next »

[Paul Eres]

but you also get 0% by using your own site -- i'm still not sure of the advantage of putting a game on this site (unless the site gets a lot of traffic)

it's a bit like 'instead of selling your lemonade at your own lemonade stand, also sell it on my lemonade stand!' 'but they're both still lemonade stands... in antarctica...'

in other words, i don't think the thing keeping people away was the royalty %, it's the lack of traffic that most sites like this have. if you can get your site traffic, getting games on it will be easy, no matter what the conditions or terms for the developer. if you can't get a site traffic, nobody will want to use it, even if it has the best terms and conditions in the world

[Masakari]

Be that as it may, I don't see what the problem is in having a game on another site. All things being equal (full control + 0% royalty), why would you not put your game on every website possible? Just because it's on my site, doesn't mean I don't want it on 100 other sites. I do get what you're saying though, the site needs promotion, but that's up to all of us as well.

Vermeulen, an idea - maybe instead of reducing the royalty from 9% to 0%, you could maintain it at 9-10% and use that money mainly for promoting the site across the web? I'm pretty sure any developer would prefer the site to have high traffic in exchange for that low royalty, because it would surely generate higher sales.

The "problem" I can see here is that promoting the site itself requires an increasing time commitment that you might not want to make (since you have your own games to worry about).

[Paul Eres]

time concerns, mainly. the time it'd take to set up my game on every site possible would take away time from other, more effective, marketing techniques. you don't lose anything except time, but time is still important

and yeah i'd rather have it take a % and use that percent for marketing -- that's a pretty good idea. i'd rather have 50% of 1000 sales than 100% of 10 sales.