4 ms·

That's all well and good, but that's kind of easy to say when there are several established business models for your type of product. And you're a profitable c

That's all well and good, but that's kind of easy to say when there are several established business models for your type of product. And you're a profitable company.

alnayyir 15y ago
His attitude got him where he is now. No one's suggesting that you shouldn't think about monetization, he hasn't even launched his product yet. Now what would be stupid is doing like some founders and giving away the product gratis for a year or two and then suddenly demanding money. That would be stupid. Getting something worth selling before worrying about what you'll charge for it isn't.
- rictic 15y ago
  His attitude is fantastic, and he's easily in the top three most inspiring figures in gaming right now. But I bet the millions of dollars from working at microsoft helped a bit too in giving him a long perspective.
kevingadd 15y ago
Saying that there are several established business models for his type of product is kind of missing the point. It's surprisingly hard to get people to give you money for something you built in the games space, in part because there's so much competition. Even Valve can't afford to ignore monetization; his point is more that their focus is always on product first, not on revenue model. Even before Valve had ever shipped a product, this is how they worked, and you could argue that their customers rewarded that approach.
- 6ren 15y ago
  Hi kevingadd, just a heads up that your other comment here is dead (your reply to corin_): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2940599 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2940599 - I think it's a perceptive, reasoned and evidence-based comment, and in no way should be dead. It's been inappropriately flagged, I believe. (I can see it because I'm browsing with showdead: yes in my profile). Perhaps the simplest fix is to just make the same comment again.
  - kevingadd 15y ago
    Thanks, it probably got killed because the HN server threw a fit when I submitted it - I ended up with two copies of the comment and deleted one. I suppose I deleted the wrong one...

That's all well and good, but that's kind of easy to say when there are several established business models for your type of product. And you're a profitable company.

alnayyir 15y ago

His attitude got him where he is now. No one's suggesting that you shouldn't think about monetization, he hasn't even launched his product yet. Now what would be stupid is doing like some founders and giving away the product gratis for a year or two and then suddenly demanding money. That would be stupid. Getting something worth selling before worrying about what you'll charge for it isn't.

rictic 15y ago
His attitude is fantastic, and he's easily in the top three most inspiring figures in gaming right now. But I bet the millions of dollars from working at microsoft helped a bit too in giving him a long perspective.

kevingadd 15y ago

Saying that there are several established business models for his type of product is kind of missing the point. It's surprisingly hard to get people to give you money for something you built in the games space, in part because there's so much competition. Even Valve can't afford to ignore monetization; his point is more that their focus is always on product first, not on revenue model. Even before Valve had ever shipped a product, this is how they worked, and you could argue that their customers rewarded that approach.

6ren 15y ago
Hi kevingadd, just a heads up that your other comment here is dead (your reply to corin_): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2940599 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2940599 - I think it's a perceptive, reasoned and evidence-based comment, and in no way should be dead. It's been inappropriately flagged, I believe. (I can see it because I'm browsing with showdead: yes in my profile). Perhaps the simplest fix is to just make the same comment again.
- kevingadd 15y ago
  Thanks, it probably got killed because the HN server threw a fit when I submitted it - I ended up with two copies of the comment and deleted one. I suppose I deleted the wrong one...