Quote: So you're telling me they don't want to make more money? That's not what business is about.
Every company wants to grow and expand. But if you try that too aggressively or beyond your bounds, you are merely sacrificing 5 years of steady profits for one year of spectacular profits and then bankruptcy.
Conitec is a business and they have their price points and balance everything out so they can stay and business and keep improving. ANY change to their current business model is risky and while you are correct that business want to make more money, they will not do it in large, risky steps but rather slow, predictable steps.
That's what we have bought into folks, slow and steady as opposed to fast and flashy. FF is the way that the majority of game engines work... they build great demos, wow the GDC and are hailed as the next unreal, and then the either get bought by unreal or become vaporware. SS is the mark to a successful company and by proxy, a successful game engine.
Quote: and if 3D Gamestudio has bad PR, we get the bad PR by proxy, because people will associate your game with it, regardless if your game is good.
I think the root of your misconception is that you are confusing game developers with customers.
The game developers will hold to the PR. They may not want to join your team or ridicule your game for your engine choice, that is true. Every bad game that is made with 3DGS merely makes the game developer happier because they did NOT choose that engine! But the customer is ignorant of these things. I challenge you to find a customer that follows the Unreal franchise of games or the 3DBlitz francise of games, or even the Torque games! They follow "doom" and "gta" and "ff". They care about games and not game engines. And I would argue that a publisher is in the middle: they have to pay attention to the PR lest the game engine truly has a critical failure that will affect the game (and sales) but they also have to pay attention to what a customer would think of the game. IMO unless the publisher cites a critical failure (such as 3DGS's inability to be put on the web), if you get dismissed by a publisher for using 3DGS, that is not a publisher you want to deal with in ANY engine!
Hence the only people that will unjustly associate bad PR with your game because it was built with 3DGS will be the people that aren't paying you (the developers) and not the ones that are potentially paying you (the customers and investors), so I don't see the problem!
