The Latest Humble Is Quite The Bundle

As previously leaked, the latest Humble Indie Bundle‘s pay what you wantness contains: Super Meat Boy, Shank, Jamestown, Bit.Trip Runner, and NightSky. For people who pay over the average there’s also Cave Story and Gratuitous Space Battles. The cash split has changed a bit this time, because the EFF is no longer one of the charities, and you can choose how your donation gets split between the developers, Child’s Play, and the American Red Cross.

Trailer thing belowwww.


  1. Phantoon says:

    Hmm, didn’t I remember hearing a story about the Red Cross and something really silly relating to video games recently?

    Edit: Sod it, I can’t find it. It was somewhere on some Austrailian news site. Anyways, the Red Cross was examining games to see if they passed the Geneva Convention. At least I’m pretty sure it was them. The article suggested the idea that games should be more realistic, and make you show the consequences of blowing things up and killing people.

    And I for one don’t want a game that realistic, ever. That’s horrific. The mans in the computer aren’t real. Sheesh.

    • UnH says:

      Yes, that game developers don’t comply with Geneva Conventions and human rights. It’s silly because everyone wants to be a merciless killer

    • MaXimillion says:

      The red cross thing was completely blown up by the press, all they were concerned about was how war is portrayed in games, mainly by studios who also make simulators for militaries, such as Bohemia.

    • c-Row says:

      I don’t feel like supporting an organization that claims I can’t differentiate between a real battlefield and a virtual one.

    • Kaira- says:

      And you shouldn’t. However, you shouldn’t also make too hasty reactions.
      link to

      Last week Kotaku reported that the International Committee of the Red Cross was hoping to get developers to incorporate Geneva and Hague conventions into video games. Some media outlets later reported that could mean potential prosecution of gamers.
      The committee said today in a FAQ on their website on the topic that in a side meeting earlier this month the committee considered “various ways in which the rules applicable in armed conflict could feature in simulations.”

      tl;dr: media took a story, twisted it and ran with it. Not that there isn’t something worrying in the original story, though. Mainly the “encourage governments”-part.

    • adonf says:

      It’s the American Red Cross… I know that Jamestown comes from “The Birthplace of our Nation” (see trailers) but still they could have chosen a less local charity.

      (Oops, not meant to be a reply, but since I’m here: didn’t the Red Cross complain about the use of their emblem in video games for health packs and claim it was a violation of the Geneva convention ?)

    • ZephyrSB says:

      To the point that the Red Cross was removed from health packs in Neverwinter Nights, IIRC.
      Although that might just have been someone pointing out that the Red Cross doesn’t exist in the Forgotten Realms, and having it on the health packs made no sense anyway…or that was the cover story, at least.

    • negativedge says:

      I love how every question about or possible judgement of any aspect of a spectacularly pointless, lowbrow, and inconsequential hobby like video games is taken by the players as a complete and total affront to all sensible ways of living. It could be possible–maybe!–that well educated, funded, and concerned people outside of your little bubble have put more thought into certain subjects now and again than you have in the three seconds it takes you to first dismiss, and then react violently to what your animal brain is telling you is a threat to your ego.

      conclusion: just because you like to shoot people on monitors and pause half life 2 in just the right spot to make it look like alyx wants to have sex with you, doesn’t mean video games are above and beyond the responsibility of having a relationship with the greater enterprise of human life. maybe the red cross is full of shit, I don’t know, but the topic strikes me as interesting and should probably strike anyone with a brain as at least viable. and burn me at the stake, but if I’m forced to choose between a world without the red cross or a world without the people in the comments section at, I’ll chose the later.

    • JB says:

      “spectacularly pointless, lowbrow, and inconsequential hobby like video games”

      Glad to hear you enjoy the hobby so much, neg.

    • negativedge says:

      I have two things gamers generally frown upon: a critical eye, and perspective

    • Kdansky says:

      You can always not give to them. I always give my money to the devs anyway. It’s them who made the games, after all.

