I read the article, and think that the devs may be missing the point (a bit), or perhaps my own perspective of the game is simply different from that of other customers.

But when I looked at the game on GOG, I quite literally thought "Why is GOG releasing another run-of-the-mill platformer with generic artwork and no interesting features that would stand out?" The only thing that seemed to set it apart from the numerous (and often cheaper) competition was that it was supposed to be hard. And that was actually the thing that made me lose interest completely. I don't mind playing hard games, and I even enjoy the challenge (I completed Giana Sisters), but I want it to be _my_ decision on which level of difficulty I play. Games that are specifically advertised as "Hard" typically do not give me that choice and force a level of difficulty on me that I may or may not enjoy for that particular game. I felt reminded of games like "Project Black Sun" or "Bunny Must Die", where I consider even the 1-2$ (that I spent on them) wasted because I can't progress beyond the first boss, and more than 80% of the game is simply closed off from me.

Advertising the game specifically as "hard" also meant that the large number of levels had no meaning for me. What good are 50 levels if a game might be getting too hard for me after the first three? Gambling 10$ on what might turn into an hour of frustration before I give up just doesn't sound like a great idea.

It's not just "market saturation" or "bundle bubble", imho. Those are factors, but their influence on my purchase decision was only indirect. The existence of bundles means that I might think "I'll get that game in a bundle eventually" instead of "I'll get that game in a few years from a bargain bin or simply not at all", which was my approach before digital downloads and the Indie movement took off. But even without bundles and without competition, I simply wouldn't have bought "Ethan". Or, to put it another way: Even with only a handful of competing products around, I probably would have picked those over "Ethan", provided that they had at least one interesting stand-out feature, and didn't threaten to close 90% of the game off from players who aren't good enough.

I do buy lots of games, and I don't only rely on bundles or sales. Just this week I gambled a fiver (full price) on "Paper Sorcerer" because of its original idea and unique art style. I also nearly bought "Contrast" for 12$ for similar reasons, and might still do so, but decided to wait a bit longer for opinions from people who played it. But, as harsh at it sounds, I didn't feel the slightest bit of inclination to gamble 10$ on a generic platformer that might end up being just frustrating.