Niche game or undermarketed?

[n01487477]

I woke up and sat thinking this morning whether I would respond to your baiting for a full 30 secs and decided to go do other things like work and life and then as night followed I thought ... I have too much time on my hands today and I'd rather have a debate with a guy I don't know. On the Internet of course! Instead of going out an having a nice beer out.

I find it funny that we are in agreement that building an engine from scratch is not the way to go. We also agree in your second bait thread about steam and matrix pricing. Although I would probably take it further about steams tactics and have no desire to get into a price debate with other people here. So, let's let this sleeping dog ...

You are even kind enough to concede that even Unity is overkill. And yet you want to take this further because I dared to step on your toes and suggest that Unity was a unacceptable fit from a software development stand point?

Sir, you accuse me of "bullshit" and a "hypocrite" on the internet ... that is a laughable moment in my life. Sure, I'm full of it. I've never made a commercial game. Good call mate. My rhetorical knives are not as sharp as yours and I may have had to resort to "Have you?" if I thought I was boxed in but I'll withdraw asking you stupid questions like that.

I have evaluated (yes, I have a computer science degree - although I get your point over on Space Sector) and have bought 4 game engines over a period of time including Torque 3d & 2d ( 'tis was a mistake I tell ya. And yes, it is now free), Panda3D(free), c4 engine(licenced and the best I've bought & used), Unity3d - demo (and I'm downloading 4 now so that I can give it a whirl - you want me to make a game in a day? Ok - I'm being facetious), JME(Java monkey engine), Slick(2d engine java), lwjgl(ok not an engine but a framework for java graphics), Xna(now unsupported by M.S) and an assortment of others (Shiva, esenthal etc) that I have tried.

Why didn't I buy Unity you may ask? Cause I'm not made of money and the 30 day pro trial in the last version made me realise I was boxed into the Unity way[;)] As I stated before, no source code access is a turn off for me.

Ok, so all I've tried all these engines and no commercial game ... very true and something I must do something about if not just to clear my bullshit title.[;)]

I no longer do software development(non-game) as a career as I prefer teaching and my own programming life cycle had come to an end.(I no longer wanted to sit glued to a computer screen starting to resemble Neuman from Jurassic Park)

I also co-coded witptracker for WITP and witptracker-ae for witp-ae in Java on these very forums. Sure it doesn't come up to high professional standards but it was a hobby for the both of us while we were dabbling in Java. Probably a mistake in the end and we should have picked a better language. Oh, isn't that sort of my point?

So, lets start the rebuttal ... a tedious little job and something I'm loath to do cause you will reply and then I'll have to reply again and in the end we'll end up hugging and being best buds.

Furthermore, the whole debate is predicated on what we say actually matters to Elliot ... and as I'm sure it doesn't, this whole exercise in futility could have been stopped by my folly of not disagreeing with your obvious acumen in these and other matters.

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

ORIGINAL: n01487477
I've used the engine, I've used others...

Aah. And some of these engines had multi-threading security flaws?

I'm not saying that everything you said is BS - but nothing you said actually checked out. Not threading security - whatever the heck that is.

Firstly, I said

IIRC it doesn't use 64bit as yet and its multi-threading is not complete (or secure)

.

I also said "IIRC" as I hadn't dealt with Unity since the turn of the decade (until today) and things have changed since then such as the 64-bit support which seems to be now happening. So I will conceed that point to you.

I should have used the word "safe" rather than secure but that is probably Semantics to you.

But having a quick search on the unity forums from that time I'll cherry pick some snippets for you.
http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/168108 ... -Threading

What I glean from this discussion (mind you its old) is a number of things.
1. The Unity API is thread safe. The scripting engine is not.
2. Unity only uses one core for its API. Maybe that has changed by now ... But as stated by Mod's - It would take Unity a long time to do a re-write of this.
3. To make your threads safe you need to write a load of wrapped classes or come up with alternatives in managed code which can have a speed impact.
4. Find a M.S solution and make another wrapper cause you are at the whims of Unity as to what they will do or not.


