GameMaker's free GMRT is smart, but the console paywall is the real test

Is "free" still a selling point in game engines, or has it become the entry fee? GameMaker's latest move suggests the second. And we think that is exactly why it's smart, and also why it isn't enough on its own.

According to GameMaker's own announcement, its next-generation runtime, GMRT, will be free for commercial use starting January 1, 2027. Developers will be able to distribute games across desktop, mobile, web and GX Games without buying a Professional license. Source code access, announced earlier this year, will extend to every tier.

The fine print matters. Current Professional license owners keep commercial rights on the older GMS2 runtime, and they get its source code too. Console export still requires an Enterprise license and being an approved developer. The company says there will be no changes to existing tier pricing.

It's a goodwill play, and a well-timed one

The timing is hard to ignore. Unity's Runtime Fee fiasco, announced in 2023, was reversed in September 2024, but as Promise Legal's analysis puts it, the damage to developer trust was done. Trust is now the scarcest resource in engine land, and a company that removes a paywall instead of adding one buys a lot of it cheaply.

There's also a practical logic. Indies don't evaluate engines by their best-case revenue; they evaluate them by what they must pay before they've earned anything. Removing the Professional license from that equation makes GMRT a zero-friction choice for a 2D project. GameMaker has been pitching itself as a 2D specialist since at least its 2023 blog post telling Unity refugees to choose it, and this makes that pitch easier to say out loud.

We also like the source access. It's the less flashy half of the announcement, but it speaks directly to the fear Unity created: what happens when the provider changes terms? Being able to read, adapt and potentially contribute to the runtime is a partial answer to that anxiety. It's not the same as an open-source license, but it's a step in that direction.

Godot doesn't blink, and Unity has less to fear than the headlines suggest

Let's be honest about the pressure. Godot is MIT-licensed, with no royalties, no subscription and no revenue thresholds, and one 2026 comparison calls it the best free engine for 2D and indie games. GameMaker isn't undercutting Godot; it's catching up to its price. Free is now parity, not advantage.

Unity is in a different spot. The same comparison says Unity Personal now covers organizations earning up to $200,000 a year, and that Unity still powers roughly 70% of the top mobile games. A 2D-centric engine isn't going to dislodge that. Our read: the pressure lands mostly on Unity's low end, the solo and small-team 2D crowd who stayed out of inertia rather than love.

Console export is where the promise gets tested

Here's the catch. For many indies, a Switch or PlayStation release is the difference between a hobby and a business. GameMaker keeps that behind an Enterprise license and an approval process. Godot isn't a free ride there either: one developer discussion notes that W4 Games sells Godot with console export and calls it relatively expensive. Still, in our view, neither engine makes consoles cheap, so this is where the real comparison will happen.

The other open question is maturity. The announcement says GMRT is still rolling out in beta across platforms. A free runtime that is still in beta is a promise, not yet a product. We'd want to see how the beta evolves before telling anyone to start a long project on it.

Our verdict

Smart move, honest limits. If you make 2D games and want a gentle on-ramp, GameMaker just got harder to ignore, and Unity's 2D stragglers have a new reason to look around. But if console release is your plan, price the Enterprise tier before you fall in love, and if long-term control is your priority, Godot still sets the standard. GameMaker won goodwill this week. Keeping it will depend on tooling and platform reach in 2027.