Unity, one of the gaming industry's most used platforms caused quite a stir recently when the company announced it would be introducing what it called its Unity Runtime Fee. These proposed changes would be a major change for developers who could expect to pay a fee once their game passes a certain threshold.

When the runtime fee was announced it didn’t take long for developers to come together and form a collective letter to have their voices heard. This included big names such as Azur Games, Voodoo, Homa, SayGames, Crazy labs and hundreds of others. Needless to say, much of the gaming industry was confused and disappointed by the proposed plans, sparking a backlash and Unity eventually announced a revised plan.

We spoke with Nikita Guk, the CEO of GIMZ and Hoopsly, who was involved in the movement and acted as the official representative in the collective letter, to discuss how the letter came to be, where things stand for developers now and what could have been done differently.

Pocketgamer.biz: First can you tell us about the collective letter? How it got started, and how many developers are now involved?

Nikita Guk: Honestly, it was quite inspiring to see folks from such a competitive industry helping each other navigate this difficult situation. The collective letter began with just a few companies, but they quickly rallied to show a united front.

Unity's primary oversight was thinking that their new model was foolproof and that developer feedback wasn’t crucial. But, it turns out that feedback is important not just for Unity but for the entire game development community.

Post the Runtime Fee announcement, positive reactions came exclusively from the investment world. They were all upbeat about Unity's potential profit trajectory, reflected by the company’s stock going up right after the news dropped. However, when our collective letter was released, things took a turn. At the time of this conversation, Unity’s stock has dipped by 22%. It's a testament to what a unified community of developers can achieve, even when facing a giant that controls over 70% of the mobile game development market.

Currently, over 1,000 companies and indie devs are backing the collective letter, not to mention the thousands of studio employees rallying behind this move. Everyone is pushing for a relationship with game engines that's beneficial for both sides.

What do you think of the new ‘revised’ plan that Unity has come up with? Is it an improvement or still not enough?

The revised plan is a step in the right direction when stacked against their initial terms of use. It seems they’re trying to align with market dynamics, letting new project developers weigh the pros and cons of using Unity versus exploring other engines.

Is it the perfect solution? No. There's still a significant amount of devs out there whose business models clash with these new terms. They're loyal to Unity but might now be nudged to scout for other options, which I'm sure will pop up soon enough.

Could negative reactions from developers have been avoided in this situation?

It hinges on how Unity approached and communicated such a monumental change. Transparent, genuine communication is pivotal when you're dealing with such a vast and engaged audience. If Unity had the right infrastructure and expertise in stakeholder communication, we might have seen a proposal that satisfied everyone, ensuring their credibility remained intact.

Here’s what I gleaned from this scenario:

• Unity’s top managers overlooked or misjudged the economic consequences for a considerable slice of developers for whom these terms are detrimental.
• The company’s communication was off. Be it the initial announcement or the subsequent modifications, the engagement strategy was flawed, leading to the backlash.
• Not every business decision can be a crowd-pleaser, but understanding the nuances of your industry is crucial. Charging a few cents per user might seem negligible for engine use. But when you slap that retrospectively, overlook the tight margins and vast marketing budgets of some companies, and sidestep indie developer sentiments, you're brewing a storm.

This situation underscores that even market giants, commanding over 50% of the share, can't dismiss the power of unified voices, especially when the latter is adept at constructive communication.

What would you, and perhaps others involved in the collective letter, want to see from Unity going forward? Better transparency seems like a must at this point.

Spot on. The fiasco has underscored that even a market powerhouse can't just unilaterally set terms (and for past projects, no less) or whimsically amend them. The trust here has taken a significant hit. You can't just patch that up with an "our bad." It's like watching years of brand investment go down the drain in mere days.

Developers are seeking tangible measures from Unity - how do they plan on righting this wrong? They crave clear guidance from their support managers and yearn for a future devoid of Unity's ultimatum-styled communications, like their stance on transitioning to Unity’s in-house monetization system for perks. Developers are in it for the long haul but demand predictability and mutual benefits.

As a case in point, many industry heavyweights wouldn't mind paying a premium for Unity licenses if that meant ditching the Runtime Fee. It might sound less lucrative, but it's more transparent and palatable to developers. In the end, it's all about adaptability, tuning into the community, and a rigorous introspection of one’s blunders and operational overheads.

Regaining trust is a long road. We're likely looking at months, if not more.

Despite the revised plan, do you think some developers will want to shift their projects to other platforms or start their next one away from Unity?

Absolutely. I’m aware of several intriguing solutions gearing up to hit the market. However, the real determining factor will be the evolution of the market and larger studios' inclination to invest capital into alternative game engines. It's not just about the engines but the entire ecosystem around it.

The recent shake-up has showcased a definite shift: companies aren’t just browsing different options, they’re actively supporting open-source initiatives, among other things.

How do you feel about John Riccitiello stepping down as Unity's CEO?

Well, you can't really pin it all on one person. It's more about how the company's internal processes are structured, and that's what ultimately leads to these external outcomes. On the flip side, the community expects Unity to take specific steps towards rebuilding trust. But I don't think this decision was the only right one; in fact, there are plenty of options. The real question is how they'll handle communication at all levels and engage with the industry, and that's going to be a lot trickier and will take more time.

How do you think developers feel at the moment? There's a lot of change in the gaming industry, and it’s highly competitive, so changes such as this cause a stir.

Honestly, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Yes, the recent upheavals stirred some angst in the developer community. This, set against a backdrop of recurrent layoffs and overhauls - triggered by so many reasons - doesn’t necessarily signify a global slump in the industry.

But a silver lining emerged: a renewed belief among developers that collective action, and unity in purpose can steer the industry. It’s striking to see indie developers and industry titans harmonising on this front. While someone has to make sure this unity happens in the first place, it's the widespread agreement and solidarity among the community that makes it truly powerful.

Also, the turn towards open-source solutions is evident. Developers are actively engaging with new tools. Who knows? This might usher in a renaissance of sorts in the industry, but it's premature to make a call on that.

Do you have any words of advice for developers who are perhaps still concerned about these changes and what do you see happening next?

The beauty of the gaming industry is its heartbeat: passionate individuals who are deeply committed to their craft. It's hard to stifle such devotion. Remember, the game engine landscape is varied, evolving, and is poised to introduce newer tools. Unity's recent recalibration - permitting developers to wrap up projects on the existing engine version - gives them breathing space to chart their next course. The industry will continue to grow, and I truly hope it stays as supportive and open to its members.