Threads about no multi-core thread support (Okay most of them here are about physics but I said complete and in parenthesis secure)
http://feedback.unity3d.com/suggestions ... ead-physic
http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/71357- ... re-physics
http://feedback.unity3d.com/suggestions ... aded-physx
http://feedback.unity3d.com/suggestions ... ing-suppor
http://answers.unity3d.com/questions/20 ... Unity.html

Furthermore, as we are talking about thread safety within the synchronisation of memory address space and as Unity's API is AFAIK limited to one core - then unless I am mistaken their multi-core support is not actually complete.

Not plugin support.

Where did I say you can't do plug-in support? I didn't. I said that you would have to use a load of plug-in support to get around the real failing of this engine. No source code, having to wait for the dev's to address an issue or provide the functionality. In fact I was recently watching a youtube interview with the dev of KSP was talking about how they had to find at least one large work arounds for one issue - I'm sure there were others too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CupGRIL2 ... mbm6Nxvb-A

Having to write plug-in support for anything that is not addressed in the API is what a software developer has to do BUT with an overhead. But back to where we agree, it is better than writing and engine from scratch.

Not 32-bit memory addressing. Nothing. Not one of your objections was supported by fact.

And yes, I was writing about a lack of 64 bit support which seems to be working well for OSX and Linux and still encountering teething problems for win. But why quibble - you are the man and are right on this point. My lack of being a Unity fanboi has foiled me again.

Sure, you can make a game in 32-bit. Optimise your code and graphics to overcome memory address problems but simply put Unity has not addressed this barrier as yet... AFAIK.

If you want to get technical 32 bit aplications can address 2GB of memory on XP or 3GB with the /LargeAddressAware flag set.On 64 bit O.s's 32bit applications can go up to 4GB of memory. Whereas

64bit applications according to M.S "provide a huge leap in the amount of physical and virtual memory that can be addressed."

Anyway, I'm sure you'd like to learn more about 32v64 bit... (as you mention below)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... 85%29.aspx

And for all your supposed experience with game engines, you seem oddly silent on what might be a better fit. I threw out one example, you say it isn't appropriate - yet while claiming knowledge of alternatives - completely fail to suggest one. I trust that you can understand how I see this as odd.

Oh - you wish me to suggest an alternative and then be shot down on that too...nice try. I really want to know why you advocate so strongly for Unity when one box doesn't fit all? Are you a user? Do you have shares in the company? Or are you as I think - just wanting to be confrontational about anything I write.

ORIGINAL: n01487477
I could go round to round with you, toe to toe ... but why bother ?

Indeed. I might exploit one of the multi-threading security flaws you mentioned and leave you hakzored. Heaven forbid!

But seriously, this isn't going "toe-to-toe". If you have something to say which I might learn from, I'd love to hear it. None of your complaints has actually been supported by fact, so I

think it's understandable that my current position is rather dubious of your claims to experience with game engines.

And yet ... (answered above)

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

ORIGINAL: n01487477
I kinda chuckled when I heard Zero (Stardrive) was going from XNA(sunburn) to Unity because he thinks it will solve all his coding problems.

Well, I had a little time, so I actually looked into this. Guess what I found? Some facts to support your claims? Guess again...

Here's his reasoning:

Reinvent the wheel:
"I wanted to use an IDE like Visual Studio and code everything from scratch. I didn’t understand these visual engines like UDK or Unity; I tried to understand them, but I lacked the foundational

knowledge to understand their advantages. The result is that I ended up spending a lot of time reinventing the wheel for StarDrive."

More efficient use of his time:
"But Unity is the way of the future. I can’t emphasize enough how much faster it is to work in Unity, how many things just work that would otherwise take days of development time in .NET. So

when I made the decision that I wanted to expand StarDrive, to bring in new content and game modes, it made so much more sense to me to just move to Unity now."

Cross-platform support:
"Future StarDrive games will be released not only for PC but for Mac and Linux as well, with the possibility of Android and iOS iterations just a short control-scheme change away."

Able to focus on developing the game, not minutae:
"My process is basically the same. There are artists scattered across the globe who are freelancing some top quality 2D and 3D art. I’m writing the code and integrating it all into a game. The only difference is that now I’m probably working three times faster with these new tools."


Full interview here: link

All that seems a far cry from your claim that "he thinks it will solve all his coding problems". He does not, in fact, seem to believe this.

