project when we need to add more seats.

    We probably would have chosen Unity if they had announced they dropped the price to be more in line with their competition.

    1. Meltdown Interactive

      10월 18, 2019 12:48 오전 응답

      If a $5 price point is going to affect your decision on which engine to use on a game project then whoever did the engine review and analysis is a complete muppet.

      1. It’s not the $5, it’s the fact that they decided to up the price instead of bringing it down as compared to what their competition has done for their products. And to be mid-project with team that will potentially double or triple in size and to have Unity up the price again per seat during a time when we would need new licenses would be financially unwise.

        While the price increase may be fine or acceptable for solo or very small teams, for larger teams its an added financial burden that can be avoided by going with one of their competitors. With the differences between the top most popular engines being very minuscule, Unity has unfortunately swung the favor away from themselves.

    2. If $5 makes you switch an engine then you are truly a beggar. And Free is still Free…

      1. The free version is fine for solo and small game developers, but it is simply not good enough for much larger projects with a lot of overhead. If you don’t know what that means and if you believe the free version is good enough then you have never worked on a very large project.

  35. Don’t listen to the whiners Unity, you guys are awesome! They don’t understand that you have to pay thousands of people everyday also! So sick of whiners! Go get your Unreal Engine dang whiners! We love you Unity!

  36. Not sure why all the hate, I do wish that plus had some more of pros features (analytics being the main one) but I’m not offended by the price increase and since I’m already a subscriber, it won’t affect me right away anyway. What offended me in the past was losing cloud build with plus but I understood it.

  37. Can I change from the monthly to the prepaid plan during the subscription period?

    1. Hi Richard,
      Yes, you can. Login to your account and select the option to manage your subscription. From there, your options are to do an immediate renewal or schedule a renewal to happen automatically when your current commitment ends. If you run into any questions or issues please reach out to our customer support.

  38. Such a bump requires you to give something new in return. Like a free pro skin or the removal of the splash screen entirely. Without something like that all of it feels very out of touch and it will allow for a massive backlash. Be careful where you step.

    1. We already have those. So I don’t understand your comment. Why would it make a difference if Unity would give free stuff for the free tier and raise price for the paying customers? I can’t follow this logic.

      1. I might’ve worded myself a bit off on that comment. What I meant is that this scenario easily allows for a controversy to start. If the rise in pricing will go solely on improving the core engine then it is quite justified. However, if there will be a new, barely useful service or some additional Asset Store stuff implemented for Plus/Pro a backlash will surely arise, since, in the end, I feel that most of the devs consider the primary role of the subscriptions to be the compliance with the TOS.

        1. BTW, Free and Plus tiers will get a free Havok Physics for free. Well, apparently we, Plus subscribers will get it for 5 bucks a month. I think we can live with it.

      2. Sorry, I might’ve worded myself a bit off on that comment. What I meant is that this scenario easily allows for a controversy to start. If the rise in pricing will go solely on improving the core engine then it is quite justified. However, if there will be a new, barely useful service or some additional Asset Store stuff implemented for Plus/Pro a backlash will surely arise, since, in the end, I feel that most of the devs consider the primary role of the subscriptions to be the compliance with the TOS.

  39. It’s an amazing game engine, and I’m thankful to be able to use it! The price is not a problem since I would have earned 100K first. Don’t give in to the free users demanding the dark skin and start screen logo, they don’t deserve anything ;)

    1. I might’ve worded myself a bit off on that comment. What I meant is that this scenario easily allows for a controversy to start. If the rise in pricing will go solely on improving the core engine then it is quite justified. However, if there will be a new, barely useful service or some additional Asset Store stuff implemented for Plus/Pro a backlash will surely arise, since, in the end, I feel that most of the devs consider the primary role of the subscriptions to be the compliance with the TOS.

  40. Still a steal, I have many criticism, this won’t be one of them, unity is packed full, it’s just don’t cater to my need. BUT BEGGAR CAN’T BE CHOOSER, the only way I would pay anyway, is if they offer quality premium advices on helping me innovate in black skin (Their skin shader is lacking there, and i’m going to be very technical as soon as possible) and afro texture hair (the entire industry is lacking). OR if i made enough money they qualify automatically. I need black character for my game due to setting, i’m not even dark skin, but come on, this has open my eyes on how much everyone is tip toeing around the issue, it’s not god damn political, it’s just basic technical stuff, brown character isn’t enough (and even them have too much subsurface light bleed). I have a god damn game to make FFS!

  41. Thanks! You just made the choice for game engine a lot easier! Godot, here I come!
    And no, that’s not only because of costs. It’s about what Unity leadership is prioritizing. It shows that they do not have a clue.

    1. Awww, poor baby. Why even use Godot? I think you should stick to playdough and finger paint, and leave games to the competent.

      Unity is prioritizing the things that it was lacking in. Performance and rendering being 2 huge ones.

