• David GerardOPMA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Not convinced that makes any substantive difference.

    • schnoopy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      It depends on how it plays. If thousands of people keep trying it for short periods of time the business model is less stupid than if a few hundred people play it nearly 24/7. Like are they spending 70 dollars per potential sale or 3?

      Is an arc of play 3 hours or 60? etc.

      Also just generally when people are being stupid it’s funnier to describe what they’re doing accurately.

      • lagrangeinterpolator
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        The current version is a demo, so they are making $0 per sale. The SteamDB graph for the demo shows that the daily maximum player count has been around 300 for the past few days, and there are around 1000 followers for the unreleased full version, so I assume that a large fraction of those players are consistent (for now). Unfortunately, I could not find any data about the total number of downloads, and I don’t think that information is public.

        But setting that aside, every game has a player base that follows a power law. Yes, most players are casual, but the most dedicated players spend a disproportionate amount of time and money. In mobile games, these people are called “whales”, and they are the backbone of the business. For example, 50-70% of a mobile game’s in-app purchase revenue comes from 1-2% of the players. Even if most players spend a couple hours on the game, the developers must account for the people who will sink a ton of time into it.

        The big problem with the AI business model is that this dynamic is now working against them. These whales now cost tons of money. They need to somehow charge these players at least $70/mo, with a crappy novelty game that would barely scrape by for $10 on Steam. Good luck with that.

        Looking at the bigger picture, this is why AI subscriptions are not a viable business model. Whatever morsels of profit you might get from your regular users are more than cancelled out by Steve Yegge spending $2.8k/month for $87k/mo worth of tokens. Whatever revenue the AI companies get largely comes from convincing executives of a few rich companies to fork over absurd amounts of money, which produces a massive concentration risk in their revenues.