[/quote]
Yes, I have read the space sector interview, I have the game and have read his posts on the stardrive forum. Actually, unless I'm mistaken and maybe you are not a native speaker the quotes you provided from him seem to suggest that he actually does infact believe that unity will solve his problems. That he no longer has to reinvent the wheel, that it will speed up development time, that at a click of a button he will be able to deploy various builds and unshackle himself from the minutae.

Anyway, this is a bit off point cause I was talking about his code optimisation and you only need to play stardrive into the mid-end game to see my point here. So is it the man or is it the engine?

I think from the little reading and his dev blog that his new SDU will be a cut down version of stardrive and maybe Unity is a perfect fit for the nature of that game. I stand by my initial thoughts that it isn't for DW though.

Why?
1. No source code. Without it, it doesn't allows you to do whatever you want without limitation. This point alone is enough to send most professionals running. Hence given the probably unfair moniker of being just a scripting engine.
2. Modifying the 3d engine for a 2d game. Yes, it is no more than just having a fixed focal length. But once again Unity is killing my argument
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1991 ... _tools.php
3. API that only uses 1 core AFAIK. So, no true multi-threading.
4. Not totally thread safe - you cannot call objects from one to the other.i.e The API to managed code threads. AFAIK.
5. Unity is more a prototyping engine. Sure, you can knock together something quick in a cookie cutter way but then the pain begins. Well that is how I remember it back in 3.? I'll try the new 4.2 demo though - just to be sure.

You later stated, "Elliot has shown he knows more about making and using game engines than you or I." - which seems to be disingenuous since you clearly claim superior knowledge over Zero.

One assumption based on your own statements is that you believe Elliot to be far superior a game developer than Zero - and place yourself somewhere in-between. Or you're simply a hypocrite.

I am inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt and favour the second choice. But if you believe yourself to be a superior game developer to Zero, I would gladly see your portfolio of published games to refute this. What's that I hear? A deafening silence?

Oh well done... brilliant!

Well done. Business experts who can't tell the difference between profit and revenue. Marketing experts promising the land of milk and honey if Matrix takes DW to Steam. And now a guru developer

who knows more about game development than Zero or Elliot. Well done, Damian - you have company you can fit in marvellously with. Introduce yourself and take a load off. You have many compatriots in this thread (and others) who share your self-image.

I'm very much tempted to scream "BULLSH!T" at this point, but I'll await your rebuttal.

[edited] cause I'm being drawn into a level of argument I don't want. Sorry...

http://www.spacesector.com/blog/2012/11 ... ckstarter/

I'm outta here and I bid you fair winds. I will no longer be drawn into a debate about this - you scored some blood.Let's leave it at that before both of us get a warning or are banned. And as I see you are still posting about this you must really should get up and move away from a computer sometime ...

Me - I'm out to a nice bar

[edited for formatting]

[Icemania]

[Lucian]

Don't worry about Kayoz, he's more afraid of us than we are of him.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: n01487477
Oh - you wish me to suggest an alternative and then be shot down on that too...nice try. I really want to know why you advocate so strongly for Unity when one box doesn't fit all? Are you a user? Do you have shares in the company? Or are you as I think - just wanting to be confrontational about anything I write.

I think you are drastically misunderstanding me.

It's my position that nitpicking and whining about what a piece of software does or doesn't do that you want or don't want is completely pointless. If you're going to complain - then I believe you're obligated to propose a resolution to address your complaint. So, sure - Unity has flaws. It doesn't dance and sing the way it could if it was completely rewritten. Some of the design decisions were probably unwise considering the changes in technology since they made those decisions. But here's my point - what's your alternative suggestion? I've asked for an alternative repeatedly and gotten nothing by whinges and moans. If you say Unity sucks - then be that as it may - so who sucks less? If you're going to argue that Engine X is a better choice because it has all the bells and whistles which make your trousers tent when reading the manuals - then by all means, let's hear it.

So, no - I'm not a Unity fan-boy. If there's a better game engine out there, I'd leap at it. If you can point me to something better - then as I asked repeatedly - let's hear it.

All I've heard from you is bitching and moaning. Not one suggestion on a superior alternative. Seriously, it's like listening to conspiracy theorists who honestly believe that Bush orchestrated the 9-11 attacks. And when I ask then what they're going to do about it - they shrug their shoulders and utter some piffle about how the Illuminati Cabal is too powerful for them to make a difference. You're exactly the same.

