Mega-Philanthropy: Humble Indie Bundle

By Alec Meer on May 4th, 2010 at 11:04 pm.

Media reportage still has it that Radiohead’s pay-what-you-want experiment a couple of years back was somehow a disaster. Independent gaming has roundly proved the lie: more devs than we can keep up with have offered PWYW deals recently, so clearly something’s going right. It’s good news for gamers too. The Humble Indie Bundle, though, is yer bona fide motherlode. World of Goo, Aquaria, Lugaru, Gish and Penumbra Overture: a collection of the last few years’ finest indies, yours for however many groats you think you can spare. Phenomenal, basically. Better still, a third of the proceeds go to Child’s Play and the Electronic Frontier Foundation apiece. Well, by default, You can request that the whole lot goes to charity if you like. Games and kindness: a winning and natural formula (and one that the shrieking anti-games media will never, ever cover.) The deal’s over here, and below the cut is a knowingly rubbish half-rap to promote it.

They’re just here to do the Humble Indie shuffle.

__________________

« | »

, , , , , .

178 Comments »

  1. Freemon says:

    Does anyone know if i can link these games to the steam account? (the ones that steam has/sells) world of goo/penumbra/aquaria and gish.

  2. Dominic White says:

    Interestingly, they’re almost up to $200,000 taken so far. Assuming the standard equal split (a big assumption, I know), that gives 66.6 thousand to each charity, plus 13.3 thousand to each of the five developers.

    I bet Edmund McMillen is wishing this sale had happened earlier, back when he was having to beg for donations to pay for important medical care, because the American health system is fucked.

  3. redpanda says:

    yeah, does anyone knows if you can link the games to your steam account? I don’t think I’m going to play any of this right know. I’d like to buy it as a reservoir for the future “days where I don’t know what to play”, but if I don’t have them on steam there’s a quite big chance I even forget to have bought them.

  4. Dominic White says:

    No, no Steam activations as far as I can see. Why is everyone so obsessed with it, anyway? Just download all five games and burn them to a DVD or something. Far more permanent.

    • Heliocentric says:

      I have 3 young children, discs are about as permanent as ball lightning.

    • Lars Westergren says:

      In the email they send you: “Please save this email so that you can download the games again whenever you’d like in the future. Feel free to make local backups though, to save bandwidth.”

    • Bioptic says:

      Yes – if you’re still not satisfied by having unlimited downloads of DRM-free games, you can simple install them to the SteamApps folder, create a shortcut to the executable in Steam and…presto!

    • Mr Pink says:

      My personal approach to ensuring my downloaded games hang around is to stash them all in a folder called “Downloaded Games” and add it to my backup set. Sweet, sweet, permanence.

      (And if you’re response is “I don’t backup” then you, sir, are a fool)

    • Mr Pink says:

      Oh God I should register so I get editing. you’re = your. *hangs head in shame*

    • redpanda says:

      I just have bought them and, surprise!! Linux version of everyone right next to the windows one!!! This is great

    • Clovis says:

      Won’t someone think of the achievements!

      I pretty much always add games to Steam if I can. I might get stuck somewhere with access to a computer. These are some great games to have on Steam to just download whever I am.

      Not being able to put them on Steam is hardly a dealbreaker though. It would be nice.

    • Vinraith says:

      @Dominic

      Why is everyone so obsessed with it, anyway?

      Because having all your eggs in one precariously placed basket is the hip new thing to do!

    • Wulf says:

      I buy games from a variety of places. If I need them on Steam then I’ll just add a Steam shortcut, and that’s that problem solved. I hate achievements and will never try to get them.

      I completely understand that this is a subjective thing, but I see achievements as “Stress, grief, and anxiety removing fun from your games since the advent of the XBox 360!”. I feel the same way about unlocks. I used the debug mode in Fuel almost immediately to unlock everything, and I’m having more fun now just faffing around than I would have had trying to actually play the game, I’m sure. £2 to go and faff around in a wide, open world on a variety of vehicles really works for me.

