next »

[Pineapple]

I don't see why Notch would employ a subscription fee, seeing how the game maintains no significant perpetual cost to him. I don't think this means the payments are going to start sucking, just that the gamemode additions and stuff will cost money. The odd part is how he plans to do this with a modding API also freely available.

[Guillaume]

Oh Notch how quickly you 'sold out'.

The guy only took out a line from his website at the advice of his lawyer, because legally, saying "all updates in the future will be free" is a VERY slippery slope. Any developer in their right mind would have done the same.

The odd part is how he plans to do this with a modding API also freely available.

I don't think that's odd- expansions could include brand new things (blimps! dragons! etc.) , whereas modding only allows you to tweak what's already there.

[Bood_War]

I would like to point out that Cortex Command has done the 'free updates forever' thing for 7 years now, and TF2 for about as along. (Though comparing TF2 and Minecraft is a bit unfair I do realize.)

[Conker534]

Anyone who doesn't agree with this is selfish.

People would abuse the legal system. Because people suck.

[Hangedman]

No need to assume the worst.

[Ben_Hurr]

Oh Notch how quickly you 'sold out'.

The guy only took out a line from his website at the advice of his lawyer, because legally, saying "all updates in the future will be free" is a VERY slippery slope. Any developer in their right mind would have done the same.

The odd part is how he plans to do this with a modding API also freely available.

I don't think that's odd- expansions could include brand new things (blimps! dragons! etc.) , whereas modding only allows you to tweak what's already there.

Modding support already allows you to do all those things.  And if Notch took that ability away he'd be a dick.

If he charged for things like Blimps and Dragons, he would be a royal dick.  That's what people are worried about with these changes.

I think its a little quick to accuse him of 'selling out' though, since all he did was take out some really vague conditions from the minecraft liscense.  Let's reserve that judgement until he does something stupid like charge per month for multiplayer or hold gameplay features hostage for $10 a pop. 

[Valyou]

Even though I got the game at the Alpha stage, I think that this new crap about "lawl u gotta gimme munny evry updat" is so unfair. Plus, MP might get so f***'d up with people who paid as soon as Beta came and those who paid in the middle of beta.
I'd rather be tempted with microtransactions than to keep tossing out money towards Notch, to be honest.
And the whole "money keeps dinner on the table" is total bull. Devs can get enough money to buy food with at least one to four buyers a day, let alone the 100+ buyers MC fares.

[jotapeh]

Even though I got the game at the Alpha stage, I think that this new crap about "lawl u gotta gimme munny evry updat" is so unfair. Plus, MP might get so f***'d up with people who paid as soon as Beta came and those who paid in the middle of beta.
I'd rather be tempted with microtransactions than to keep tossing out money towards Notch, to be honest.
And the whole "money keeps dinner on the table" is total bull. Devs can get enough money to buy food with at least one to four buyers a day, let alone the 100+ buyers MC fares.

The assumptions in these statements are all at once broad, overreaching and erroneous – please do a little fact-checking.

[ink.inc]

Even though I got the game at the Alpha stage, I think that this new crap about "lawl u gotta gimme munny evry updat" is so unfair. Plus, MP might get so f***'d up with people who paid as soon as Beta came and those who paid in the middle of beta.
I'd rather be tempted with microtransactions than to keep tossing out money towards Notch, to be honest.
And the whole "money keeps dinner on the table" is total bull. Devs can get enough money to buy food with at least one to four buyers a day, let alone the 100+ buyers MC fares.

The assumptions in these statements are all at once broad, overreaching and erroneous – please do a little fact-checking.

 

[Guillaume]

No need to assume the worst.

Hmm yes- when it comes to making legal statements that could put your company at stake, you NEED to assume the worst.

People bitching about that decision are self entitled whiners who expect to have everything for free ("like omg, if notch makes us pay i'll just pirate it lol!") and have no idea how the business side of game development work.

Please, let's keep some classiness on TIGSource, and respect our fellow indie dev decisions when they are smart and justified. 

[Hangedman]

No need to assume the worst.

No need to assume the worst about Notch's actions.

[deathtotheweird]

People bitching about that decision are self entitled whiners who expect to have everything for free ("like omg, if notch makes us pay i'll just pirate it lol!") and have no idea how the business side of game development work.

You sound like a typical asshole fanboy. Notch can't do anything wrong can he? He's infallible eh? I disagree with his decision because I expect every thing to be free right? Go fuck yourself, stop putting words in my mouth.

I am just concerned about this decision. Mainly because I am confused on what is an update and what is a bug fix. He doesn't clarify what an update is or how an update will affect the game. Would Minecraft version 1.1 be an update or a bug fix? It doesn't make sense to me and he doesn't help matters by using vague terminology.

Also I wouldn't mind paying for extra expansions as long as they were reasonable additions and not obvious cash-grabs (like the horse armor dlc for oblivion).

