0 Favourites

Analysis of Game Engine Business Models

  • Just some food for thought, a little analysis on the various methods used to monetise game engines:

    • GameMaker: Feature limited free version, �25 for pro version. No subscription or profit sharing. New versions are infrequent and usually incur an upgrade fee. YoyoGames are now acting as publishers of iOS and Android games made by their community, bringing in another revenue stream.
    • Unity3D:Feature limited free version, $1500 for pro, additional modules for iOS, Android, etc. starting at $400. Free version has a branded splash screen on exported games. Web player available, as well as exe export. Also, Unity just announce support for 3D accelerated Flash export. New major version at least once a year, not sure about upgrade fees.
    • 3DRad: Unusual model. Free version available, at least 6 months behind current version. Recent donators (last 30 days) get access to the latest development version. The forum has a bidding area where the developer proposes features and users can put cash towards them in support. Features that raise the required funds are given priority. Current dev version - 7.15; current public version - 6.50. Releases used to be monthly, but appear to have been slowed down recently, perhaps because the jump from v6 to v7 is quite significant.
    • CoronaSDK: Free to download and develop with, games can be tested in the simulator, purchase an annual subscription to publish on iOS or Android ($199 for one, $349 for both). Subscribing also gives access to daily builds of the software and premium resources. Updates to the main app seem to be incremental, about every 3-4 months.

    There are probably errors, and there are plenty more options to consider. If anyone wants to add anything, reply below and I'll amend this post.

  • GM PRO is 25 USD.

  • Visionaire: Feature limited free version. Full version 35 �.

  • I'll tell you one thing, any creator that makes me share profit with them is one I will forget like last week's trash.

  • I'll tell you one thing, any creator that makes me share profit with them is one I will forget like last week's trash.

    In a way that is what Construct 2 plans to do, if you reach a certain amount of earnings then you have to pay for a higher priced license. If you were earning ?20k/yr though and needed a commercial license it wouldn't be much of a problem though.

    I guess you are talking about a per sale percentage share system but i haven't seen many game makers use that, i doubt many people would want to do that.

  • In a way that is what Construct 2 plans to do

    Absolutely, categorically not. We are not planning to ask for royalties on profits. If paying anything at all for software counts as sharing profits, then all existing software falls under that definition!

  • In my opinion any software where i have to pay more after i reach a certain amount of earnings is taking a share of profits because you are forced to pay the difference between the licenses.

    That money is taken from profits so it is like paying royalties just that it's a 1 time payment each time it is required rather than a per sale system.

    It wouldn't be a problem though if anyone was earning that much money either.

  • In my opinion any software where i have to pay more after i reach a certain amount of earnings is taking a share of profits because you are forced to pay the difference between the licenses.

    I really don't think it applies here. The 20k number acts as a commercial discount, of sorts. You're still just purchasing the right to sell, and if it's less than 20k you make, you get the discounted price.

    If the price went up again at say, 100k, then you would have a point.

  • It would be the same if the threshold was 20k, 50k or 100k + or if the commercial license price is �149+ or less. It's just my opinion that the difference is still royalty's in a way, i guess other people don't like it having that label though.

    For the record i am not arguing against that plan or anything also so don't get me wrong here. I think the suggested commercial license price is totally reasonable.

  • Saying it's a royalty is incorrect, as royalties are usually based on percentage shares of profits, or some linear relationship between sales volume and royalty amount.

    This is a higher prices license, for companies that turn over higher volumes.

  • That doesn't qualify it as a commercial license though.

    Generally speaking companies will need to use multiple copies for multiple employees.

    Your just assigning an arbitrary value to compensate for that.... right?

    Yeah, might wanna rethink that part.

    As it stands your just saying if they make more money, you want more as well.

    Probably not legally binding anyway, even if the amount is negligible... either way.

  • How, exactly, do you plan on finding out exactly how much money I make from the games I make with C2?

    My end goal, ideally, would be using a digital distribution platform like Steam. How are you planning to get sales data for my game if it's up on Steam?

  • Construct 3

    Buy Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Buy Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • We would hope that most companies are honest, and select the correct license model.

    We couldn't do much, but if you are an established business the government can spot audit you. When spot audits occur, they evaluate all your software licenses.

    If a company was hugely successful with one of our products as well, this would be fairly obvious and we would be able to tell from our sales history if they are using the correct license or not.

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)