    • Was Neurotic says:

      Anyone else remember a few years back, when they claimed that anyone using a white square with a red plus on it to represent ‘health’ in any way was violating their ancient and sacred copyright law? That one quietly went away I note…

    • Just Endless says:

      oh, and also a heaping dose of cynicism.

    • c-Row says:


      The problem is that even the current wording of their FAQs makes it sound like they don’t really trust us.

    • Carra says:

      Both Childs play and the American Red Cross are US do-gooders.

      I’ll just give my money to the developers.

    • adonf says:

      Yeah, where are those Wolfire guys from? I always thought they were British or something…

    • Starky says:

      You know as dickish as negativedge comes across I’ve got to agree with him…

      The red cross is one of the greatest forces for good and humanitarian aid in the past century – it has done more good and saved more lives than virtually every major charity combined.

      If anyone doesn’t give to them because of some comment they made about this fairly unimportant (in the grand scale of things) hobby we all share, then that is frankly dumb as fuck.
      That said, I didn’t give any to the ARC, because I’m British – and if I give to the RC (which I do) I want to give to the British red cross.

    • c-Row says:

      “We don’t trust you but we will still happily accept your money.”

    • InternetBatman says:

      I pretty much agree with you negativeedge. Gamers in general act like a nest of hornets whenever anyone says there might be potential negatives to gaming. There’s no need to disrespect it as a hobby or form of entertainment, but the reaction is typically immediate, unthinking, and angry.

    • Wulf says:

      Ya. I’m with NE and potentially Starky as well.

      I mean, they have a point. Games are frequently violent, almost all of them are, and there’s just too much of it. It’s gotten to the point where if I suggest that in games we allow things to be tackled with reason, I actually get openly mocked for it. That’s the level of gamer intelligence I’ve come to expect. I often hope for more than that, but the times I’ve been disappointed…

      Really, I’d love to see less violence in games. Not because I’m a prude, but simply because gods damned variety. I mean, really, games are becoming more and more that the only solution to handle a problem is to either stick a sword in it or shoot it. And thought I know that the endless hordes of fanslaves out there are going to hate me for this, Skyrim is a fine example.

      Yes, Skyrim is a decent game, but it’s also exactly what I’m talking about.

      1.) Most of the game seems to be arbitrarily made up of racist/fascist bigots who promote genocide, this seems to be the case in order to get the player killing things.

      2.) It’s really damned hard to reason with them. It’s also impossible to create a lasting peace treaty between the Stormcloaks and the Imperials, you can’t reach a peace agreement withe the dragon concordance either. Nor can you overthrow the Thalmor without killing lots of them. it’s kill kill kill kill kill.

      3.) Hand-to-hand combat in Bethesda games used to be about knocking a person out. That way you could knock out your prospective foes and only take out their ringleader, the real troublemaker, thus making a surgical strike and knowing that without leadership these crazy people would disband and maybe take a second look at life. I can’t give them that chance in Skyrim.

      4.) In Skyrim, I found my stride for a while with the werewolf fear power, but that’s designed to stop working at level 25, which forces you right back into the killing again.

      It would be nice to have some variety. I mean, if these Red Cross people or anything looked at a game like Skyrim and called us witless barbarians for it, I couldn’t blame them. Could you? Sure, have killing as an option for those who want to do it, sometimes, but all too often even in RPGs there’s the complete removal of reason. And when I promote reason, like I’ve said, I get made fun of.

      Because I don’t want to kill everything, I’m a lesser person in the eyes of many gamers.

      I can’t believe I just typed that, but I did, and we all know that that’s the truth. That’s the sad part of it. Gamers are just people who want to kill things, and games are a virtual outlet for that. Certainly, there are people who’d prefer To the Moon, the Blackwell trilogy, Gemini Rue, and stuff like that given the choice, but generally gamers are just people with a deep need to see things die. And having a virtual battleground to express that is something they desire.

