I have a pretty big concern with one of the changes made to the EULA, which I think is going to make it considerably more difficult for developers using Unreal Engine to pitch their games to Publishers. This is a stage that a lot of the teams here in our own studio are in now, talking to the likes of Sony and more.
Now, bear in mind that when a start-up company (or even a non-start-up) seeks investment, they have to justify where every single penny of those funds will go. If we have to turn around to those people and say “BTW, a big chunk of this money goes straight to a third-party”, that’s going to make investors and publishers squirm. That’s going to make it very hard for smaller studios to get investment & publishing money, and normally you’re asking for the bare minimum you can get by with as a start-up.
If I’m understanding this term properly, I’d rather be paying $19 a month instead, it’ll be a lot cheaper.
Additionally to this, some of the teams here are NOT making games, they’re making virtual experiences or visitor attractions with an end product almost finished, and a client already in mind. These teams are trying to seek even less investment and funding, since the potential revenue generated from the products will be considerably lower. As an example, we have worked very hard to keep our running costs below £150,000 for our first year as that allows us to qualify for EIS funding (essentially, tax-free investment). Losing 5% of that really isn’t an option for us, but we’re way too far into the development cycle to turn back now (not that I’d want to being ultimate-fanboy[SUP]tm[/SUP], but you understand my concern).
I understand that the change of the EULA was necessary following the approach of giving the engine out for free, but the EULA is much stricter now, and for developers like us that are this late into the pipeline and in an awkward “we-need-peoples-money” kind of period, it could be crippling.
“Royalties that you pay on an advance payment of revenue for a Product that is recoupable by the payer, such as a publisher, may be credited against future royalty payments that you incur under this Agreement for that Product.”
Why don’t you go the custom licensing route then: Custom Licensing?
I mean Epic won’t be able to cover all issues regarding licenses and the EULA they have used covers them as best as it can … but at least they offer a custom license solution for those that need that type of license.
I really doubt publishers are going to bat an eye at $5K out of $100K going to the tool that is (most likely) making the project possible. If UE4 is only a fraction of the overall project then you need to seek custom licensing as qdelpeche said.
Because it’s incredibly expensive, way out of bounds for a start-up studio and would easily cost us more than 5% of our gross. Initially, we weren’t expecting to pay anything other than our monthly sub fee, simply because of the kind of project we we’re working on.
Honestly, when people are coughing up anything from 150K to up to 500K, they are very very careful and particular about where that money goes. The kind of holes you have to jump through to get this investment as a start-up game studio are endless. We’ve had very good incubation on the subject and a lot of both mock and real pitches to potential investors and publishers, it’s quite literally dragons den, only much more extreme because games are (as everybody knows) a very risky business.
Doesn’t really work like that, you can’t just magically add 5% to what you’re asking from investors or publishers.
Investment in somebodies business doesn’t belong to Epic as far as I’m concerned, that’s not what I’m worried about. Our running costs are not in anyway related to whether we use UE or not. The bit I’m worried about is when a client comes to us, we start making the product and get milestone payments to keep the studio running (the remainder of that counts as our profit), but 5% of all that money that is supposed to run the studio instead goes to Epic. That’s a LOT more than $19 a month, and turns the whole ‘free’ thing completely on it’s head. We’re actually paying considerably more.
In terms of what we’d have to pay, it’s almost as much as a full-time salary for an additional team member. I just want some clarification on what we pay, originally it was 5% of profit on what you actually sell, and only on games. This changes the game quite a bit.
Not sure, that sounds like it’s Publisher protection more than anything. Difficult sentence to figure out… This is why nobody reads EULA’s, they’re too wordy
Maybe it’s just me but I feel like it’s kind of naughty to change the EULA if people have already been developing on it…
Thanks Tim, and the 5% now covers any application made with Unreal correct? I’m not sure if building a game for a visitor/space science centre classes as an Amusement Park Ride or not… maybe something to determine closer to the time.
EDIT: Nevermind, you answered in my other thread. Cheers Tim
