Home » Unity and Unreal Engine’s Pricing Strategies

Unity and Unreal Engine’s Pricing Strategies

Unity and Unreal Engine's Pricing Strategies

In recent months, the world of game development has been abuzz with news about major changes in pricing strategies by two of the industry’s biggest players: Unity and Unreal Engine. The decisions made by these two companies have ignited a firestorm of discussion and controversy, ultimately leading to the unexpected resignation of Unity’s CEO. Simultaneously, this controversy has opened the door for emerging game engines like Cocos and Godot, which have gained traction as viable alternatives in the wake of these pricing shifts. This article will delve into the specifics of the renowned Unity and Unreal Engine’s pricing strategies, and the backlash that ensued, and the repercussions that shook the industry.

Unity’s Pricing Shift

Unity, known for its robust game development platform, made waves in the industry when it announced a significant shift in its pricing strategy. Historically, Unity had offered a free version of its engine, making it a popular choice for indie developers and small studios. However, Unity decided to move away from this model in favor of a tiered subscription system. Under the new pricing structure, users would need to subscribe to one of Unity’s plans, including a free but limited Personal plan, a Plus plan, and a Pro plan.

This change drew immediate backlash from the community, with many indie developers and small studios feeling disenfranchised. The sense of accessibility that Unity had provided to newcomers in the industry was at risk, and it raised questions about whether this shift was primarily motivated by profit or sustainability.

Unreal Engine’s Price Adjustment

Around the same time, Epic Games, the company behind Unreal Engine, also made alterations to its pricing structure. While Unreal Engine had never been completely free, it had gained a reputation for its royalty-based model, where developers paid a percentage of their revenue after a certain threshold. Unreal Engine decided to lower this revenue-sharing threshold, thereby requiring developers to pay royalties sooner.

The decision to adjust the revenue-sharing terms was met with mixed reactions. Some believed that it would make Unreal Engine more accessible to smaller developers, as they could potentially pay less in royalties. However, larger studios and experienced developers worried about the impact on their bottom line. Overall, this pricing shift raised questions about fairness and whether Unreal Engine’s change was also motivated by financial considerations.

The Backlash

The backlash to these pricing changes was swift and vocal. Unity and Unreal Engine have been integral to the growth of the gaming industry, and many developers have built their careers and companies around these engines. As such, any alterations to Unity and Unreal Engine’s pricing strategies were bound to have a profound impact.

I. Unity’s Community Outcry:

Unity’s decision to move away from a completely free version, which had been a cornerstone for hobbyist and indie developers, was met with strong opposition. Developers expressed concerns about the rising costs associated with using Unity, which might hinder innovation and stifle creativity. The move was seen as a betrayal of Unity’s roots in accessibility and democratizing game development.

II. Unreal Engine’s Mixed Reaction:

Unreal Engine’s adjustment to the royalty model garnered a more nuanced response. Smaller developers welcomed the lower threshold, believing it would be advantageous to them. However, some larger studios and experienced developers saw this as a potential financial burden, particularly if their projects had a higher upfront cost and lower revenue thresholds.

III. Social Media Storm:

The controversy quickly spilled over onto social media platforms, with developers and enthusiasts expressing their dissatisfaction through Twitter, Reddit, and other channels. Hashtags like #UnityBacklash and #UnrealPricing became trending topics, amplifying the voices of discontent.

The Resignation of Unity’s CEO

Amidst the brewing storm, the unexpected resignation of Unity’s CEO, John Riccitiello, sent shockwaves through the industry. While the official announcement stated that Riccitiello’s departure was due to “personal reasons,” it was clear that the ongoing pricing controversy and backlash played a significant role in the decision. His departure was seen as an attempt to quell the unrest and regain the trust of the developer community.

Repercussions and Industry Impact

The fallout from Unity and Unreal Engine’s pricing changes was substantial and had a profound impact on the industry:

I. Reevaluation of Game Engine Choices:

Many developers began to reevaluate their choice of game engines in light of the pricing adjustments. Some considered exploring alternative engines or returning to older versions of Unity and Unreal Engine, which still offered more favorable pricing terms.

II. The Rise of New Alternatives: Cocos and Godot

In the wake of the Unity and Unreal Engine pricing strategies controversies, new game engines began to shine, offering developers alternatives that were more in line with the traditional principles of accessibility and democratization.

Cocos Engine:

Cocos Engine, often overshadowed by Unity and Unreal Engine, experienced a surge in interest. It offers a free and open-source game development platform that caters to both 2D and 3D game development. The engine’s flexibility, strong community support, and accessibility have attracted developers who felt disenfranchised by the recent pricing changes.

Godot Engine:

Godot Engine, an open-source powerhouse, also saw increased adoption. Known for its user-friendly interface and flexibility, Godot has become an attractive option for indie developers, smaller studios, and even larger companies looking for alternatives that prioritize accessibility and fairness.

Continued Discussion on Fairness and Sustainability:

The controversy brought important questions about fairness, accessibility, and sustainability in the game development industry to the forefront. It triggered a larger conversation about the relationship between developers and the corporations that provide the tools they rely on.


The recent pricing strategy shifts by Unity and Unreal Engine unleashed a storm of controversy and backlash that shook the game development industry. Unity’s move away from a completely free version and Unreal Engine’s alteration of its revenue-sharing model disrupted the established order, prompting both support and criticism from different segments of the developer community.

The unexpected resignation of Unity’s CEO, John Riccitiello, underscored the gravity of the situation and the impact these pricing changes had on the industry’s key players. In response to these disruptions, Cocos and Godot emerged as alternatives, providing game developers with options that emphasized accessibility, fairness, and transparency.

As the game development community navigates these changes, it is clear that discussions about fairness, accessibility, and sustainability will remain central to the industry’s evolution. The ultimate outcome of these controversies will shape the future of game development and the tools that empower developers to bring their creative visions to life. The rise of Cocos and Godot demonstrates that the game development landscape is evolving, and developers are more determined than ever to advocate for platforms that prioritize their needs and values.