Quote: Originally Posted by CheapLikeAFox I think this is probably the cheapest it will get on Steam. FWIW, I got: Trainz 2012 Trainz 2010 Trainz 2009 Trains Classics 3 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00..._ya_os_product for $12.49 from Amazon over the summer.

Good point! I think the Trainz 12 plus earlier versions didn't quite grab me. (Also if it has DLC I prefer it on Steam.) I think I'll be passing on the daily. I want it, but I'm not sure I $10 want it. Maybe Tony will toss it in a bundle with a wargame, a hidden objects game, and a bikini waxing simulator. ^_~

Quote: Originally Posted by CheapLikeAFox What would a good analogy be? Or is there another company who has done something similar? I'm trying to wrap my head around it, but I see no logical reason for them to purposely "cheapen" or dilute their IP. All THQ has is those IPs. That is basically what their company is. Creditors aren't going to keep a sinking ship running simply because there is no value left in the games they do have. The only way for THQ to produce any more value in their company would be to make more games but since the games they make cost a ton of money creditors aren't likely to sink more money into them for a gamble. THQ is also a publicly traded company, so them being able to drain the value of their company on purpose seems like it could open them up to some liability with investors. The only logical view I see is the following: 1. The non-BTA games they are giving away have reached their peak value. THQ is just giving away copies of games that aren't really selling much anyways so they don't lose much there. 2. The BTA game is a gateway to a ton of DLC. So you couple a bunch of games most people already have or wouldn't buy alone with a bigger title to give people a bigger sense of value and then you hope all these new purchases drive money into the DLC for your game. It's just one step removed from freemium. Sure, Humble isn't a cure all to their financial woes, but even if they only make 2-3 million with this that's still a little more cash to try to hold them over long enough to release some more games and turn things around.

I haven't familiarized myself with THQ's exact situation. But in general, a closer analogy would be: Suppose I owned a failing Premium Sprits (Booze) store that has a way too much inventory, but I couldn't make rent this month. Now I hear rumors that this crafty Fox guy is planning on taking over my business by paying me a teeny bit of money and promising everyone I owe money to that they'll get their monthly payments. I know he can stand to make a good profit since he's getting my inventory for much less than I paid for it (or it can even be bought for). The thought of this makes me mad, so I decide to throw a big party so most of the inventory gets consumed. Now Fox won't be able to make a ton of money on my misfortune. Without him as incentivized to take over, maybe I find a new business partner (Fox or others) to shoulder some of the expense and get the business back in order.

Real Example: ARM (Acorn Risc Machines, their microprocessor designs are in all the smartphones and tablets) and DEC (Digital Equpment Corp, produced the then fastest and best performance/$ Alpha microprocessor). In the mid-90s ARM (whos processors where then in most GSM phones and Apple's Newton MP100-130) was having trouble pushing their processing power to a higher performance so they asked DEC to design a new generation of ARM processor, StrongARM (power the Newton MP2000/2100 as well as the iPaQ). At the time both DEC and ARM were at risk of a hostile takeover, so they made an agreement that if either one got taken over, the other would wind up with exclusive rights to the StrongARM Intellectual Property. This made ARM and DEC less attractive hostile takeover targets. This is a form a poison pill.