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a blind fanboy who would buy the game twice if notch told him to (aka an idiot).

[Xion]

he didn't say all updates will cost money,
he just said not all updates will be free.

Maybe all updates will cost money,
but then maybe they won't.

And anyway, I think if you're a smart consumer you could probably figure out which updates are 'Updates' and which are bug fixes for yourself. (hint; the bug fixes are the ones that primarily fix bugs)

[unsilentwill]

wow. lots of  goin on

This isn't a surprise, in fact this is one of the first things I knew about the game. Starting as a free creative thing, evolved into this expansive and fun game that is definately worth paying full price for. He sold the alpha for cheap, promising those who buy would pay no more, forever! as thanks for sifting through and helping with alpha nonsense.

Beta, to me, was defined from the start as the core and functioning gameplay mode. Which by all accounts I think it will be by the 20th, given his current record. It will have bugs, and those who don't want to risk paying for what they think will be bug fixes should buy the game right now. Though honestly, I would buy the game twice, not because I'm blind, but because it is worth at least as much as a solid Nintendo title in my opinion.

If Notch suddenly up and dons his asshat, buy making beta players pay for monkeys, I will be a bit upset and not advise people to pay for monkeys. Do I think he's going to do that? Well I don't know the dude, but from what I've read and seen I highly doubt it.

There may be a time to be upset, but now is certainly not it.

[deathtotheweird]

as I pointed out earlier, there were updates that fixed bugs and added content together. Would he actually do that and charge for it? Probably not, but due to his odd wording on his blog he could if he were so inclined.

It's not that big of a deal, I just wish he would clarify what he means by update. Or choose more clear terms such as DLC or Add-on.

[Oddball]

Erm.. Just in case anyone didn't realise my comments about subscriptions and Notch 'selling out' were a joke. That is why my next sentences started with 'On a more serious note'. Note to future self, use more smilies with your jokes.

As far as I'm concerned it's Notches game so he can charge people whatever he wants, and good luck to him too.

[Guillaume]

People bitching about that decision are self entitled whiners who expect to have everything for free ("like omg, if notch makes us pay i'll just pirate it lol!") and have no idea how the business side of game development work.

You sound like a typical asshole fanboy. Notch can't do anything wrong can he? He's infallible eh? I disagree with his decision because I expect every thing to be free right? Go fuck yourself, stop putting words in my mouth.

I certainly don't think I'm an "asshole fanboy", or than Notch is infallible. Just that people are way too jumpy, and tend to feel self-entitled about something just because they like it and Notch is indie.

Also, if I were you, I would refrain from using such hateful speech. It just makes you look like someone resorting to insults because he cannot express himself clearly otherwise.

I am just concerned about this decision. Mainly because I am confused on what is an update and what is a bug fix. He doesn't clarify what an update is or how an update will affect the game. Would Minecraft version 1.1 be an update or a bug fix? It doesn't make sense to me and he doesn't help matters by using vague terminology.

That's precisely the issue. Would 1.1 be an update or a bugfix? What about 2.0? What about another game that Mojang would make 5 years from now that would bear some resemblance to Minecraft? All these point of views could be defended for in court, given a good lawyer. And that's precisely what Notch wants to avoid.

Also I wouldn't mind paying for extra expansions as long as they were reasonable additions and not obvious cash-grabs (like the horse armor dlc for oblivion).

There's a difference between being a smart consumer and being a blind fanboy who would buy the game twice if notch told him to (aka an idiot).

Well, if you are a smart consumer, then you know how to differentiate the updates you want to buy from "horse armor dlcs". And I have actually bought the game twice when Notch first made it available, because I loved what he did and wanted to support him. Not all of us reason on a "what's the cheapest I can get this for?" basis.

[deathtotheweird]

That's precisely the issue. Would 1.1 be an update or a bugfix? What about 2.0? What about another game that Mojang would make 5 years from now that would bear some resemblance to Minecraft?

This is what I want clarification on. The last sentence you're just being a smartass, and Minecraft 2 would be a completely different game. I just want to know what he means by update.

If any other company did this you guys would be frothing at the mouth in anger, but Notch does it and you defend him up and down. I don't get you guys sometimes.

[Pineapple]

Don't mistake a small number of speakers for the whole. I, for one, take no real side on the issue, but that doesn't mean I'm not curious as to what's going to end up happening. Knowing Notch, I'd be surprised if he actually did end up charging for future updates unless they formed what's essentially an entirely new game (like a new gamemode, like the dungeons and levers expansion he's brought up a few times) whereas simple additions to existing game content would require no additional payment.

[Xion]

not defending, just being reasonable. What is an update? What is a bug fix? Use your noggin. Not that hard. See no issue.

And like I said, even if a bugfix is an update, or whatever your confusion seems to be, he didn't say he'd charge for it, just that he's reserving the right to do so. Not like he's done it yet. Complain when that happens.