      Now what does that say to you?

      And I’m not saying that having a harmless way to express your darker desires is bad, not in the least. That’s a very human thing to do, since it keeps us all from going crazy, but what I’m saying is that it paints us all in a bad light when our games are about violence and nothing else. It means that we can’t show people the choices we could make. I’m not sure how to explain this…

      Let’s take a look at something like New Vegas:

      “Ah, he’s the boss of a group of drug-runners.”
      “And you have to kill him now, of course.”
      “No, actually! I can talk to him, and make him see reason. I won’t have to shed any blood. Shedding blood is a choice and I choose not to.”
      “Okay, that’s pretty awesome.”

      Now Skyrim:

      “Ah, that’s the boss of a group of Necromancers.”
      “And you have to kill him now, of course.”
      “…well, yeah.”
      “You can’t reason with him, barter with him, or arrest him?”
      “Arrest him? That’s a fun idea! …but no, I can’t do that.”
      “So you can only kill him, then?”

      And that’s my problem.

      I’ve brought this up before, and I’ve been mocked for it so many times. Yeah, I want to talk to people and critters as an option. So this is my counter-mocking, really, because I honestly think it’s kind of disgusting, and we’re even encouraging developers to think this way. You want to know why I’m always so proud of Obsidian and what they do? They always give me the choice. It’s my choice what I do. And if I don’t want to play some bloodthirsty mendicant I don’t have to.

      If some people are worried about us gamers and our violent tendencies?

      Frankly, I think they have every right to be. Or at the very least, it’s justified by the games we play. And it’s justified by the fact that very few people (I may be one of the only ones) actually stops to think “Well, it would be nice to do something other than killing all the damn time in these games.”

      I mean, really.

      If given the option, how many of you would prefer to knock a bad guy out and cart him off to prison? If you were given the option, would you do it? Or would you just kill them for convenience? And if you would want this, then you need to let developers know, and you need to actually set the cowardice aside and criticise them for not offering you the choice.

      There’s a reason that gamers have always had a bad rep, and this is why.

      All the kneejerk responses in the world won’t change that.

    • LintMan says:

      Carra: ” Both Childs play and the American Red Cross are US do-gooders.
      I’ll just give my money to the developers.”

      Child’s Play isn’t a US-only charity. On their web site, I see hospitals in Canada, UK, Egypt, Austrailia, and New Zealand. And I believe it’s open for children’s hospitals anywhere in the world to sign up. (I think almost all the hospitals listed (in the US and elsewhere) were added by the efforts of gamers wishing to donate locally.)

  2. Josh Wanamaker says:

    It’s a shame I already own 5 of these games, or I’d buy the bundle. Clearly, that was money well spent. If the Humble Bundle folk could arrange to turn keys into gifts for people that already own them, that would be wonderful. Did…did that statement make any sense?

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      I think so.

      Also, on consideration, I think this bundle is only actually particularly great if you pay over the average. THOSE TRICKSTERS.

    • Juan Carlo says:

      Yeah, I got it just for Cave Story, everything else is just a bonus. However, the average is already up to nearly 6 dollars, so if anyone is buying it just for one game it almost doesn’t pay as whatever that game is it’d probably be cheaper on its own during a steam sale.

    • Josh Wanamaker says:

      But Jim, I always pay over the average! Have I been consistently taken advantage of?!

      I…I feel so used! BETRAYED, even!

    • phylum sinter says:

      I do declare that TECHNICALLY you could download the DRM free versions, and upon promising yourself to never download the games yourself you haven’t bought; load them on a usb stick and put a bow on it.

      Yessir. Or is that ethically unsound? Have my humors steered me wrong?


    • Llewyn says:

      This doesn’t really make any sense. It’s not a fixed price bundle, it’s pay what you want. If you have some of the games already, make a donation based on what the remaining games are worth to you. Nobody is monitoring what you (specifically) pay for the bundle and judging you on it – oh my, Josh only paid $X for all these games! – and some money going to the developers and charities is better than no money. Admittedly it’s a little unfortunate that this bundle doesn’t let you split payments between developers.

