On Sat, 24 May 2025 09:51:28 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<
dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 5/24/2025 7:43 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Fri, 23 May 2025 21:37:10 -0700, Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 5/23/2025 10:18 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Is that what the devs intended when they made that deal with Epic?
I've no idea. But it sure feels that way.
Possibly, could be just to hopefully get some people to play it and get
some buzz. Epic offered them enough to do it maybe?
It's a bit of both, apparently. There's a response on the Steam
discussions page about this very topic from the developers.
Essentially, they accepted the free 'game of the week' deal from Epic
over a year ago, receiving 'modest compensation'. They also saw it as
a way to get out word of mouth about their game (e.g., free
advertising). It isn't clear if the devs or Epic chose the date when
the game would be offered for free.
There are a lot of people on the Steam boards who are quite upset that
they pre-ordered the game on Steam only to discover they could have
gotten it free on Epic. It's also really weird to give away your game
on the day of release, since that's when the vast majority of sales
are made. The devs themselves indicate the money they are getting from
Epic was fairly minimal. They are giving up a lot of money with this
move.
... unless, again, they know that Epic freebies don't actually
contribute to lost sales, because everybody who actually would
normally buy the game will just get it on Steam.
It could be that the devs were so desperate for an influx of cash that
they had to make the deal a year ago?
It looks like it might actually be fun too.
It actually does, and reviews (beyond the "why am I paying for this
when I can get it for free" teeth-gnashing) are quite positive. It
hardly seems the sort of game that NEEDED to be given away free to
make a positive impact.
It's just a really weird move.
Sounds like some small indie developer got taken advantage of.
Why are small indie developers not responsible for their own bad
business decisions? (assuming it even was one).
Money was offered to list the game for free and they accepted. If
they were paid a year ago when the game wasn't even yet ready for
release, it was paid without even knowing if the game is any good or
not. A gamble for both sides perhaps, and maybe one that turned out
better for Epic (and Epic customers).... or maybe not...
...releasing something for free (even when not paid) on a major
platform generates Youtube videos and buzz about the product, which is
often worth a lot more than any cash offering in terms of a marketing
campaign, so it might have actually been a good business decision.
If you said those that bought it on Steam got screwed, I think I could
agree with you, but I don't think anyone screwed anyone intentionally
here.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)