      I love Steam because it has a nice interface for all of my games, it has a decent offline mode, and Source games have a far more benign form of DRM than just about any other kind of DRM in existence (I’m immediately reminded of The Whispered World, since the Gamer’s Gate version shat bricks and the Steam version was flawless). However, if you can get something DRM free then there’s no problem! Go for that! If it’s limited downloads? Hmmm… I can understand wanting it on Steam instead, but if it’s DRM free and unlimited downloads, then that’s groovy!

      I mean, from now on, I’ll be buying only things I see marked as DRM free on Gamer’s Gate since they offer unlimited downloads too and that’s just as good as Steam, but really, what you buy from should be contextual. I’m a huge Steam supporter but I don’t believe in buying things solely from Steam alone.

  5. Grumpy Moose says:

    I accidentally released my bowels when I saw this bundle. All of the five games were very high up my “games to buy list”. I’ll probably gift the bundle to someone else as well. Some of these are perfect material for some of my casual-gaming friends!

  6. Alexander Norris says:

    I already own (and dislike) Gish, World of Goo and Lugaru and have no interest in Penumbra because I am a scaredycat. The only thing I might remotely want is Aquaria but I can’t afford to give them more than $1 and I’d rather not rip them off for all their bad work. At least when I pirate a game I don’t end up legally owning it for next to nothing.

  7. HYPERPOWERi says:

    Wake up, people! Don’t you realise that this is a blatant sodomy of everything good and fluffy in this world? These heartless bastards are out to abuse the goodwill of charities and feel up your mom while at it!

    Well, they’re not getting a cent out of me! No, my money is going to support the one true pillar of integrity and solidarity — Activision.

    /me takes tinfoil hat off.

    Bought this for a tenner (only after Lugaru. Already own WoG and P:O) and will repeat-buy at least once again as a gift.

    • HYPERPOWERi says:

      O MAI GOTT you get to play a mermaid in Aquaria!!!

      I’m going to have to throw some more loot at the indies.

    • Jimbo says:

      Activision do shit tons of charity work. In return they get free advertising (their charity is even called Call of Duty something or other) and, in theory, goodwill Wheres the love for Activision? It’s no different to this setup at all. Except they aren’t part of the ‘indie scene’, so instead of getting treated like the sun is shining out of their ass, they just get treated as what they are – a business acting like a business.

    • Wilson says:

      @Jimbo – Well the difference in treatment is wrong. It should be reported more perhaps, and they should certainly get kudos for it. I agree with you there completely. But it doesn’t make this any less valid as a charitable exercise. It isn’t that we should be mean and cynical about this Indie Games bundle, we should be more generous and appreciative of Activision’s charity (and other corporate givings to charity).

    • Lilliput King says:

      Jimbo, what are you on about?

      When Activision start offering the chance to pay for MW2 entirely through charity donations we can have this conversation. Until then the situations are a mite incomparable, wouldn’t you say?

  8. Grumpy Moose says:

    And it’s also worth noting that Penumbra Overture comes with a coupon that gives you a 75% discount on the Penumbra Collection. That’s 3 games for 4£!

  9. Lars Westergren says:

    They’ve collected over $200 000 now. Great news. I’m happy both for the causes and the indie devs.
    :)

  10. Barts says:

    I have 5USD in my PayPal account and no credit card available at the moment to add more (don’t ask). If I opt to pay 5USD for this bundle, is the gaming community consider me a cheapskate and an asshole?

    • Grumpy Moose says:

      Don’t worry. I had the exact some problem, but I’ll pay them more in a day or two. I do think I heard the faint sound of Edmund McMillen scratching at my door though. I better hurry up!

    • Lars Westergren says:

      If $5 is all you are able to pay, pay it. They get something left after PayPal takes their fee, and every little bit counts.

      The people who are assholes are those who pay $0.1 and then post the download link at warez sites, destroying the server bandwidths.

    • Barts says:

      Humans as a species sometimes disappoint me so much… Seriously, what is wrong with these people?

      I did pay five bucks, better that than nothing. I don’t care about Penumbra and Lugaru, so… Yea, weak excuse that one. Still, strength is in numbers, every penny counts.

