3 ms·

Let's say you have a game, say you are Ubisoft. You distribute with Amazon Luna, I assume you get some sort of money, something like for every hour played on X

Let's say you have a game, say you are Ubisoft. You distribute with Amazon Luna, I assume you get some sort of money, something like for every hour played on X game you get $0.0000005 or something silly like that. Basically you get a rough amount of money from people playing your game every month. I fail to see how that is any different then a Steam or GameStop based distribution. Which is... You find a publisher, they setup and get all the boxes/discs/what ever figured you and every month you get a cheque of all your sales. From a game developer point of view, it's the exact same.

hombre_fatal 6y ago
The difference is that players don't need to invest anything to play your game, just like I don't need to buy or rent a specific DVD to watch a movie anymore. They don't need to pay additional money, they don't need to install it. One advantage is that there's no barrier to trying out your game. The other is that your game now runs on anything.
- dubcanada 6y ago
  It's different for the end-user, yes. But from a developer/game business point of view it's the exact same. Maybe less earnings, but there isn't any details on that to confirm so it's just speculation.
  - hombre_fatal 6y ago
    Well, those UX considerations in my post are also business considerations. Just look at all the games people never even get to entertain the idea of playing because they only own a tablet, macbook, underpowered computer, wrong/no console, etc. Getting your game into their hands through a service like this surely impacts your business.
defen 6y ago
> You distribute with Amazon Luna, I assume you get some sort of money, something like for every hour played on X game you get $0.0000005 or Even better than that, you could get $0.0000005 for every hour spent playing or watching on twitch. Or maybe separate numbers for twitch vs plays, but in theory does Amazon care if a million people play alone and don't broadcast, or if one person plays and a million people watch?

hombre_fatal 6y ago

The difference is that players don't need to invest anything to play your game, just like I don't need to buy or rent a specific DVD to watch a movie anymore. They don't need to pay additional money, they don't need to install it. One advantage is that there's no barrier to trying out your game. The other is that your game now runs on anything.

dubcanada 6y ago
It's different for the end-user, yes. But from a developer/game business point of view it's the exact same. Maybe less earnings, but there isn't any details on that to confirm so it's just speculation.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  Well, those UX considerations in my post are also business considerations. Just look at all the games people never even get to entertain the idea of playing because they only own a tablet, macbook, underpowered computer, wrong/no console, etc. Getting your game into their hands through a service like this surely impacts your business.

defen 6y ago

> You distribute with Amazon Luna, I assume you get some sort of money, something like for every hour played on X game you get $0.0000005 or Even better than that, you could get $0.0000005 for every hour spent playing or watching on twitch. Or maybe separate numbers for twitch vs plays, but in theory does Amazon care if a million people play alone and don't broadcast, or if one person plays and a million people watch?