ORIGINAL: n01487477
Yes, I have read the space sector interview, I have the game and have read his posts on the stardrive forum. Actually, unless I'm mistaken and maybe you are not a native speaker the quotes you provided from him seem to suggest that he actually does infact believe that unity will solve his problems. That he no longer has to reinvent the wheel, that it will speed up development time, that at a click of a button he will be able to deploy various builds and unshackle himself from the minutae.

I have to disagree with that. I did not get the impression that he thinks it'll be point-click-drag and bingo he has a game. He states that it'll be quicker and easier - but nowhere do I get the feeling that he thinks that Unity is the panacea to all his problems. I got the distinct impression that his position is that he'll spend less time working around Unity's limitations than he would to do it all himself.

News flash for you - all libraries/software has bugs. All of them. Pick a (non trivial) library - any commercial library you like - and you point one out to me that DOESN'T have bugs. You can't. It doesn't exist. Choosing one engine or library is just a cost-benefit analysis. How much do I gain in productivity vs. how much do I have to work to dance around the crappy design and/or coding? Such decisions are made ALL THE TIME. Yet somehow you seem to think that open-source is the magic bullet to producing perfect software, and if the product chosen doesn't meet your needs 100%, you're going to whinge and complain.

Maybe you do that, but the rest of the software development world chooses the least-sucky option available, and using some of the time/manpower savings into dealing with the shortcomings and - fingers crossed - coming out ahead in the deal. Your position consists of nothing more than - "let's just whinge and complain". Maybe it makes you feel important. Who knows.

ORIGINAL: n01487477
Anyway, this is a bit off point cause I was talking about his code optimisation and you only need to play stardrive into the mid-end game to see my point here. So is it the man or is it the engine?

Have you played DW in mid-to-end game? Perhaps you have a shining opinion of Elliot's code - but it slows to a crawl and then just goes bang without warning. But that, based on your glowing evaluation of Elliot's code - is perfectly acceptable.

ORIGINAL: n01487477
1. No source code. Without it, it doesn't allows you to do whatever you want without limitation. This point alone is enough to send most professionals running. Hence given the probably unfair moniker of being just a scripting engine.

OK, so you think open-source code is fundamentally better designed and written than commercial? Let's see your examples. Name me an open-source office suite which out-performs Office. Name an open-source MMO that blows away Warcraft. Open source is grand for some projects - but the more complex it becomes, the less applicable o-s is. Too many cooks in the kitchen ruins the stew, as they say. Commercial software stays focussed. It has to. People's careers and lives are invested in it. O-S is done by hobbyists. No commitment and many so-called programmers who have vastly over-inflated opinions of their code.

As for "sending most professionals running", I'm afraid the market trends blatantly contradict your assertion. Tell me - how many AAA games released this year are based on open-source frameworks? If professionals flock to open-source - then surely you can list me .. say six - AAA titles. I'm all ears.

I think I can safely ignore the majority of the remainder of your post. You cite threads which are 2-3 years old. I frankly don't care where Unity was 2-3 years ago. What concerns me is where they are NOW and where it's going to be 2-3 years IN THE FUTURE. You seem to be obsessed with history, so I'll let you rummage around your floppy disk collection.

ORIGINAL: n01487477
http://www.spacesector.com/blog/2012/11 ... ckstarter/

You're serious? You're going to bring THAT P-O-S up as an example of how wrong I am? Have you SEEN where he is? And have you noted the calendar date? He's due for release in 5-6 months. "Early 2014" was his promise. He's nowhere near a commercial release. He's not even ready to alpha test it yet. He's perhaps 15-20% code complete. And it's only going to get harder for him as he tries to bolt everything together and finds that it doesn't work quite as smoothly as he predicted. Writing the code is the end of a developer's work, he seems to think. Boy, he's in for a rude awakening when alpha testers run it on a myriad of boxes and test it's functionality and balance. Yes, game balance. Haven't heard so much as a peep from him even considering that aspect. But he'll have it all ironed out in 5-6 months, yes?

If you're going to bring that up as an example - I can only say that his progress so far seems to be not too far off my predictions. But hey - if I've missed something and he REALLY does have his code nearly complete - and tested and balanced - and he REALLY IS ready to ship - then let's hear what I've missed.