      I am spreading the word, though: note on my blog (in making, should be up later today), computer boards I frequent (already done), article on one of the most viewed Polish websites (in making, should be up today).

  11. Randy Squirrel says:

    Took me nearly 2 days to decide to buy L4D2 for £13 last weekend, and about 5 seconds to drop £20 on these guys.

  12. airtekh says:

    Since I only own World of Goo (and that’s tied to Steam), I think this is going to have to be a definite purchase for me.

    I appreciate the money going to charity but as for the promotion…. step away from the microphone sir.

  13. Magic H8 Ball says:

    Penumbra is a stand-alone game? Dunno why but I always assumed it’s a mod.

  14. Risingson says:

    I had all but one of these games. And I still bought them, giving the money to the developers. Then I will give them to a friend of mine that never buys any game.

  15. slaine says:

    Paid $20 for this bundle even though I already own Goo. Love the idea of supporting devs and EFF at the same time. Pure awesome. Now with Civ 4 complete (thanks to Wulf) and 5 new indie games, not sure how I’ll manage to find the time to play them all … :/

  16. Kieron Gillen says:

    I’m a little disturbed by the people in this thread who appear to be channeling Dave Tosser unironically.

    KG

    • Sarlix says:

      Whaa? you can channel him?!

      *smashes cloning equipment*

    • Vinraith says:

      @Kieron

      Indeed. It’s another example of the internet’s “people bitch about everything, so you can’t take them seriously bitching about anything” paradigm and it’s not at all a helpful thing. How are we supposed to make it clear to Ubi that their DRM is unacceptable when we’ve got people howling about the evil developers and their DRM-free games for charitable donations “scam.”

    • Dominic White says:

      @Kieron – you think THIS thread is bad? The Something Awful thread is ten times worse. There are people literally furious at the charities of choice.

      Across many boards, this mixture of generosity and humility from a bunch of indie devs seems to have pissed off every Daily Mail (or international equivalent) reader on the net.

    • Jimbo says:

      You gentlemen don’t find it a little ironic to be over here bitching about bitching instead of just replying to me directly? The Dave Tosser thing gets trotted out whenever anybody has the audacity to question anything the indie devs do, so that doesn’t bother me in the least.

      I don’t believe I resorted to extreme hyperbole or general frothing to make my point, so if any of you have an actual reply that amounts to more than just misrepresenting my position to knock it down (‘bla bla evil developers’ etc.), then I’m happy to hear it.

      Somebody in this thread referred to this as a ‘mutually beneficial arrangement’, which I believe is an accurate assessment. Not evil, not wicked – but based on what we’ve seen so far, do I think it’s reasonable to assume they’re doing it for their own benefit? Absolutely. Why not? You think these 5 games make even a fraction (whatever their cut may end up being) of ~$300k dollars in however long it’s been running so far? You think these guys aren’t smart enough to realise exactly how this would play out?

      So yes, ‘mutually beneficial’ is a fair enough way of putting it. ‘Mega-Philanthropic’ is a huge leap of faith away from ‘mutually beneficial’ though, is it not? That’s a leap of faith I’m not prepared to make just because the companies behind it are indie. Not yet anyway, we’ll see how it plays out.

    • jalf says:

      Ironic? No, I see nothing ironic about it. Try reading all the comments. There are a few that are a teeeeeny bit more… unhinged… than your comment. Perhaps the Dave Tosser thing was not directed at you. :)

    • Wulf says:

      I have to admit, I purposefully and ironically mimicked Dave Tosser in defence of Lugaru, and I wasn’t expecting anyone to outdo that by actually being Dave Tosser, in the flesh, but there you go!

  17. Tei says:

    This thing, Aquaria, is surprising good ( good as in good production values, but it has some very sloooow start that smelll wll get in speed soon ).

  18. bookwormat says:

    Interesting that nearly 1/4 of the contributions come from the ~1% minority that use linux.

    • Vinraith says:

      The Linux compatibility is certainly part of the reason I was interested. My copy of World of Goo was already multiplatform, but I had no idea Penumbra even had a Linux-compatible version.

