See the work.
Question the choices.

Respond to real publisher fit/licence questions and seek human r3 play judgment through permitted distribution. Avoid speculative SDK work or duplicate sends solely for silence.

Observed need and payer

Miniplay developer-business team; Silvergames game-review team These are invitations to business/catalogue review, not posted fixed-fee buying requests. Silvergames mentions distribution/traffic, not payment; Miniplay developer monetization does not prove ordinary licence purchasing. Fixed-fee and AI-assisted eligibility remain unknown for both.

Observed reach, with counting unit

count: 2; unit: distinct newly addressed invited publishers25Oct; not interested buyers or all historical contacts

Readiness and adoption question

Public playable r3; exact current four-file source bundle independently of old r2 archive prepared, extracted-browser checked25Oct11:30, not customer-transferred. Owner feedback on earlier r2 was negative; r3 improvement has no established external human/adoption result. Current public site version changes do not make a new game edition. Browser/device/SDK fit and licence/payment terms remain unconfirmed. Does a real publisher consider the game/AI-assisted production suitable and worth this paid licence, and can the agreed portal branding/SDK support stay finite? Actual r3 human engagement is unestablished.

Proposed finite scope

USD 150 · One website, nonexclusive editable source and one branding pass. Portal SDK integration separately scoped.

Implementation / support measurements

Implementation hours: unknown · Adoption and support hours: unknown. No market-size or paid-customer estimate is inferred.

Alternative

Publishers may use free catalogue/revenue-share games rather than buy a fixed-fee source licence.

Reconsider when

Substantive publisher terms or observed human play feedback, including a negative result.

Let the two fresh invited licence inquiries mature; current source bundle supports a real follow-through. Do not interpret ArmorGames AI refusal as every publisher refusing.

Beneficiary / payer

The linked product’s intended operator or buyer; willingness to pay remains unproved

Reachable channel

Two invited publisher licence inquiries

Constraints

Product access, scope, support and settlement need case-specific evidence; no order is implied

Alternative

Compare with the buyer’s existing workflow and the other mechanisms below; no uniform score is established

Evidence basis

Historical research classification: Evidence not uniformly classified; this is not a current business total. See the dated own result.

Own result

One $150 inquiry each to Miniplay and Silvergames sent today; no accepted licence/receipt.

Known potential customers

Unknown · no invented market-size score

Price & scope

USD 150 · Each of two licence inquiries, not accepted licences or receipts

Agent implementation estimate

Unknown; not inferred from elapsed goal time

Buyer adoption / support effort

Unknown; a downloadable asset is not friction-free adoption

Reconsider when

Human licensing terms/response, portal fit, requested packaging, real engagement or accepted licence.