It definitely seemed like they had done most variations of the idea, and they wanted to try something new. It is interesting that they don't want to try the new things under the Zachtronics names, but it also kinda makes sense, since their fan maybe has certain expectations from that brand? I definitely can relate to how making the same kind of game for 10 year can become tiring. The article also hints that some of them maybe want to try opportunities that has more room for growth than a small indie studio.
Definitely interested to see what they do in the future, the fact that it'll be under a different name doesn't really matter to me.
They said they began development before an iOS version of Osmos was announced, but if they were aware of the original game (and it sounds like they may been), a reasonable person would probably have concluded it wiser to choose a new name. Even if they weren't aware, I can't imagine settling on a product name without searching for it. Furthermore, instead of costs to rebrand their work (which would have been questionable enough), they asked for full development costs plus anticipated sales, which would suggest they had no intention of releasing anything.
They have the same name. Now, when you do a web search for the valuable one that's been around for a long time, you instead get the new videogame thing. They chose to stomp on this name rather than respect an existing thing, and this attitude says something about their company.
I wouldn't be surprised if they decide that this was just a "code name" for the project and come up with something that sells better. Though I like the name.
It’s their risk minimisation strategy. If they call it something new, it would be perceived as a higher risk development. If they keep the existing name, it’s viewed as a mere improvement on the existing model.
It honestly makes sense to name the company something else than their first product, especially as they now have multiple other products with similar user numbers.
They announced a change of brand a month ago. I guess adding “One” at the end of the existing name counts, and I like the implication that they want to communicate clearly on phases of the project but… Was it worth announcing a brand change? I feel like I’m missing something.
I've read and analyzed a large number of stories on IndieHackers and not a single one mentioned the name being an issue, or something they wished they had changed.
There probably are a few stories out there of companies rebranding successfully and meaningfully, but it doesn't seem to matter that much in the general case.
My guess is that if there's a battle of wills that's going to occur, the game will win. It's easier to change a name on a web project than an iOS game. There's months of advertisement that've gone in to Loren's Letterpress at this point.
Seems like this name change is to run from their past sins -- like how Electric Boat became General Dynamics, or like how Unbounded Solutions became BrighterBrain.
On the main site, it used the name one. It also says it aims to be the successor, not that it is the successor. I wouldn't feel disrespected if someone did this. I would be a bit bummed someone is trying to take my paying user base but that's about it.
the rebranding was to skirt antitrust and regulatory scrutiny. They’re trying to convince regulators and the jury they are a AR/VR company, even though their entire business is (and will be) all funded by ads and data mining.
Definitely interested to see what they do in the future, the fact that it'll be under a different name doesn't really matter to me.
reply