  19. jalf says:

    I feel guilty about paying only $5 for the bundle, but I’m broke at the moment. It was that or not buying it at all.

    I’d rather give them a small amount of money than nothing at all.

  20. Iain says:

    I just payed a single cent.

    • Vinraith says:

      Even covering the cost of the bandwidth to download the games was too much to ask, eh?

    • jalf says:

      I suspect a cent more than covers the bandwidth costs. Bandwidth is dirt cheap. What this 1 cent probably doesn’t cover are the fees paid to the payment processor (paypal or whoever you paid through)

      But the bandwidth? One cent is likely more than enough.

    • Vinraith says:

      @jalf

      Yeah, I didn’t even think about the bank transaction fees, which are undoubtedly far worse. Still, it’s basically taking money from charity then bragging about it, which is pretty much the definition of asinine.

    • Lilliput King says:

      The transaction fee for paypal is30 cents, not sure about the others.

      Pretty bad, forcing people to pay 29 cents so you can play the games they fucking made.

    • Wulf says:

      I think these things should have a floor value to stop people like Iain doing what he did.

      I know a floor value can imply a favoured price, but that’s when you include a ceiling value to balance it out so that people will understand. For example: I’m selling my game on such a system, I have a floor value of $1 (with this explained as covering bank charges) and a ceiling value of $100. I’d advertise this as “Pay what you think my game is worth, $1, $100, or anything in between! The choice is yours.”

      I definitely think these systems could use it though, because it’s horribly unfair to make them pay for the bank charges, the bandwidth, and then provide the wretch who paid 1 cent with a number of very good games for free.

    • Jimbo says:

      No, it isn’t ‘unfair’ and he isn’t ‘forcing’ them to do anything. If you are going to potentially make a loss advertising your product at ‘Pay Whatever You Want!’, then guess what, either don’t do it or don’t complain about it when somebody wants to pay 1 cent. You can’t just have all the upsides of it and none of the downsides.

      They could advertise as “Pay Whatever You Want (So Long As We Break Even!)”, but I doubt it would gain more than it loses, because it doesn’t have the same fuzzy tummy appeal, which makes or breaks this entire business model, as demonstrated here.

    • Wulf says:

      “[...] he isn’t ‘forcing’ them to do anything.”

      Except that he is, yeah? I know Devil’s Advocate is awesome and all, I’ve done it myself, but that’s precisely what this is.

      If they have to pay PayPal to cover his downloads, then he’s forcing them to dip into their own funds to cover his download, and I think that’s unfair. I think that if they had a floor value so that supercilious sods couldn’t just get some feeling of self-righteous sticking it to the man just by underpaying a group of indies, people wouldn’t think less of them for it. I know I wouldn’t.

      “If we don’t charge $1 as a minimum then the charities get nothing.”

      Yeah, my sense of ethics says that’s fine, see.

    • jalf says:

      @Wulf: He’s still not forcing them. They *chose* to allow 1 cent payments in the first place. If they didn’t want 1 cent payments to occur they could have set a minimum price, but they didn’t.

      And like Jimbo said, I think they’d make less money overall if they set a floor, because that that would encourage some to just pay the minimum. It would kind of legalize the minimum price, making it ok to just pay that, instead of some higher amount that you think is fitting.

      If they say “anything between 1 and 100 dollars is acceptable”, it also implies that $1 is an acceptable price. And so many people will pay $1.

      If they say “pay what you think is the right price”, people will have to decide for themselves what is acceptable, and so most people will decide on a pricepoint above $1.

      Of course, one thing they could do is just add a little notice informing customers of their transaction cost, so customers can take that into account when choosing how much to pay.

      Apart from this, are we sure the same transaction fees are charged in this case? That paypal doesn’t have some kind of special bulk rate or something?

    • Wulf says:

      @jalf

      It’s still forcing their hand in my opinion. They’re relying on good will, and anyone dastardly enough to abuse that is forcing them to dip into their own funds. I’ve worked with charity fund raisers before (see my example below) and occasionally you’ll get some fat toff come in and scoff everything and not donate anything (or just toss a couple of pence). It’s something that I think should be frowned at at the very least.

