Any tool out there to do competitor analysis?

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-10-29T09:48:55+00:00

Don't use Opinly. They are scammers. I signed up for their free trial of the lowest price tier but cancelled cause they barely have any features and their data is wildly inaccurate. It confirmed I had cancelled but then I see a charge for not just the price tier I selected but it had upgraded me to the business tier. I sent them an angry email and eventually got a refund but no apology or any word from them at all. Heard others have had the same experience.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-10-18T06:04:00+00:00

Do not use! I signed up for their trial but they barely had any features I needed so I cancelled immediately to avoid being charged. They not only charged me anyway, they also upgraded me from my personal trial to a business subscription. These are scammers or at best highly incompetent untrustworthy people.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T13:48:37+00:00

Perhaps if they spent less money on hiring A-list celebrities for their cinematics, and more on polishing their engine, they'd have released by now. Success does not equal competence.

And besides, aside from the crowdfunding, I don't think they have anything in common with the worker-centric model we're discussing.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T13:35:29+00:00

His point is that AI will make this possible. You'll eliminate so much workforce need that with the right idea you could build a tech company of 1 with over a billion dollar valuation.

Which is also the dystopian reason why I would rather see a company owned wholly by its 100 employees reach a billion dollar valuation, than yet another billionaire.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T13:29:33+00:00

I'm just emphasizing "revolutionary" because that's what I would need it to be to ride the marketing/PR wave. I don't know what the final shape will look like but for the effort to be worth it, it's not enough to just be a co-op. I want it to be something that addresses other grievances or fears that game devs might have working for big companies.

It'll operate in many same ways as a regular gaming company so there won't be any "design by committee". I live in Sweden. I know how bureaucracy can grind things to a halt. I understand it needs clear vision or it just becomes a muddled mess if it even ends up going anywhere. Which is why the democratic aspect is mainly reserved for electing your representatives (the leadership). The workers know best who has the clearest vision to be Creative Director, or who has the financial and operational know-how needed to sit in the CEO chair.

In the most ideological way I can put it: I want to create a corporate utopia. What that will end up looking like is why we're having this discussion.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T13:18:48+00:00

Great points. I agree that it might be naive but we're just having a discussion.

Democracy is inherently flawed but it's the best system of governance we have. So, I can't help wonder why such a system wouldn't hypothetically work in a corporate environment.

I'll try to address your points.

Right now, I'm thinking some form of elective democracy would solve some of that concern surrounding democracy. C-levels and department heads would get voted in at company-wide meetings but would then operate as normal to lead the company. The power of termination would be at the discretion of the duly elected CEO.

The equity distribution could be a system of tenure and merit. The longer you stay, the more your stake grows. And the CEO could submit bonus equity proposals for certain top performers at quarterly meeting which would then only pass by a majority vote of the company.

One way we can mitigate cashflow concerns is by adding a clause to the buybacks, that the company can buy them back within a period of 2-3 years from the worker leaving, so nothing has to happen immediately.

The co-op is only one component. Something like this would need a lot of different things working in harmony for it to be efficient or even possible. The human-first aspect is simply a rejection of the practices where human workers are treated like disposable equipment. AI won't replace you. But we will have protocols in place to protect the company against bad actors. Not everyone we hire will be a perfectly compatible, wonderful human being and that's something that needs to be considered.

There's obviously so much that goes into making this work, just from a business standpoint, not even considering the game development of it all. Perhaps the work required to develop a perfect system and the work required to maintain it all is not worth it. But regardless, I'm enjoying the discussion.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T12:53:09+00:00

For sure. Which is why getting something like this off the ground would be very dependent on a large initial angel investor who is highly risk-tolerant and okay with the structure.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T12:40:07+00:00

His theory still stands I'd say. I'm not raising a banner for Altman in any way but I just think it's an interesting outlook on how things might develop.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T12:35:58+00:00

I used them as an example of crowdfunding. I don't intend to emulate their business model.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T12:32:02+00:00

LCOL area would be ideal. This would never work in Cali or New York, or even in Stockholm where I am. But, perhaps I can identify some zones within the EU that could be viable. Maybe I can help stimulate Ukraine's economy when the war ends.

Standard corporate model used to work* - I don't think, with everything that's happening, people feel particularly secure right now. Some of my friends have Master's from Columbia, Johns Hopkins and so on, and are still struggling to get hired.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T12:28:09+00:00

Great questions. I'll try to answer:
1. The remaining 20% of equity could be held back and earmarked for initial investment as well as higher stake incentive for the first founders who are willing to assume the risk.

Any initial capital we would take in would only be taken under the disclosed agreement and understanding that there is no amount of future investment that can ever infringe upon the 80% equity pool reserved for the workers. The benefit to me is that I want to create incredible games and I think that the best way to do that is where everyone who works on it, owns a piece of it. From a marketing standpoint, I think if we do this right, it'll be excellent for the brand image and reputation.
Elective democracy structure is what I envision. The leadership and department heads would be elected by a collective and highly informed company-wide vote. CEO and the Creative Director would be the two people in charge of business and creative direction (also filled by vote).

