4 ms·
Well, on the bright side, they did sell 18,000 copies, so that's $720k. I couldn't see any information on how much the game cost to develop, so we don't know if
by sho 18y ago
Well, on the bright side, they did sell 18,000 copies, so that's $720k. I couldn't see any information on how much the game cost to develop, so we don't know if they still made money or not.
To me it's "sad" in the same way that being able to voice calls from your PC is "sad", if you work for a telco that is. People found a cheaper way to get what they want. Good luck betting against that.
- lucumo 18y ago> To me it's "sad" in the same way that being able to voice calls from your PC is "sad", if you work for a telco that is. People found a cheaper way to get what they want. Good luck betting against that. There's a "minor" difference there. The telco competes against an independently developed product, while the game maker competes against his own product.
- sho 18y agoThere are differences, yes, but the take home lesson is similar - businesses based upon specialised delivery of information are doomed in the presence of a general network. The problem the game makers have is that their whole model revolves around customers not being able to acquire the information they want (ie, a game) unless they buy it from the producer. Unfortunately, this is no longer true for many people, who have found a much cheaper transfer method. The challenge for the producers is to find a way of making money which isn't reliant on being the sole source of the raw information. For game producers, this could be to charge for playing the game, a la WoW. For movie producers, the cinema. For musicians, the concert. Charge for the experience, not the delivery. Hope that makes sense.