      This is kind of like saying that if someone leaves a window open in the belief that their community was a good one, they chose to be robbed. That’s walking a particularly grey line, right there. Some will say one thing, others will say another, but whichever, I still think it’s unethical and I do think it’s forcing their hand. I won’t think particularly kindly of people who take the 1 cent option, anyway.

  21. Ysellian says:

    You must be mighty proud. ^_^

  22. Dominic White says:

    Yeah, I’d just like to point out that if you pay just one cent, that means that the devleopers have to cover the bandwidth and bank transaction bills.

    You are literally taking money away from charity. Not just failing to give, but taking. That is how terrible you are, and if you’re bragging about this, then you’re a horrible, twisted little wretch of of a creature masquerading as a human being.

    • MD says:

      Too far. Again people are tied up in symbolism and seem to place little importance on the actual end result when making moral judgments. Even if you were right (and I doubt it — if the 1c sales are a liability, it seems pretty unlikely that the developers will pass on a negative cut to the charities), this is, what, 30c or so we’re talking about. Meanwhile, you, I, and probably everyone else in here has wasted a massive multiple of that on useless shit bought for purely selfish reasons. Money that, all up, could have made a significant difference to the lives of those who actually need it. Yet we’re all morally upstanding citizens because our intentions are supposedly good, we’re not *actively* robbing anyone, we hold the right opinions, mouth the right platitudes, and (in some cases) occasionally even put our money where our mouths are. This is bullshit. Every time you waste 30c on something you don’t need, or hoard it unnecessarily, you’re just as much of a “horrible, twisted little wretch of of a creature masquerading as a human being” as he is. Your self-righteousness (not to mention vicious personal abuse) is based on emotion and the avoidance of honest, rational self-assessment. Enjoy your shiny trinkets though! I’m sure the sick, poor and starving won’t begrudge you your indulgences — after all, at least you didn’t (potentially) cost Child’s Play 30c.

    • Wulf says:

      We’re not all like that, you know.

      I have an ongoing subscription to a number of charities, Defenders of Wildlife being one of my personal favourites. So some of us talk the talk, but we back it up by actually being philanthropic too. Not to mention that I’m pretty poor, which is why I have to wait for sales so often before buying anything. I’ve wanted Fuel for a long time, but I had to wait until it was £2 before I bought it. I’d estimate that about 10% of what I get goes out to charities.

      And for the same reason I was happy to put a bit of money down on this. There was one game I didn’t have there so I admit it was mutually beneficial, but I could have put down 1 cent for it, and I didn’t, because I wanted a larger sum going to charity than that. Usually if someone asks me to donate to charity, I will. The only thing that bothers me about all this I suppose is that people think it’s okay to take the rewards for charity aid without doing anything to earn those rewards. Instead, they’re making the charity fund-raising event organisers (in this case) pay for their ability to access those rewards.

      If this were a real charity fund-raising event, and they had edibles and such for people who donated, and someone came in and started scarfing everything and only dropped a cent (less than one pence!) into their charity box, would that be cool? Of course it wouldn’t.

      I’m not saying that it’s illegal or anything, what I am getting at is that it’s horribly unethical, and those who do it have absolutely no sense of ethics whatsoever (to hell with morality), by no measure of ethics could something like going to a fund-raiser and abusing it be considered ethical, these people are pariahs and they should be considered as such. No ‘Get out of your guilt, free!’ card for them. I’m sorry, no, no card. Never a card, the people who do that deserve whatever guilt and harassment they get.

      I’m poor, but I have a hell of a lot more honour, honesty, and integrity than some people around here. It seems that being poor makes people honest. :p

      To stress it again: They didn’t do anything illegal or against the law, no, they didn’t, but they did do something unethical, and the world has gotten pretty fucked up if we think that unethical exercises should be praised or are even excusable.

    • Wulf says:

      Concessions I’ll make are: It would be fine if it were a hobo, or if it was someone collecting food for a poor family, then either of those would be ethical.
       
      But in this case it wouldn’t be a hobo and the family wouldn’t be that poor, so neither of those would work. I mean, I’m poor these days, and if I can afford it then I’m bloody well sure that those paying 1 cent could.
       