      If you’d rather donate more but feel you want something more from it, buy two copies of the bundle and gift one to a friend. I did this with the Frozen Synapse bundle – I gave a certain amount and then realised that what I’d got was worth more to me. I could have just increased my donation but chose instead to buy a gift copy for a mainstream gaming friend who would otherwise never have touched those games. Win all around, really.

    • adonf says:

      Well you own these games, what’s keeping you from donating them as long as you don’t add them to your Steam or Desura account ?

    • Premium User Badge

      Bluerps says:

      I have bought several HumbleBundles even though I already owned most of the games included in them. HumbleBundle is more about giving to charity (and giving some more money to developers of games I really liked) than getting games cheap, for me. Still, giftable keys would be really nice.

    • MadTinkerer says:

      I’ve used the extra codes as gifts before. While I don’t mind giving a bit more money to developers and/or their favorite charities, the fact that I can also give the extra codes to my friends & relatives is a nice extra incentive.

  3. Juan Carlo says:

    Interesting that it’s only been 24 hours and they have almost reached 1 million, with almost 200,000 units sold. Meanwhile, all the other bundles usually push about 30,000 units.

    I wonder why Humble bundle does so much better? Sure the games in this bundle are awesome, but even Humblebundle’s lackluster bundles tend to do pretty well.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      I suppose they just have better profile? The first couple were so big that everyone knows about them?

    • The Tupper says:

      Indeed. And ‘HumbleBundle’ is such a good name – despite my initial disappointment that it didn’t refer to a charitable collection of the early music of Gerry Rafferty and Billy Connolly. Which would be the ‘HumbleBumsBundle’. Which is an even better name.

    • Kdansky says:

      Higher profile, AND much better games. I mean, come on: Dino D-Day versus Super Meat Boy?

    • Eclipse says:

      hey, I love Super Meat Boy but Dino D-Day is great!

  4. baby snot says:

    Anyone know why EFF is no longer a part of this?

  5. Lobotomist says:

    Although I have super meat boy (best platformer evar)
    I am totally getting this !

  6. Driadan says:

    I miss they don’t include desura keys anymore (I suppose it’s the competition) as it is like the steam for linux.
    At least they usually include direct downloads for linux too, so not too much to complain about :)

    • Kaira- says:

      I guess they might add Desura keys later, like with Introversion-bundle. At least I hope so. :P

    • Driadan says:

      @kaira did they? I didn’t notice I’ll go redeem them (although i must have bought darwinia and uplink in 4 or 5 different forms)

  7. AshEnke says:

    Why is Shank part of an Indie Game Bundle ?
    With the huge “EA” logo at the start.

    • Untruth says:

      Just because EA previously published it, it doesn’t make it non-indie. Nearly all the big Indie games have been published by big publishers.

      Klei Entertainment who make Shank are still an independent developer and are – as far as has been made public – privately owned and managed.

    • Starky says:

      EA publish loads of indie games, and games made by independent studios, usually through their EA partners program (which Valve used for their games), which gives devs a bit of EA clout, shipping and distribution and so on – but lets them retain ownership of the IP.

    • InternetBatman says:

      Still, that stretches the definition of indie. I’m pretty sure that the independent means independent from publishers. Making distribution deals and possibly getting bankrolled by them isn’t that independent.

  8. Thomas says:

    Could you atleast put leak in quotes? Like this:


  9. mongpong says:

    I don’t own any of these – and pretty much have been meaning to buy them all. Nice! Got a 7 hour train ride next Monday so these should keep me occupied.

  10. thekeats1999 says:

    Just got this for myself, also here is a gifted one.

    link to


    Ps please post after taking so people know not to grab.

    • The Tupper says:

      Bah. Beaten to it. Top marks for your generosity, though sir/madam.