Maybe he'll surprise me. And maybe Elvis really didn't do no drugs.

[Data]

ORIGINAL: Lucian

Don't worry about Kayoz, he's more afraid of us than we are of him.

LOL That's so true it's not even funny but still

basic Kayoz argumentation

sorry, couldn't help myself

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Data
basic Kayoz argumentation

I will assume that you are illiterate and someone is reading this to you. That the error is theirs and not yours.

Did you notice that he claims superior knowledge and game programming ability than both Elliot and Zero? "I was talking about his code optimisation and you only need to play stardrive into the mid-end game". Both Elliot and Zero are guilty of this faux-pas in their optimization. Clearly he thinks he's better than either.

So, who's waving the "I rule" flag?

[Osito]

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

ORIGINAL: Data
basic Kayoz argumentation

I will assume that you are illiterate and someone is reading this to you. That the error is theirs and not yours.

Did you notice that he claims superior knowledge and game programming ability than both Elliot and Zero? "I was talking about his code optimisation and you only need to play stardrive into the mid-end game". Both Elliot and Zero are guilty of this faux-pas in their optimization. Clearly he thinks he's better than either.

So, who's waving the "I rule" flag?

Kayoz, I think in responding to Data you overlooked your own signature [;)]

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Osito
Kayoz, I think in responding to Data you overlooked your own signature [;)]

Proof:

1. "chuckled when I heard Zero (Stardrive) was going from XNA(sunburn) to Unity because he thinks it will solve all his coding problems" - Damian claims greater knowledge than Zero
2. "Elliot has shown he knows more about making and using game engines than you or I." - Damian claims less knowledge than Elliot (thus he's better than Zero, inferior to Elliot)
3. "... code optimisation and you only need to play stardrive into the mid-end game to see my point here. So is it the man or is it the engine?" - Damian claims superior code optimization compared to Zero
4. Both Stardrive and DW suffer from poor performance in mid-to-end game. Thus Damian is better than both.
5. Damian claims greater game engine knowledge than Zero (#1 above) as well as better code optimization skills (#4). So, Damian is well on his way to claiming general superiority as a game developer. To either. Elliot or Zero.

You could challenge my conclusion that he's only claiming greater expertise in specific areas, and not generally. But the impression he gives is: Zero is crap. Elliot is crap. Damian rules both.

And since his game development portfolio consists of one crappy little Java data analysis tool, [aside]woo, impressive. He can output his results to a fixed spreadsheet.[/aside] we have ample proof of his kick-ass game development skills.

Edit:
Of note, his little Java project was co-developed with another bloke. So who has the leet coding skillz is subject to question. Given the magnitude of their project, I suggest that their skills are about equal.

[Osito]

Kayoz, it was actually Data's unsubstantiated assertion about your argumentation that I was referring to, not your argumentation, per se.

I knew I should never have put down my popcorn and reached for my keyboard. Always a mistake

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Osito

Kayoz, it was actually Data's unsubstantiated assertion about your argumentation that I was referring to, not your argumentation, per se.

I knew I should never have put down my popcorn and reached for my keyboard. Always a mistake

Was the grammar of your statement incorrect, then?

Your statement:
Kayoz, I think in responding to Data you overlooked your own signature

Should read:
Kayoz, I think in responding, Data overlooked your own signature

I wouldn't worry about the popcorn supply. Damian has already made enough of a fool of himself, that I don't expect to hear from him again. But then again, he might be polishing his gaming development magnum opus - WitPTracker AE. I would hate to think I'd taken time away from this great work which is no doubt cementing his credentials as a peerless game developer.

Edit:
Argh, there I go again. It's not his magnum opus. It took two of them to code it - both floydg and himself. Such a work of genius couldn't possibly come from a single mind!

[Osito]

Ahh, now I love grammar questions ...

What I meant was that Data's statement about your own argumentation was a mere assertion, unsupported by any evidence. Therefore, assuming Christopher Hitchens' statement is true (which is another question, of course), you did not need any evidence (or argumentation) to dismiss the assertion.

