next »

[peanutbuttershoes]

I dunno, it just seems like everyone just complains instead of offering viable/realistic solutions to the problem.

I like the process of solving problems.

[Christian Knudsen]

I just don't really see how making a bundle to sell your own game at a low price is a solution to the problem of games being sold for too low a price. I just hope that when/if the overabundance of bundles make them crash, prices return to a somewhat reasonable level and don't just leave developers with not even that slimmer of hope (bundles) of recouping the cost of developing their games. But I fear Pandora's box has been opened.

[Mikademus]

I dunno, it just seems like everyone just complains instead of offering viable/realistic solutions to the problem.

I like the process of solving problems.

To solve a problem you have to understand it. We can't fully understand it until it has passed, and then it is too late. We can speculate and extrapolate based on our understanding, which will give us scenarios. Where these scenarios will coincide--or where they point to outcomes that are possible and unacceptable--we can act, for instance by being critical and raise awareness like the WWF does. I certainly don't want to see indies becoming an endangered species.

[eld]

To be fair though, wasn't piracy yesteryears problem?, yet everyone found it not to be in the end.

I mean, piracy price of $0 dilutes the price quite a bunch.

[Christian Knudsen]

It's arguable whether or not pirates would have paid for the game to begin with, but with bundles, you're selling the game for almost nothing, i.e. you're hollowing out your customer base. Also, it's hard (almost impossible) to do something about piracy, whereas the bundles are done by the indies themselves. You could say indies are pissing themselves to stay warm, but after that, they're just wet and smelling of piss... or something like that.

[peanutbuttershoes]

To be fair though, wasn't piracy yesteryears problem?, yet everyone found it not to be in the end.

I mean, piracy price of $0 dilutes the price quite a bunch.

By golly!  He's right!

The humble indie bundle is solving another problem, piracy.
To which you reply, "At what cost? Now games are worth nothing and I can't sell my stock unless it's in a bundle!"

Countrymen, it is time to stop giving a fuck. Games are stupid.

Good day.




No but really. I'm looking forward to when this indie game bubble of mine pops and my life goes back to frickin normal and I focus on cooler things. Like architecture. Har har

[eld]

Yet, the same argument could be have, pirates might not have bought it in the first place.
And most bundle buyers did not intend to buy the game at the first pricepoint either.

Many of these games in these bundles have been out for years, yet tons of people have not played them yet, how come?, maybe the price wasn't right?
That they were waiting for a bundle isn't a reason, you aren't THAT likely to find that one game you wanted in a bundle, but if you do you're lucky.

In the end, people who want the game when it launches will get it, and those who think the price is too high will not buy it, but perhaps when the price drops.
Then there are those who probably would not have bought the game at all, but find it might be worth trying out at random since it was in a bundle.

Thousands of people who probably would not have bought the product in the first place.

Now, there's a tactic to this, dlc and future products, you'll notice that many bundleleers will have dlc attached to their product, which alone will cost more (but not cost a lot) than the bundle itself, and many people who found their product via the bundle will buy the dlc.

There will always be vocal people, those who say that probably wont buy a game at all, and pirate everything, and those who say that will wait for sales, and then the new ones who say that they'll wait for bundles, these are not the majority.

[dustin]

I think part of the problem is that most people here are in the minority that actually spends a significant amount of money on indie games.

For me (and my guess is that this is true for most people) I've spent way more money on indie games since this name your price thing started then I ever did before.  I don't make a lot of money and only really buy dirt cheap games (used games from the previous generations system mostly for ~5$).  This also meant I only ever bought 1 20$ indie game and 2 or 3 10$ ones in the 3 or so years I was into indie games before the name your price models started popping up.  Since then I've spent way more then 50$ on indie games, yes I have gotten more then 4 or 5 games for my money but that doesn't really seem to stop me buying a new bundle when it pops up with a game I want.

[Christian Knudsen]

There are, however, also a lot of people right now saying that they won't buy the games in the latest bundles because they haven't even had time to look at the games they bought in the previous bundles! Why would those people buy a new game for $20? Why would they even be interested in that new game when they still have dozens of games from previous bundles they haven't played yet?

(I'm really trying not to be too pessimistic about all this, honest!)

[peanutbuttershoes]

You're right though about that group of people.
There's no way they would.

Well the only exception I can think of is say... Skyrim.
People spent 59.99 on skyrim no matter how many bundle games they have but haven't played.

Quality games. Guys. Quality will bring people to your game.

? Yeah? I mean I see meat boy as a quality game. The peeps in the HIB are there because they make good games and have good games that people will buy. Good Game selections sell the HIB just as much as the pay-what-you-want model does I think.

Edit: another thing I think that shows this as true is the fact that so many people say they already own the games in the bundle. Paid full price for 'Em.
Because they're good games.

[Christian Knudsen]

So you're saying that all we need to do is make a long-awaited, heavily marketed sequel to a huge series of AAA games? Easy!

[Mikademus]

I think part of the problem is that most people here are in the minority that actually spends a significant amount of money on indie games.

For me (and my guess is that this is true for most people) I've spent way more money on indie games since this name your price thing started then I ever did before.  I don't make a lot of money and only really buy dirt cheap games (used games from the previous generations system mostly for ~5$).  This also meant I only ever bought 1 20$ indie game and 2 or 3 10$ ones in the 3 or so years I was into indie games before the name your price models started popping up.  Since then I've spent way more then 50$ on indie games, yes I have gotten more then 4 or 5 games for my money but that doesn't really seem to stop me buying a new bundle when it pops up with a game I want.

Well, I only buy a very few AAA titles just as I only buy a very few Indie titles. Sure, I too have bought many more indie games since the bundles, but now I, an indie myself, am starting to think of indie games as shovelware you buy by the bucket. I have actually caught myself thinking that with the bundles I don't have to look up indie titles anymore, I can just wait for a bundle to pick (what they would have me believe to be) the cream of the crop for me. That makes me a passive consumer and moves power to the bundlers (the indie producers/distributors) from both me and the indie developers. The problem of TV wasn't fixed by adding more channels, it actually exacerbated it by increasing the demand for low-cost fillers. This is a shift of power, a shift of agency and a shift from quality to quantity. It is an iTunesisation of indie games.

[peanutbuttershoes]

So you're saying that all we need to do is make a long-awaited, heavily marketed sequel to a huge series of AAA games? Easy!

No no.

But I mean, go look at Edmund's career and see how he started getting known. He made good games.
Polished. Well rounded. Prolific. Solid games.
He makes money now because he's good at making games.

Derek Yu makes good games. Alec from infinite ammo. Steph Thirion. Peeps at Vlambeer.
Polished games get sold, If the person sells them. If they aren't sold, they get popular, QWOP for instance.

Build it and they will come.

EDIT: There are exceptions to the idea that a game needs to be good to sell: Minecraft for instance.

There are also instances of games that should sell well but didn't, even though they were awesome.
Like Hidden and Dangerous 2.

But I think generally the idea that good games sell is a solid idea.

[Christian Knudsen]

But the issues isn't about selling games, it's selling them at a sustainable price. And bundles are lowering that price.

Also, Edmund's latest games have sold through XBLA, the Humble Bundle and Steam. I bet the games wouldn't have been as much of a commercial success for him if he had to sell them from his own site or through portals like most indies do.

Build it and they will come.

That seems like terrible advice...

[Gimym TILBERT]

Minecraft was filling a void, it does help.