    • thekeats1999 says:

      Sorry you were beaten to it and glad someone will enjoy this bundle.

    • Berserkben says:

      I got your gift, thanks a bunch!

      PS: Sorry for the delayed post!

  11. Hulk Handsome says:

    I’ve gotten into the habit of just donating a few bucks to a charity of my choice outside of the bundle and then giving all the money to the developers with the amount I actually pay.

    • Jonith says:

      Same, I give almost all the money to the devs so they hopefully will develop more games, and then I give a few quid to charity after, so I don’t feel bad

  12. Saiko Kila says:

    Only GSB would be interesting to me, and I already have that one. So I pass. But it’s good they’re trying.

  13. JagRoss says:

    Would anyone be willing to exchange an above average bundle for Braid, VVVVVV, Machinarium, Gish, Cthulhu Saves the World and Breath of Death?
    Edit: And Half-Life 2.

  14. MichaelPalin says:

    I don’t even have time to play the games of the previous Bundles anymore!!!

  15. oceanclub says:

    While I’d gotten a bit skeptical of the glut of bundles lately, I jumped on this one. Though I fear I will never ever get anywhere with SMB, a game that makes me realise my age and accelerating decrepiture, Cave Story+ is great and diverted me from Skyrim for an hour or two last night.


  16. says:

    My compulsion to keep an organized Steam library has me tempted to buy the bundle, despite already owning 4 of the games on various platforms.

    Also, it’s funny how all of these people are going “Ewwwww, it’s the AMERICAN Red Cross.” I’m pretty sure people would call me a jerk (or just silly) if I made a big deal about it being the British Red Cross instead, or some such.

    • Jonith says:

      It’s a charity that want to help people, I don’t care if there based across the pond from me, as long as the money goes to help, it’s fine by me

    • adonf says: Er, no. That’s no anti-Americanism, lemme explain.

      My problem here is that Wolfire and the Humble Bundle never advertise themselves as an American company. Their own web site doesn’t even say where their offices are, I had to look them up in Wikipedia to learn that they are in San Francisco. Also the games sold in the bundle are from all over the world (Except Jamestown that’s from “Our Nation”, no I can’t swallow this one…), mostly the US and the UK but still. So it appears to be a global enterprise, yet they direct the donations to a charity that acts locally in the US. I feel a bit cheated here. You could replace America by Britain and it would be exactly the same.

      It’s not a huge deal, and of course it’s possible for the buyers to give everything to the developers and donate extra money to any charity they like, but still it’s disappointing that in the age of the Internet these guys don’t realise how global these bundles are.

    • Cheese says:

      I agree with Adonf, it’s sold on world-wide-web, the charities should probably be world-wide too.

    • Mist says:

      I would also have preferred some international charities (Doctors Without Borders for example..), but iirc the various Red Cross organisations also do work outside their nation of origin in case of environmental disasters etc, so I still threw some money their way =)

      The Child’s Play Charity on the other hand is a bit…. eh. Sick children are of course a worthy goal, and the “gamers helping gamers” angle is nice, but in the Humble Bundle it feels like “Gamers all over the world helping American gamers” (ok, so there might be ~5 non-american beneficiaries.. but still)

    • Jonith says:

      I have the same feelings as you on Child’s Play, Mist. Sure it’s worthy to send money for sick children to play games, and the fact it has got a wider majority of gamers interested in charity, but even so their are worthier causes to donate to.

    • Hulk Handsome says:

      I agree about Child’s Play. As others have said, it’s cool giving sick kids games to play, but I’d much rather donate money that helps them get treatment that actually helps them get better, or money to send doctors out to remote locations, etc. Child’s Play just feels like a “lesser” charity to me.

  17. Dowr says:

    Worth it for BIT. TRIP RUNNER alone.

  18. DOLBYdigital says:

    I simply love Wolfire!! Both for their engine and for the Humble Bundle idea… :)