    2. Wenn, if you google for open Unity jobs vs. Godot jobs, the result should show quite clearly who’s got the prios right ;)

    3. Meltdown Interactive

      10월 18, 2019 12:51 오전 응답

      Gowot?

  42. Dark skin is still pro only, you have to show the Unity logo on free (so any garbage software built in Unity will always tell you it’s using Unity… unlike Unreal where only pro use has to show the logo. Every time I launch Rocket League, I am reminded that this masterpiece is made in Unreal), and they raise the price.

    Unity is great, but holy sh*t, the higher ups in the company are absolutely clueless and out of touch with their customers. Get a grip.

  43. Dark skin is still pro only, you have to show the Unity logo on free (so any garbage software built in Unity will always tell you it’s using Unity… unlike Unreal where only pro use has to show the logo. Every time I launch Rocket League, I am reminded that this masterpiece is made in Unreal), and they raise the price.

    Unity is great, but holy sh*t, the higher ups in the company are absolutely clueless and out of touch with their customers. Get a grip.

  44. Dark skin is still pro only, you have to show the Unity logo on free (so any garbage software built in Unity will always tell you it’s using Unity… unlike Unreal where only pro use has to show the logo. Every time I launch Rocket League, I am reminded that this masterpiece is made in Unreal), and they raise the price.

    Unity is great, but holy sh*t, the higher ups in the company are absolutely clueless and out of touch with their customers. Get a grip.

  45. Where is the “Dark” skin. Buy the plus version xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

  46. I would like to congratulate Epic Games and their Unreal Engine for the benefits they will receive from this latest mistake from Unity. I would also like to thank Unity for saving me money each month on my subscription and considerable asset store purchases. Unity continues to go downhill and now they want you to pay more for it… This is what happens when you put the guy from EA in charge.

    1. It’s a fairly meagre increase, and the yearly subscription for plus is still just an expense I can cover with a day or so of work, so I’m really not fussed. Happy to pay a little more considering how beautifully ECS works. This just comes off as one of those boring entitled gamer rants that Steam is infested with.

      1. I wouldn’t call a 20% price increase ‘meager”… not everyone uses the Plus version…

    2. I would happily pay an extra $5 a month. I think most people will agree Unity has added more that $5 worth of value to the engine since 2016. Given us this much since 2016 with no increase , imagine what an extra $5 can do :)

    3. Let’s say you have 10 seats and you make $1.000.000 in revenue a month (purely figuratively)

      10 * $150 = $1.500 a month in Unity subscription cost
      5% of $1.000.000 = $50.000 a month in Epic Games royalties

      That’s quite a difference, now lets take that same team but lower the revenue to $100.000 (the point at which you have to start paying for Unity)

      10 * $150 = $1.500 a month in Unity subscription cost
      5% of $100.000 = $5.000 a month in Epic Games royalties

      Is Unity really that expensive? Seems way cheaper to me plus having 10 devs on $100.000 revenue a monh feels too big anyways yet you can increase the team size to 33 seats and still be cheaper than UE4 even though it doesn’t make financial sense to have that many devs on that amount of revenue.

      The startup cost might be a bit higher but once you start selling your product and generating revenue it quickly because cheaper than signing of a constant 5% of your revenue. If for some reason you would get a smash hit like Fortnite or Minecraft then with Unity you would keep a ton more cash to yourself, with Epic you’d still be paying them 5% of that regardless of the actual amount.

      Every Unity seat at the new price will be equal to having $3.000 in revenue at Epic’s 5% cut, below that amount (per seat) Epic is cheaper, but above that Unity will always be cheaper than Epic

      1. A small correction

        10월 18, 2019 10:12 오전 응답

        A small correction is in place I think. First of all the $100k revenue limit for Pro is per year -> $8333 per month
        Secondly for Unreal the first $1000 revenue is exempt for royalties ($3000 per quarter per game actually)

        Thus your second example should be:

        Monthly revenue $8333

        10 * $150 = $1500 a month in Unity subscription cost
        5% of $7333 (8333 – 1000) = $366 a month in Epic Games royalties

        There is a tipping point where Unreal becomes more expensive (at about $30k per month), but often not for the small indie.

      2. A small correction

        10월 18, 2019 10:14 오전 응답

        A small correction is in place I think. First of all the $100k revenue limit for Pro is per year -> $8333 per month
        Secondly for Unreal the first $1000 revenue is exempt for royalties ($3000 per quarter per game actually)

        Thus your second example should be:

        Monthly revenue $8333

        10 * $150 = $1500 a month in Unity subscription cost
        5% of $7333 (8333 – 1000) = $366 a month in Epic Games royalties

        There is a tipping point where Unreal becomes more expensive (at about $30k per month), but often not for the small indie.

  47. This is not a big price bump, but I’m sure there is going to be backlash because of it. I personally think Unity is still a steal for this price compared to the other options, especially considering all of the awesome new features that are being added. The quality and stability of the engine has also increased a lot from Unity 5 days, so that’s another plus.