Whether my own statement actually conveyed that meaning, in a grammatically correct fashion, is unclear to me right now. Given given that I am involved in this dialog, I guess it didn't convey it to you personally, which does indicate I could have done better. I could have put a comma after "think" and "Data", but I'm not sure that we would be in a much different position. Perhaps there was a better way of expressing my statement, but I have - urgently, it seems - to go and cook my partner's dinner, so I can't give it much thought right now.

My original post was flippant, and I could certainly be criticised for taking the subject further off topic, and probably for semantic imprecision. If so, I accept the criticism, because I can't delay that dinner any longer ...

[Kayoz]

Osito,

Granted. I could have dismissed his assertion that "I rule" simply on the lack of evidence. If I've taken such a position, then I'd like to see his evidence.

However, it's worse than that. Not only is Data asserting that I claim superiority (which is baseless), but it is Damian who is actually the one claiming that position. Data not merely asserts his position without evidence - he asserts it in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Hitchens isn't "true". His current state is "dead". A great thinker and writer, but I am not aware of any instance in which he claimed to be "the truth". He never claimed to be a prophet. But oddly enough, he was clearly a better writer than any of those claiming divine inspiration for their scribblings.

[Osito]

ORIGINAL: Kayoz

Osito,

Granted. I could have dismissed his assertion that "I rule" simply on the lack of evidence. If I've taken such a position, then I'd like to see his evidence.

However, it's worse than that. Not only is Data asserting that I claim superiority (which is baseless), but it is Damian who is actually the one claiming that position. Data not merely asserts his position without evidence - he asserts it in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Hitchens isn't "true". His current state is "dead". A great thinker and writer, but I am not aware of any instance in which he claimed to be "the truth". He never claimed to be a prophet. But oddly enough, he was clearly a better writer than any of those claiming divine inspiration for their scribblings.

Oh well, what the hell! Dinner's finished.

Actually, I thought you'd made your case on the argumentation side (which was kind of the point of my original - flippant - post), so I didn't think you needed to add anything to Data's post - that's not to say I can't see the motivation.

As regards Hitchens, this point is more important to me. I just want to clear up that I was not intending to say or imply that he considered himself, or his statements, to be the "truth". I was simply taking the quote as a proposition which might be true or untrue. Yes, I took the statement at face value in your signature, but it's clearly there to be analysed, unpicked, and rectified if necessary; that's the point of it, really.

In fact, it's a fascinating statement: I'm sure you already knew this, but I hadn't realised, until this evening, that it is referred to as Hitchens' razor. Clearly, it's also related to Occam's razor, which is another very useful tool when analysing an argument - funny that I hadn't made the connection earlier.

[whiran]

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
Well done. Business experts who can't tell the difference between profit and revenue. Marketing experts promising the land of milk and honey if Matrix takes DW to Steam. And now a guru developer who knows more about game development than Zero or Elliot. Well done, Damian - you have company you can fit in marvellously with. Introduce yourself and take a load off. You have many compatriots in this thread (and others) who share your self-image.

You are quite the troll Kayoz.

Well done.

You have pulled me back in because of your continued claim that I do not understand the difference between revenue and profit. I find that odd since at no time in my original post where I presented made-up and arbitrary numbers did I ever mention the word profit. You were the only one using that term not I.

I used the term the company "made" X number of dollars. Not that the company net X number of dollars or that the company made X number of dollars in profit.

If you do not understand that distinction that is on you but to claim that I do not understand it is a good job at trolling.

I'll quote various things from the original post that you keep mistakenly referencing as "profit" while ignoring the fact that the term profit was not used.

In fact, I won't bother quoting all the various parts of the post I'll just go to your quote:

ORIGINAL: whiran
The point of pricing, from a marketing standpoint, is to sell as many copies as one can to make the most money.


ORIGINAL: Kayoz
Profit. Not revenue.

Increasing sales volume at the cost of profit, would be called, to use business technical terms, a stupid decision.

Once more I draw your attention to what I wrote. To make the most money means gross revenue not net. That means total revenue not profit. You didn't seem to grasp that.

As to increased costs and the like if you didn't cherry pick your purposefully misunderstood comment and ignored where I laid out a variety of scenarios that included things like royalties:

ORIGINAL: Whiran

Let's pretend that Amplitude Studios only made $10 USD per copy of Endless Space sold (the game sells for $30 USD, Steam probably takes 30% so that leaves $20 and then the game was rarely on sale for half off although at half off that still leaves Amplitude making $11.50 per copy sold but let's say $10 USD) then Amplitude Studios made 3 million dollars from Endless Space.

