Yeah, some would no doubt pay 20 bucks....but one thing: a good number of people who buy games online are "budget conscious" and like to wait for sales....and sadly I don't think ZP does such much if at all.

That, combined with some people being on a budget, might make that price point a bit hard to swallow for some.

Agreed :)

Always got the feeling that Fireflower was an one-person affair. And he has his target clearly set and stated, games focusing on story, by which he seems to generally understand retro adventures, and with little or preferably even no violence. Probably very "safe" stuff in general, so anything that may bother is likely out as a rule.
Would even 10% of those who voted actually buy it at full price? And on a store that's not the one they voted to get it on? And which store also is very limited in terms of the payment options offered? (Not to mention that some, as the dedicated thread shows, still insist on being suspicious about its legality despite the evidence.) And then consider what their actual share is, with most going to the dev, and also deduct taxes and fees. They're looking at a couple thousand in profits. Maybe.
It'd be far more of an image hit than a financial one. But the image hit would be significant I'd say.
Which leads to the question of whether they want to become front page news. Still strike me as being quite happy with being a niche side project, not a major aspect of the company and mainly for those in the know, not looking for a general audience.

I don't think any of us know for sure how many would buy it if ZP were to release the game. There are many factors involved, but I think it's also worth bearing in mind that the GOG wishlist probably doesn't represent the entire market of gamers that may be interested.

Hence my use of the word 'if' in my post. I was using that figure as a rough ballpark estimate to make a point that selling Devotion could give quite a significant financial windfall for a small store that is trying to grow, especially if they are the only one selling it.

Perhaps we could at least agree that, given the recent publicity of Devotion, it would be likely to bring in more sales than the average game they could release (which most likely would also be available on other stores)? So, even if the numbers I suggested are a bit off, there would still probably be a fairly strong financial case for them to prioritize it.

So it seems they "curate" even more than GOG.

(to be clear I don't much mind them doing so....their store and all....I just dislike stores that do such things in general. I say let players pick what they want to buy :))
=-=-=

This.....many people don't even bother voting in such wishlists so the actual number who might buy the game(for any price they choose to pay) could be higher.

Also people who bought that game on say ZP might also then buy other games on the store while they're on the site....possibly leading to more sales overall for ZP.

So I just found out from this post
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/list_of_drmfree_video_games_digital_distributors/post182

that Playism will very soon discontinue selling DRM-free on their own website :(
( https://blog.playism-games.com/termination-playismstore-membership-services/ )

That is rather distressful...

And btw, Detention is available there (the only place where it's currently DRM-free is Playism website) so some of you interested in getting it DRM-free should probably hurry :/
I'm kind of in a pickle personally since I wanted the game (I wanted a lot of games that are DRM-free only on Playism) but I am in a financial hell atm :(

edit:
I don't understand why I got so heavily downvoted?
Playism is ( according to PCGW https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Detention ) currently the only digital distribution platform selling Detention DRM-free.
Since this thread is specificly about Devotion possibly being released somewhere DRM-free I think at least SOME people should care that the only place that currently sells THE OTHER game made by SAME DEVELOPERS is going to cease operations subsequently leaving Detention nowhere DRM-free.
Ergo:
Detention, the previous game made by Devotion developers is soon going to no longer be obtainable DRM-free because Playism, the platform currently selling it DRM-free is going to cease doing so soon.
Do people not care about it?
Or is it too extravagant to share thread relevant information, I thus hurt somebodys feelings and therefore got bot-mass-downvoted?

The problem is we don't know what kind of money GOG is bringing in from China; it could be a lot more than $160k. Perhaps it was Epic/Tencent who "strongly encouraged" the rejection, which would be much worse imo :P

I don't like the rejection of course but I'm willing to try to understand GOG's reasoning for it.

I dunno, but I can only repeat that gog has only started being usable in China some time around 2017, so they really neglected that market for the longest time.

They have 21085 fans/followers on Weibo, compared to Steam's 898427. Neither of which sound like much, compared to the market potential, but then again China is already Steam's largest market if I remember correctly. Make of these numbers what you will.

Agreed, and if that's the case that means that all the people screaming bloody murder over the Epic deal were right on the money.

We have 2 dedicated threads for such conversations.
So I will cut this with some repetition of my own words:
there is not much sane business tactics in essentially exchanging your entire estabilished growing international userbase for a market from ONE country that MAYBE would be more profitable but it's HIGHLY UNSTABLE and long-term income from it is in actuality NOT guaranteed (CH gov can make a company go away with a snap of a finger, it's extremely foolish to risk offending and likely leaving entire international userbase JUST for CH market).

Where do such claims about Epic come from? Is there any evidence?
The only evidence which I have seen about Epics stance in this points in the opposite direction. Epics CEO Tim Sweeney is outspoken against kowtowing to CCP(*).
And no, Tencent does not control Epic, Tim Sweeney controls Epic.

(*) Random supporting links from web search:
https://win.gg/news/2648/epic-games-ceo-promises-his-company-won%27t-censor-activists
https://www.businessinsider.de/international/epic-unlike-blizzard-wont-ban-players-talking-politics-hong-kong-2019-10/?r=US&IR=T
https://www.esportznetwork.com/epic-games-will-not-suppress-players-free-speech/

Looks like Red Candle beat Zoom to the punch:
(though here's hoping they eventually also start selling it)

Yeah looks like Zoom dropped the ball, as I expected.

Maybe they didn't want to deal with any problems that might arise from selling it, maybe they were too busy with other things, or maybe the negotiations fell through between them and Red Candle.

Well no matter what the reason, this worked out for the best......this way allows Red Candle to make more money off of initial sales.

(also Zoom will hopefully get it later on as well, which would be nice)

That's what I mean, I already saw Zoom as a bit of a failure of a platform, one that's unlikely to ever show the strength and ambition to make it as a competitor.

Eh, maybe they're happy being a small little pond......we all saw what happened when GOG tried becoming like Steam.....so maybe it's for the best that they stay small. :)