      Oh yes… there’s also that little thing about games being a luxury whereas food is a necessity.
       
      So we come to the conclusion that robbing charity fund-raisers for luxury items can in no way be ethical. And there you have it. I also suspect that the people paying 1 cent are pretty well off, much more so than I am.

    • Dominic White says:

      @MD

      Oh, look, Dave Tosser ate a thesaurus. All I said is that if you have the opportunity to knowing take money from a charity, and then have the nerve to brag about it, you are a fucking horrible person and I would kindly appreciate it if you removed yourself from the internet (and ideally the internet) post-haste.

      Even if it is only a small amount of money, it is a horribly selfish and immoral act, and should be chastised at every possible step, lest it actually become acceptable behaviour.

      I’ve got direct debits from my bank account to a couple of charities, and I’m practically broke (I think I’ve got about £300 to my name right now?). What good are you doing, other than ham-fistedly trying to justify ripping off people who are trying to actually do some good in the world?

    • Dominic White says:

      Curse you lack of coffee (and edit function!). That was meant to read ‘remove yourself from the internet (and ideally the gene pool)’.

      Thank you and – (comment directed to anyone who would gladly cost charities money in the name of getting free games) – fuck right off.

    • Lilliput King says:

      “Too far. Again people are tied up in symbolism and seem to place little importance on the actual end result when making moral judgments[sic]”

      To be honest, that kind of ethic doesn’t really work on its own. (“Why don’t I divide up my estate and sell everything I own in order to feed the homeless for one day? It’s a better result! Why don’t I divide up my body in order to supply a couple of people organs? It’s a better result!)

      Regardless of what system you use, I’d hope you can at least draw a distinction between those who support charities and those who incur them costs. If not, it’s your system that needs inspecting

  23. kyle says:

    what the hell it didnt let me download it after i paid for it!!!!

    • Wulf says:

      Send them an email and tell them which email address your PayPal account is tied to, they’ll verify this and get on it right away.

      It’s Wolfire, they’re awesome like that.

  24. somedude says:

    I paid $18, which seemed fair enough to me, for a charitable donation and the one game out of the batch I was interested in (Aquaria, although after reading about some of the others here, might give them a look as well).

    I don’t have any problem with it being a mutually beneficial arrangement – developers get a bit more cash (which hopefully encourages them to produce more interesting new games), I get to kick a few extra bucks to charities that I already support, and I pick up a few new games to try on my Mac laptop.

  25. Kevbo says:

    So happy to see Aquaria getting more attention since that game is simply phenomenal in my opinion. I really wish more people could just experience that game since its a masterpiece. Hopefully this will get it in the hands of more gamers! Gotta love Indies for keeping the gaming scene fresh :)

  26. Stabby says:

    - Total raised $319,926
    - Average contribution $7.95
    - Number of contributions 40226

    crazy.. I would say that $320,000 split 7 ways is pretty awesome. Almost $50,000 to each of the companies, charity and EFF

  27. clovist says:

    Can i pay $0 for it? no? then its not pay what you want

  28. dingo says:

    I had all games but Lugaru already but I wanted a RM free Aquaria for ages (mine was on Steam before).
    I gave $30 split 50/50 between devs and charity just like in the trailer.

    Fantastic idea and I’m more than willing to spend my entertainment money this way as long as Ubi etc. try to f… with me and consider me a threat instead of something to be courted as a paying customer.
    Choke on our DRM bulls… and sell your games to the console crowd.

  29. lethial says:

    Paid $35 total to gift it to a friend (since I have all the games in the bundle).
    Then today, I saw this: http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/05/Another-view-of-game-piracy
    now I feel that I need to buy another bundle for another friend…

    WHY CAN’T MORE DEVS REALIZES THIS!? And @RPS, you guys so should front page the article, given all the piracy debates of late.

    • Wulf says:

      The maddening thing is that I’ve been saying this forever, all over the Internet, and I’ve posted just this in RPS comments threads many times, too. But it takes a big name before people perk up their ears and actually bloody listen, so I’m very pleased that Wolfire wrote this up.
       
