Unity CEO Matt Bromberg says Runtime Fee reversal is part of bid to become 'a fundamentally different company'

One year after introducing a controversial Runtime Fee that raised outrage from game developers and sparked rising interest in alternative game engines, Unity is rolling back its policy. The change isn't happening in a vacuum. Unity is also raising prices on Unity Pro and Unity Enterprise subscriptions, and according to CEO Matthew Bromberg, it's part of a plan to "become a fundamentally different company."

That's a bold statement for the chief executive of a publicly-traded firm to make. But given what the organization has been through, it may be warranted. Unity has spent the last two years laying off employees, raising prices, and implementing policies like the Runtime Fee, all to the chagrin of developers, some of whom have claimed it's fallen behind on maintaining the quality of the engine.

In an interview with Game Developer, Bromberg pitched a vision of the company that doesn't rely on moves like those to boost profitability, saying that Unity's goal going forward is to "have its head on straight," and be a better partner to help developers make great games.

Unity is once again, promising to be better at listening

The last two years of speedbumps for Unity (which included that time former CEO John Riccitiello said some developers are 'fucking idiots') were often followed by company executives telling customers the company wasn't listening enough to game developers. Bromberg deployed a version of that line in that conversation, saying the company needs to "be better at listening" in the future.

Related:Exclusive: Unity is killing its controversial Runtime Fee

The Runtime Fee reversal is an outcome of that process, he said. He apparently spent his first 100 days at the company speaking with Unity customers, which include the popular Unity game engine and its affiliated marketing and monetization platforms.

When pressed about feedback from employees, many of whom reportedly raised concerns internally about the impact of the Runtime Fee and how it could hurt Unity users, Bromberg said the same listening process has been taking place inside the company. He said this decision followed a cross-functional group of employees weighing in on where the company should go.

He also acknowledged ongoing concerns about Unity's stability and tech debt, a growing concern among developers frustrated by Unity's rising prices while still experiencing quality-of-life issues with the engine. He said a key goal for Unity is to make a "stable, well-performing" product that will make the company a better "partner" for developers who use it.

Some, like Godot cofounder Juan Linietsky, have pointed out to Game Developer that Unity's IPO-driven acquisition spree saddled the company with new tools it would be responsible for maintaining for high-value customers. Bromberg said Unity has also been looking at that challenge, and referred to its decision to to end its partnership with Weta FX as one example of how it can ease the technical load it had taken on (here, with the cost of 265 jobs).

"There is progress we can make on integrating some of the capabilities those acquisitions provided into our core flow of game building," Bromberg said. For now, there will be a renewed focus on improving and maintaining Unity 6 as a reliable game development tool.

Unity's shift is also about "getting back to where it began"

Bromberg's description of Unity's future seemed far afield from Riccitiello's promise of making the best "Real-time 3D" (often shortened to RT3D) engine for companies across the world, which implied a future where Unity would be extensively used outside the world of game development. He repeatedly referred to his past experience as a game developer, and painted a picture of the company working closely with developers to give them the tools they needed.

Unity will be doing so with stronger competition. Tools like open-source game engine Godot have become more popular with developers in the last year, with Godot in particular biting at Unity's heels as a leading engine used in game jams.

It's unclear what, if anything, Unity will be directly adapting from developers' increased enthusiasm for Godot. Bromberg did say he doesn't take developers' trust for granted, and that the company "wants to get better" to retain that trust.

"We want everyone to want to use Unity," he said, also acknowledging that the company is in a competitive market and it will need to labor under pressure from competitors.

Addressing concerns investors may have about the company not having revenue from Runtime Fee-generated revenue in the future, Bromberg said the "simple, predictable pricing" the company has laid out will provide "more than enough growth" for the company with its pricing model.

Unity's previous far-reaching promises of game engine growth previously extended all the way to the US government, with the company signing some contracts with technology firms and companies like Lockheed Martin, BAH to provide support for the United States defense projects. Developers concerned their use of the engine could in some way support weapons manufacturing or wartime software development have maintained criticism of Unity for making these agreements, largely to little avail.

Bromberg held firm on said contracts. "My view in general is that it is not inappropriate for American companies to have business with the American government," he said. Developers might raise their eyebrows at how that comment goes further than the Department of Defense.

The U.S. government aside, Bromberg's pitch seemed squarely aimed at Unity's original customers: the game development community. He and his peers will have a chance to make that pitch next week at Unite 2024 in Barcelona, where he said he sees a chance to "take a breath, clear the decks, and reconnect" with customers.

After two years of conversations with Unity executives, there was another interesting shift in Bromberg's rhetoric worth noting. Previously, Unity execs Marc Whitten and Jim Whitehurst referred to Unity users as "creators," alluding to a wide range of customers that went beyond game developers. The phrase seemed to align with Riccitiello's established vision of Unity as an "RT3D" tool versus its role as a game development tool.

Bromberg didn't use that phrase, going instead back to "developers" and "customers," more generic terms describing those who use Unity. It also doesn't appear in Unity's blog announcing the Runtime Fee reversal.

The absence of the term may mean nothing, but it may be one sign Unity is re-narrowing its vision to first and foremost, serve a business focused on making games, not generalized 3D software.

If developers report a better relationship with Unity in the months and years ahead, it will certainly be a sign that Bromberg's strategy is working. The challenge will be—as it long has been—to ensure that strategy us profitable and sustainable for the company, so that sustainability can be a strong foundation for the game development community.

Update: This story has been updated to clarify Unity's contractual relationships with the United States Government and with the correct surname of its former interim CEO.