You will, once again, see I am still talking GROSS revenue to the individual companies. I just split it out into revenue to different businesses.

I do not know what their salaries are, what their overhead is, and what other expenses they may have.

I did lay out, clearly, that putting a game on Steam incurs an additional cost to the company doing so by means of the 30% that Steam takes.

But, somehow you don't seem to understand that writing that a company made X dollars does not mean the same as a company made X dollars in profit. They are two different things.

Perhaps you should step back one time when replying with your troll mode on and read what is being written in the context that it was written.

But, I will give you this, you make a great troll. You manage to get a rise out of people. So kudos for that.

[Darkspire]

[Kayoz]

Revenue v profit:

ORIGINAL: whiran
To make the most money means gross revenue not net. That means total revenue not profit. You didn't seem to grasp that.

You don't make money from revenue. You make money from profit. I addressed this point earlier, and you're bringing it up again without addressing my initial queries on your so-called logic.

Edit:
Perhaps the first sentence is poorly phrased. I mean, that "made money" is generally understood as your profit. Saying you "made a million dollars" when that is your gross revenue, is misleading to the vast majority of readers.

- Gross revenue == total sales receipts
- Net revenue == total sales receipts - costs
Somehow you have the two inverted. Go back to your basic accounting and re-read your statement. I suspect that even you are capable of identifying the mistake you made. Here's a link to help you along if you're still scratching your head: gross v net revenue

If you want to resurrect this discussion, then I do require that you put it in the context of statements made, and that you quote fully. You're cherry-picking bits out of a more than three-month old discussion to support your ignorant statements. If you want to play with necro threads, then quote fully and in context. I don't think anyone should have to dig through the thread to try to find something you wrote over three months ago.

ORIGINAL: Whiran
I do not know what their salaries are, what their overhead is, and what other expenses they may have.

And yet you feel qualified to make predictions on their profitability?

Your whole Steam-proselyting argument has been "increase revenue", not "increase profit". The latter being of far greater interest to Erik and company than the former. But as I said, you completely fail to understand this difference.

I don't know what Matrix's costs are, nor what the costs associated with sales on Steam are. And neither do you. My position is, and has been - that Erik has the numbers to crunch to make a decision. Neither you nor I have those numbers. Thus his decision is far more likely to be the correct one than yours. (here, I remove myself - I do not say "my decision", since I have not the arrogance to claim I know more about his business than him, whilst you clearly do).

If you still don't understand, there is nothing more I can say. You're either unwilling or incapable (or both) of understanding.

ORIGINAL: Whiran
Perhaps you should step back one time when replying with your troll mode on and read what is being written in the context that it was written.

I replied to what you wrote. I am not telepathic. I cannot divine the "true meaning" of statements which are demonstrably false. If you mean profitability, then stop basing your whole argument off revenue numbers. It's a simple fix. Really. It's that easy.

But...

While you're here, perhaps you'd like to address my previous query of the logic of your statement:

ORIGINAL: whiran
Matrix does not believe in treating Distant Worlds as anything other than a niche product positioned exclusively as an expensive game. That's fine because, at this point, the PRICE has become something of a selling feature for the people who get it.

While you're demonstrating your business expertise to everyone here, perhaps you'd like to explain how in the games business, a high price is a "selling feature". That's a very interesting business statement you have there. Illuminate us mud-chewing non-accounting primitives, please? I really want to hear your explanation for this statement.

[Icemania]

ORIGINAL: Icemania
At this rate, by the time they get around to Distant Worlds 2, they could have a lot more competition. Maybe I'm an optimist, but the current crop of 4X games is the weakest I can remember, so surely someone will take advantage and initiate some serious 4X projects in the next few years. Look at Star Citizen in a supposedly small and dead genre not unlike 4X. $21M in funding, massive publicity, and we hope a great game on the way.

Fortune favours the bold.

And a few days later ... GalCiv 3 is announced.

