Humble Indie Bundle 3: Now With Minecraft

[KirbyKrackle]

Love the priorities of some people:

Ripping off indie devs and charities? Poor little misunderstood soul.

Providing a free time-limited bonus incentive to purchase the bundle? Anti-Christ.

Personally, I think they ought to make the bonuses something you have to pay more for, like with the bundle-in-a-bundle last time. Maybe that would make some of the cheapskates reconsider (not that I'm calling anyone here a cheapskate because that would be flaming and rude, of course, and we can't have anyone being mean to the poor little cheapskates, now can we; we might hurt their poor little cheapskate feelings).

 

[KirbyKrackle]

Hmmm... You know what? I've got a few bucks left in my bank account, I think I might just purchase this. Besides, whats wrong with supporting the Independence every once and a while.

Now, I'm still considering buying it, even as I type this part, and probably will even if its responded to, but I'm curious, this is the first I've heard of these games (except Minecraft, which I own and its awesome!), what are these games like. Are they good? They look interesting. You don't have to say much, I'm just curious what you guys have to say about it (And Yet it Moves... huh... the name sounds interesting)

Note: I'm not trying to troll or anything. Sorry if it sound like I am.

Well, I can't help you with Hammerfight, but the demos for the other games are as follows:
VVVVVV:http://www.kongregate.com/games/TerryCavanagh/vvvvvv-demo
And Yet It Moves: http://www.andyetitmoves.net/index.php?content=demo
Crayon Physics: http://www.crayonphysics.com/
Cogs: http://www.lazy8studios.com/free_downloads

I recommend checking some of those out and seeing if you like them. You'll know your own tastes better than any internet stranger!.

 

[Zelda_Lover26]

Hmmm... You know what? I've got a few bucks left in my bank account, I think I might just purchase this. Besides, whats wrong with supporting the Independence every once and a while.

Now, I'm still considering buying it, even as I type this part, and probably will even if its responded to, but I'm curious, this is the first I've heard of these games (except Minecraft, which I own and its awesome!), what are these games like. Are they good? They look interesting. You don't have to say much, I'm just curious what you guys have to say about it (And Yet it Moves... huh... the name sounds interesting)

Note: I'm not trying to troll or anything. Sorry if it sound like I am.

Well, I can't help you with Hammerfight, but the demos for the other games are as follows:
VVVVVV:http://www.kongregate.com/games/TerryCavanagh/vvvvvv-demo
And Yet It Moves: http://www.andyetitmoves.net/index.php?content=demo
Crayon Physics: http://www.crayonphysics.com/
Cogs: http://www.lazy8studios.com/free_downloads

I recommend checking some of those out and seeing if you like them. You'll know your own tastes better than any internet stranger!.

Thanks dude, I will!

But I don't think I'll be able to get the pack like I wanted... I just now checked my account, and found out I only had $0.47... I swear I thought I had more than that.... However, I had forgotten that I had bought another indie game a few weeks ago (its called SpaceChem. Check it out if you have steam... Its really not half bad).That's not to say that, once I obtain the money to, I might not buy them. I will, but I'll just have to buy each of them separately... And you know, I don't really have a problem with that. It really seems a lot better then only giving them a few cents. Hey, people worked hard on these games, after all.

(oh, and yes, I know I just announced how much I had in a bank account on a public forum. probably not the best idea, I know...)

And for people saying that Notch should give the full version instead of a demo:

I can see the logic behind it. If he just gives a demo, people can see if they like it or not.
if they don't (which can happen), no big deal.
If they do, they can by the full version.
Notch gets a little more money to run his game, a gamer discovers a great game, everyone goes home happy. And besides, its not like thats the only thing their giving away, right? If the buyer didn't like Minecraft, but liked all the other games, then everyone still wins.
Overall though, that's just my opinion. You guys are still welcome to yours. Just wanted to put that out there.

 

[Alphakirby]

I take it I'm not the only one who has donated just $0.01 ..

Dude,even I at least donated 90 cents and that's because 90 cents was all I had and these things are a limited time only. I REALLY hope you are a hobo or something so this can be justified,because a penny if you do have more money giving just a penny is just plain cheap and selfish.

 

[Alphakirby]

A lot of people are saying that Nightmare doesn't deserve to be berated. I'm inclined to disagree; I think it's wrong to berate others for voicing their opinion on the matter. Ignoring forum rules aside, I don't think one should suppress how they feel about the fact that he paid so little. If you think it was a scummy thing to do, then you should let him know. If you want to, that is. If you agree with him, then defend him.

Making an altruistic project like the HIB pay money to give you games is kind of despicable, in my opinion. I don't feel like I have to suppress that feeling with the clinical "well, 1p was an option, so it's not wrong to actually pay that little". This is not a question of rules. It's a question of morality; has been from the start. I don't think it's hypocritical of me to berate Nightmare; I am higher up than him on the moral ladder - at least in this case - simply because of the fact that I paid more money than him. My $14.99 high horse has to do something, right?

Sorry for being preachy.

It's ok,even I'm berating the guy and I could only afford (As in all the money I had left) to pay 90 cents because I had just gotten Catherine and my prepaid card only had 90 cents left in it. Though I did push most of that small payment towards Child's Play because that's what I did last time I got a HIB.

