That's pretty much the only thing that matters. there is a huge difference whether they make $0.5, $1 or $2 etc (and especially how much more do they make per user in a "rich" country since Unity seems to think that they are worth up to 10x more than everyone else.

> Plenty of games are profitable at scale with only a few pennies per user.

Beyond a certain point (over 1 mill users) it will only cost $0.01 per install. So this will affect 1-5 dev/worker studios with very low revenue per user. They could still probably just pay ~2k for Unity Pro per seat and stay under the 1 million revenue threshold.

To me it almost seems that the '$0.20 per install' is only there to encourage developers to upgrade to pro if they have more than a few hundred k. users.

> If it was instead a %

True, I'm not arguing that wouldn't be more fair. It would be quite expensive to enforce and close to impossible in certain cases. So I understand why Unity chose to do this instead.

I wouldn't be surprised if that 20 cent cost is just there to encourage developers who'd have to pay to update to pro (e.g. a seat for a year seems to be equal to about 10k installs, but with pro you get extra 800k free installs and increase your revenue limit by another 800k so you'll likely won't even have to pay extra for users at all)