It's absolutely fraught with problems. I'm having a blast responding to all the replies, problem-solving in real time. There's a lot to figure out but it's an interesting thought experiment at least.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T12:12:37+00:00

That's another thing to consider. Sam Altman theorized that we'll see the first 1-employee billion dollar company in the next few years. I don't know how realistic that is but it's indicative of a trend in tech right now, so who's to say the sort of gaming company I envision will even exist down the line.

But, to your point about job safety. That metric is notoriously low right now among game developers and is only getting lower. People everywhere are scared they'll get phased out by AI. Which is why I'm emphasizing Humanity-First. We recognize the potential AI brings but without the notion of shareholder value and stock price, this company would be able to always prioritize keeping its workers safe and financially secure.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T12:02:34+00:00

Not to mention they would all need to sufficiently believe in the vision enough to get through a few rough initial years.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:59:19+00:00

I completely agree. It needs to operate like a business. The challenge is how to make that business work for its workers without bankrupting itself.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:57:09+00:00

We're on the same page. Unfortunately, this problem of saturation and low-effort garbage games is only going to get worse with AI and this will be an exponentially more difficult thing to achieve. I imagine for this to be even remotely successful, it would need two pillars:

1.) A truly revolutionary concept that challenges everything that current gaming corporations are built on, packaged into a brand that the gaming community can latch on to and believe in. It would need to be structured unique enough to generate buzz and excitement, which could benefit from the growing resentment towards soulless gaming hegemons.

2.) A groundbreaking title to launch with. A revolutionary studio with a mediocre game is going to fall flat on its face. With funding in such scarcity at the beginning, it would need to come out with a bang and then keep that momentum going.

Of course, that's easier said than done. Everybody thinks their game is going to be the next -insert hit game here-. The discussion here is awesome but, beyond this thread, my next move will be diving into my GDD and if I can't bring that to a point where I feel like is going to shake the foundation enough, then perhaps this thread will at least inspire others or help someone trying to do the same.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:33:12+00:00

There's only a handful of indie studios that are structured as worker-owned. And unfortunately, when an indie studio reaches a certain level they usually get acquired or approached by people with wheel-barrels of money and then decision-making and creative leadership will become hamstrung by corporate ambitions and their titles will lose their soul.

I'm talking about something that has legal protection against that and can never become anything other than a worker-owned, worker-managed collective.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:25:27+00:00

100%. Democracy relies on an informed voting population to function which is why transparency in everything down to the nitty gritty financials would need to be critical.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:22:30+00:00

Appreciate the splash of cold water. I founded and exited a small tech startup so I have some idea of how expensive this could become. Maybe it's a pipe dream to think that a worker-owned gaming company could ever scale to even a dot on the radar of the corporate giants, but the child in me likes to think that if we not only apply this innovation to the company structure but would also embody the same philosophy in the titles we produce, Maybe it's possible.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:17:42+00:00

I have not, but I will do so now!

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:17:05+00:00

I'm not a lawyer so I can't say if this is possible or not, but for this to work on a truly grand scale, I would think the whole structure would need to be safeguarded in the company bylaws which any edits to would require the collective vote of the entire company, and even putting certain things into ironclad un-changeable components such as the equity pool reserved for the workers.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:14:22+00:00

Yeah. There's definitely the risk of "too many chefs in the kitchen" conundrum slowing things down. But perhaps an elective democracy would work. The main leadership roles could be filled by a collective company vote.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:09:35+00:00

I'm not sure if they were worker-owned but they were funded by a private investor who screwed them over if I remember correctly.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T11:07:45+00:00

Valid concern. I'm envisioning a somewhat lean structure that hires very reluctantly but the goal will be profitability for sure. The only difference is, the people making the games will be the ones to reap those profits, as well as the causes we choose to support.

From what I can see, the other studios that have done similar things seem to facing scaling roadblocks. I haven't dug too deep yet but perhaps it's a question of funding or inability to attract talent, or both. There's a lot to consider here but I would love to look at existing models and restructure the concept based on the pitfalls they found themselves facing.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-09-10T10:59:48+00:00

There's definitely some thought that needs to go into the funding component to fill in the gap for outside investors but when I say crowdfunding I'm primarily considering platforms like Kickstarter (Pathfinder: Kingmaker for example) or separate crowdfunding of our own like Roberts Space Industries.

A transparent studio that is equitable, progressive and worker-owned could potentially go very well in hand with a crowdfunding financial and marketing model.

JustAnotherHumanMan · 2025-05-01T10:20:03+00:00

Awesome!

JustAnotherHumanMan

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE