My issue was that you're trying to ask for more than average small publisher asks for and nothing in your portfolio warrants that kind of a cut. You should settle for less or give a sizeable funding to the project as an incentive and an act of trust. If you are willing to invest on the project you're going to publish, you'll seem confident in your abilities to get that money back and then some.
This, pretty much, big time.
If a publisher were to approach me and offer funding right from the early stages because he believed in the project, I would probably be WAY more open to the 40% cut. It would seem more like a partnership than feeling like a possible exploitative deal.
In short: what you have to offer at the moment doesn't warrant a 40% deal I don't think.
Another thing which would be convincing would be guarantees. "We take a 40% cut but we guarantee that through dealing with us you will increase your sales by x amount." If a person ends up making more by using your services even with the 40% cut, they might be convinced to do so.
You're new to the scene but you are probably aware that indie game development but keep in mind that devs are often alone or with a very small team and work so many hours on their games, going for a share of their revenue is a very touchy topic. It can even come across as insulting if the fee is too high.
Maybe you could focus on small, low-key games which require little development time. You could then offer minimal funding and build up your credentials. When you get more money that way, you can take a stake at a promising indie game of a greater scale and cross your finger that your investment pays off.
Basically,
you're either in or out. If you're in, you're in from the beginning all the way to the end, if you're out, you're out. You're not only in when the game is done to reap on the rewards.
Developer