[Athelas2211]

GalCiv3 is announced, sold like hell in founder/supporter edition and here is something to be remembered by. (Stardock does only steam now, and of course, their own DRM free download).

http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/426351 Post made by Stardock CEO (gaming company that is 20 years+ in the "game" and I think even Kayoz must agree that they know their game......so, give yourself a efw moments and read on.


"Let me get this out of the way: I like Steam. I like Valve.

We have a poll up right now that asks whether you use Steam. Let us know please.

I’ve been in digital distribution since before digital distribution was a thing. The very first computer game that was launched at retail and digitally distributed was Galactic Civilizations back in February 2003.

For us, digital distribution was a matter of life or death. Consider this, how many other independent (or heck, just non-publicly traded) game studios have been around 20 years? Go ahead. Count them up. Not many eh?

I incorporated Stardock back in 1993 from my college dorm room. And I can tell you, if it weren’t for digital distribution, we would have stopped making games a long time ago. That’s because the more people that are between you and your customer, the more opportunities there are for theft. Not by players but by retailers, publishers, distributors, etc.

One of the reasons why the whole “piracy” bellowing from publishers irritated me was because the biggest obstacle to getting paid for my work wasn’t from pirates. It was from the middle men.

In 1994, we released our first game. Galactic Civilizations for OS/2. It was published by a company called Advanced Idea Machines. The game was a huge hit. So I heard anyway. We didn’t get paid. And being a poor college student at the time, I couldn’t afford a lawyer.

So in 1996, we released Galactic Civilizations 2 for OS/2. This time we released it ourselves. But our retail distributor, Micro Central, went bankrupt and didn’t pay us and our mail order distributor, Blue Orchards went out of business as well and didn’t pay us.

So then we moved to Windows and we released Galactic Civilizations for Windows, published by Strategy First….and again, didn’t get paid.

Do you see a pattern here?

What saved us was digital distribution. With it, we could sell directly to customers, cutting out the middle man.

As you can imagine, when Steam came out we started to get a little nervous. Not because of the competition but because we feared the idea that we would one day need to sell our software through a third party and hence risk not getting paid…again.

As it had turned out, our fears have been unwarranted. Impulse, now owned by Gamestop, pays like clock work and so does Steam. By contrast, with a retail distributor you were lucky to get paid merely 90 days late. And that’s not counting the obnoxious and expensive RMA games they play. I like the service Steam provides. They’re easy to work with, they’re honest, and they’re passionate about what they do. And most importantly, they let me, as a game developer, focus on what matters: making games.

Anyway, the point here being, what are your feelings on Steam these days?"

"by Frogboy (CEO of Stardock)

Yep. Across the board. Valve only charges 30% for sales that occur via them."





"

That's not really workable. People are not going to accept downloading 10GB or whatever for every little update. And there is still the matter of the installer which would need to place the files.

In 2013, there's really no compelling reason not to use Steam.

When we left the OS/2 market, there were a lot of people who were mad at us then. Similarly, there were lots of people who didn't want to run "Windoze" just to play a game and insisted on DOS versions.

People who want to play PC games are going to either deal with a tiny selection of non-Steam games or deal with it.

We've done the math and it's a no brainer. It's Steam from here on out. Even if that, unfortunately, means losing some good customers. The cost/benefit ratio is just too one-sided.
"

[Osito]

An interesting post, which I remember reading last year, when it was originally put out. But from the point of view of this thread it misses the point. There are those who seem to think that DW should be on Steam and there are those who think it shouldn't. Personally, I have no problem with Steam, and most of the games I have bought (I use the word "bought" rather than "owned", because I understand/accept that Steam could cancel my apparent ownership at its own discretion) over the last five years were through Steam.

But the fundamental point here is that the guys who make DW are the ones who decide which media to use in order to distribute it to the public, and they are best placed to take that decision, not us, the game buying public. They may take their decision because they correctly think they'll make the most money that way, or because they mistakenly think they'll make the most money that way, or even because they just don't like Steam. In any event, it's their decision, taken with a lot of background information that is not available to the common or garden forum poster.

Look at it this way: if DW suddenly comes out on Steam, does that mean you think you were right all along?

[Lucian]

If DW were only available on Steam I would never have bought it.

I'm one of those old-fashioned people who actually like to own the games I purchase rather than have my access dictated by the whim of some faceless company.

Once you get my money, it's mine. Period.