• TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Unless indie devs are getting guarantees for revenue that aren’t tied to playtime numbers I don’t see how these indie devs aren’t just getting scammed.

    It would seem like they would be better off by figuring out how much money they’d need to put into advertising to make the same amount of sales to make the same or more revenue than they would by putting them on a subscription

    • Paradachshund@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      From what I’ve heard they’re having trouble convincing devs to join so I think you’re spot on. This is Spotify for games basically.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I’m not uniformly opposed to subscriptions as a concept. That almost goes as far as “paying money for products is anti consumer”.

      Even when it comes to a smaller sum, I see the attraction to companies: It’s reliable revenue, which makes business and payment of employees more stable.

      That said, it relies on the consumer constantly knowing they have the option of leaving without “lock in” persuasion, and the product being decent value. Obviously, we’ve seen hundreds of anti-consumer subscriptions.

    • CodenameDarlen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      But this one is good.

      “look at us we’re helping indie games and not just that but helping gamers to help indie devs. We’re a good company, we’re almost jesus christ of capitalism”