      Yes, please everyone, do understand what that article tells you. Tell your friends, tell your journalistic friends if you have them, tell whomever might be interested, because it seems that no one’s really bothering to fight the misinformation. Piracy is a problem, but it’s a small problem compared to the real problem: unless it’s indie us PC gamers have to choose between unbelievably shitty ports of console games that aren’t exactly to our taste or poorly translated European games, most of the time.
       
      You’ll get the odd console game that works on the PC and has a good enough port, and you’ll also get the occasional European title that has a proper translation, but if the quality of games on average is low then you can’t expect people to take notice. People are smarter than that, and they realise that a company is saying “Well, yeah, we’ll screw PC gamers, we’ll just throw them a few scraps of a port once we’ve finished this banquet of a console game, maybe. Oh, and we won’t bother with a demo either, they don’t deserve it, all though our lovely console-owning boys and girls do!”
       
      Any high-quality games that are designed specifically for a target demographic will sell. See: most indie games. If a game isn’t selling then don’t slap draconian DRM on your games or kick up a fuss on forums about the evil pirates, instead, find out why the games aren’t selling and make better games, those games will sell. Probably like hotcakes.
       
      If you know you’re making a great game but your sales aren’t high enough, then you’ve targeted too niche of a demographic, and you either need to live with that or you need to broaden your demographic, I could think of some that fit into this example. Pointing the finger at pirates isn’t going to magically solve anything. What I see is this: good games sell, good games with a very narrow field of interest probably won’t sell (but they might still be good), poor quality games are shit games that won’t sell, and games targeted at the wrong demographic are also seen as shit games, and they won’t sell either. It’s as simple as that.
       
      What developers need to do is move all this bloody money they’re putting into DRM away from that and into market analysis.

  30. Agrajag says:

    Bloody hell, they got almost 400K by now

  31. Bassism says:

    Lethial, thanks for linking that blog post. It’s insightful, well written, and has an argument that I haven’t seen before.
    I second the motion to link it on the front page. If nothing else, it deserves a mention in the Sunday Papers.

  32. Max says:

    Paid about a fiver for it as I’m not in the money at the moment, will probably give more later. Some crazy git has given $1000!

  33. Iain says:

    They didn’t even protect the links.

    God-damn these guys are dumb. If someone sends you the download link you can just download them yourself.

    Indies are fucking idiots.

  34. James G says:

    Wow! This is great:

    Dear Humble Bundle supporter,

    I have a small announcement you might be interested in. This morning, I was talking to fellow indie studio Amanita Design. They wanted to donate to the Humble Indie Bundle too — but in a unique way. They decided to donate their award-winning, cross-platform game, Samorost 2, to the bundle! It is really a great game, and I encourage you to go download it on your updated Humble Bundle key page.

  35. Magic H8 Ball says:

    Wulf said:
    The maddening thing is that I’ve been saying this forever, all over the Internet, and I’ve posted just this in RPS comments threads many times, too. But it takes a big name before people perk up their ears and actually bloody listen, so I’m very pleased that Wolfire wrote this up.

    I do believe your definition of a big name is quite warped.

  36. Toddeon says:

    Wow most people only talk abaut Child’s Play and not abaut the EFF (or other charitys).

    Yeah the sad Children. You give them money that children in rich western countrys arent bored anymore…. (minus the one clinic in egypt)..
    Screw the figth for civil liberties in the Internet Age. You got little jimmy a PSP because he forgot his own at home. Yes it’s a good thing for a child to have something to play in a time of need. Like a painful time bevore/after an op or medicamentation with side effects. But you know how abaut something more positve …. like money for little children that cant afford a freaking op or medicamentation.

  37. atanok says:

    Child’s Play’s mission is putting video games in select hospitals for children to play.
    I can’t say I agree with that mission very much, so I’m giving its part to the EFF, which fights for everyone’s electronic freedom, a very much important battlefront nowadays, with the threats to net neutrality, ISP abuse and proliferation of Digital Restrictions Management and the Treacherous Computing Platform.

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>