I would think it would be weird for a game engine business to try to curate what type of creative talent utilizes their game engine product. It would seem to me from monetizing installs that you'd want anybody and everybody using your game engine product to generate _anything_ to get installed one or more times by a consumer.
To make your case, I think it would be more relevant if Unity decided to charge game publishers extra for publishing games that were only installed for some short amount of time on a device before going uninstalled. That is not the case here.
Anyway, I see where your mind is at, but I think the conclusion you came to is not correct. I don't see what incentive Unity would have to keep low quality games off of their product, they actively would want them to succeed to hit the thresholds for monetization. And besides, everybody already knows to judge the tool based on its potential, rather than judge it based on some mediocre games that came out and flopped, because that happens with any engine.
To make your case, I think it would be more relevant if Unity decided to charge game publishers extra for publishing games that were only installed for some short amount of time on a device before going uninstalled. That is not the case here.
Anyway, I see where your mind is at, but I think the conclusion you came to is not correct. I don't see what incentive Unity would have to keep low quality games off of their product, they actively would want them to succeed to hit the thresholds for monetization. And besides, everybody already knows to judge the tool based on its potential, rather than judge it based on some mediocre games that came out and flopped, because that happens with any engine.