• Idea On Digital Distribution
    10 replies, posted
In other words download sites such as Steam. One day, a game comes out and you have been wanting to get it ever since you first heard of it, but because you are such a poor retard you can't buy it. This is where my idea comes in, a download site where every game on it, new or old, is only 5 dollars; you heard me right, 5 dollars. "But Gay how will the developers make money off there games!?" This is where the advertisers come in. The site owner is going to work his ass off on getting people to advertise there shitty little products on the site, in turn all the money gained from these advertisers will go towards the developers in each purchase of there game. So yes, biggest downside to the users is the spam of ads. This idea focuses on giveing a win, win, win, win situation: The customers win by paying less, the advertisers win by well advertising, the developers win by actually getting more money if the site becomes popular, and finally the site owner still gets a little income from his creation. And all this being LEGAL. The biggest problem I can see in this so far is it relies heavily on popularity of the site. Please, if you find anything wrong with this idea post saying blah blah blah would cause blah blah blah, or whatever.
i see nothing wrong with that, but it wont work It at first sounds like throwing away money so no dev will sign up EDIT: no Jessesmith1 is right, i didnt think about that, im :downs:ing again :saddowns:
you obviously don't know how little ad revenue profits. and how much a team of developers for big game companies costs. it wouldn't work,
Um, how do you decide the money made from the adverts amongst the developers? If you give it to them evenly then whats the point in making a good game and if you don't then how do you decide it after all the sales figures will be skewed by the consistent pricing.
[QUOTE=Jessesmith1;16245634]you obviously don't know how little ad revenue profits. and how much a team of developers for big game companies costs. it wouldn't work,[/QUOTE] It could only host one game at a time? Maybe instead of 5 dollars it could be 15? Just throwing ideas out there. [editline]01:20PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Callius;16245645]Um, how do you decide the money made from the adverts amongst the developers? If you give it to them evenly then whats the point in making a good game and if you don't then how do you decide it after all the sales figures will be skewed by the consistent pricing.[/QUOTE] It would be each purchase, not a constant give in of money.
So...you want developers to undermine their profit margins by selling, at unfathomably low prices, their games to the relatively small population of 'PC gamers' that will accept a digital copy of a game whilst being bombarded by ads? Even if advertising offered a strong, consistent flow of income based on popular content, you still wouldn't be able to pay for the titles. Throw in the operating costs of such a service and the most you will be selling is casual Popcap flash games. Games aren't expensive because they come in a box on a disk, they are expensive because most AA and AAA games cost millions of dollars and large teams to produce. Simply switching to downloadable content and signing up with GoogleAds isn't going to work. Steam is effective because they rarely undercut retail prices but still offer more convenience. It still faces the issue that they aren't offering a physical product and everything works at their mercy...but they have a robust system to back it up. The community features, decent download speeds, easy recovery, and particularly no limitations of # of installations make it a desirable service.
[QUOTE=ChristopherB;16245833]So...you want developers to undermine their profit margins by selling, at unfathomably low prices, their games to the relatively small population of 'PC gamers' that will accept a digital copy of a game whilst being bombarded by ads? Even if advertising offered a strong, consistent flow of income based on popular content, you still wouldn't be able to pay for the titles. Throw in the operating costs of such a service and the most you will be selling is casual Popcap flash games. Games aren't expensive because they come in a box on a disk, they are expensive because most AA and AAA games cost millions of dollars and large teams to produce. Simply switching to downloadable content and signing up with GoogleAds isn't going to work. Steam is effective because they rarely undercut retail prices but still offer more convenience. It still faces the issue that they aren't offering a physical product and everything works at their mercy...but they have a robust system to back it up. The community features, decent download speeds, easy recovery, and particularly no limitations of # of installations make it a desirable service.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the input!
How about this: The site owner buys games at the same price stores get, then sells them for $30 or so, and relies on ad revenue for the remaining $20. The dev gets normal amounts of money, hopefully the site owner makes money, and we get the game for 20 bucks cheaper.
[QUOTE=GayPancake;16246014]Thanks for the imput![/QUOTE] I believe you mean "input" and if you aren't going to respond to valid criticism then you may as well give up. Regardless of whether this is a hypothetical business plan or and idea you want to pursue late; you should be able to defend it if it is worth it. [QUOTE=Bubbaluke;16246030]How about this: The site owner buys games at the same price stores get, then sells them for $30 or so, and relies on ad revenue for the remaining $20. The dev gets normal amounts of money, hopefully the site owner makes money, and we get the game for 20 bucks cheaper.[/QUOTE] That is the only reasonable way this could work if you really do want to undercut retail pricing. You have to take the hit up front and pay the developers their due...then you have to rely on the advertising. No publisher is going to risk his assets to a distributor who isn't guaranteeing proper payment.
[QUOTE=ChristopherB;16246113]I believe you mean "input" and if you aren't going to respond to valid criticism then you may as well give up. Regardless of whether this is a hypothetical business plan or and idea you want to pursue late; you should be able to defend it if it is worth it. That is the only reasonable way this could work if you really do want to undercut retail pricing. You have to take the hit up front and pay the developers their due...then you have to rely on the advertising. No publisher is going to risk his assets to a distributor who isn't guaranteeing proper payment.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the spotting that spelling mistake! [editline]01:49PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Bubbaluke;16246030]How about this: The site owner buys games at the same price stores get, then sells them for $30 or so, and relies on ad revenue for the remaining $20. The dev gets normal amounts of money, hopefully the site owner makes money, and we get the game for 20 bucks cheaper.[/QUOTE] Also this is what I was looking forward to seeing.
[QUOTE=Bubbaluke;16246030]How about this: The site owner buys games at the same price stores get, then sells them for $30 or so, and relies on ad revenue for the remaining $20. The dev gets normal amounts of money, hopefully the site owner makes money, and we get the game for 20 bucks cheaper.[/QUOTE] The publisher get 18$, the dev gets 2$. Greedy fucks.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.