 

[Marmooset]

I'm not sure which is more pathetic, paying a penny for the Bundle or advertising it in a public forum.

Frankly, I feel you folks have been seriously trolled. Staff included.

If somebody's caught taking a piss in an alley, it's public indecency. If they take one on stage, it's performance art.
This is the stage. And the one p is the p.

 

[GrandmaFunk]

I just don't see how calling him(and others like him) a "bastard" is helpful is making him see the error of his ways.

what would?

do you think there's anything that could be said to someone like that that could change their minds about it? he doesn't seem to feel any shame or remorse about it, he doesn't see anything wrong with it, they gave him permission to pay that much.

so no, it's not productive. then again, when you see someone acting like a douchebag, it feels good to say "hey you, quit acting like a douchebag"..regardless of the fact that it won't change their behaviour at all. you hope it influences others that see that to think "well, i don't want ppl to think im a douchebag, maybe I shouldn't act that way."

when you think about it, that's what etiquette is: shaming ppl into proper behaviour.

it doesn't always work, but we haven't been able to come up with any better solutions over the last few thousand years.

 

[Gindil]

For the love of PETE FOLKS!

Has *ANYONE* done ANY research into projects like this?

Anyone? He says he paid .01 pds for it! Great, fine, whatever. I paid nothing and I don't want the games because I already have them (you can check on my steam account if you want). I have no interest in this HIB, whereas with the first one, I put up $25 for the bundle!

I personally didn't find a lot of value with the second bundle, but I got it and put $5 to it. It was games I didn't demo, and being in school, I have my own bills to pay.

The "pay what you want" model is just that. You pay what you personally think the bundle is worth! He doesn't value the bundle that much, and I find it absolutely amazing how so many people want to guilt one person for what he thinks it's worth. It's like complaining about piracy in this day and age. It happens. It's about an underserved customer and everyone's too strung out on saying "wow, what a dick move" instead of the question "how do I make the bundle more valuable to people".

As of my writing, the bundle has made $798K. His .01 pds (pence) hasn't affected how much others are putting to it. @notch has donated $4000+ to the project. He's not the only high roller out there. Some are going to value it highly, some won't. Like the project that I linked to in my last post in this thread, it's a split between a ton of factors. Still, that says nothing about how others feel about it. Personally, it's time to move on. He paid his money, he got the games. The world does not stop because of one person not valuing the game highly. Others pirate the game, and tell friends that it's good. Those friends might go to buy it. There's plenty of research to confirm this.

The question that others might ask is how to make the game more valuable to more people. If all everyone does is focus on one person's behavior, then quite frankly, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Maze1125]

For the love of PETE FOLKS!

Has *ANYONE* done ANY research into projects like this?

Anyone? He says he paid .01 pds for it! Great, fine, whatever. I paid nothing and I don't want the games because I already have them (you can check on my steam account if you want). I have no interest in this HIB, whereas with the first one, I put up $25 for the bundle!

I personally didn't find a lot of value with the second bundle, but I got it and put $5 to it. It was games I didn't demo, and being in school, I have my own bills to pay.

The "pay what you want" model is just that. You pay what you personally think the bundle is worth! He doesn't value the bundle that much, and I find it absolutely amazing how so many people want to guilt one person for what he thinks it's worth. It's like complaining about piracy in this day and age. It happens. It's about an underserved customer and everyone's too strung out on saying "wow, what a dick move" instead of the question "how do I make the bundle more valuable to people".

As of my writing, the bundle has made $798K. His .01 pds (pence) hasn't affected how much others are putting to it. @notch has donated $4000+ to the project. He's not the only high roller out there. Some are going to value it highly, some won't. Like the project that I linked to in my last post in this thread, it's a split between a ton of factors. Still, that says nothing about how others feel about it. Personally, it's time to move on. He paid his money, he got the games. The world does not stop because of one person not valuing the game highly. Others pirate the game, and tell friends that it's good. Those friends might go to buy it. There's plenty of research to confirm this.

The question that others might ask is how to make the game more valuable to more people. If all everyone does is focus on one person's behavior, then quite frankly, you're doing it wrong.

Yeah, you'd be totally right, except for the fact your premise is totally wrong.

What I meant to say is that I don't value each of these games at 1p. I haven't actually played them but it takes a lot more effort for them to be worth 1p. I paid 1p simply because I had the option too. The organisers gave me the option too do it, so I did.

If these were 5 cars and I was told I could pay how much I wanted with the money going to charity and the manufacturers - I would still pay 1p.

He doesn't value the games at $0.01, he fully recognises that they are worth more than that and chooses to pay less just because he can.
If he honestly thought all 5 games were worth just $0.01 then he should pay that. He might need a lesson in the worth of things, but he wouldn't be doing anything wrong.
But that isn't the case, he recognises they are worth more than that but doesn't pay the amount he thinks they are worth and simply pays as little as he can get away with because he's that sort of person.

If he thought they were only worth $0.01 then this would be an issue of economics, but that's not the case, he's simply being selfish and trying to get as much as he can while paying as little as possible, and so it's an issue of social morality, not economics. He says it himself "If these were 5 cars and I was told I could pay how much I wanted with the money going to charity and the manufacturers - I would still pay 1p."

If morality wasn't part of the question then everyone would just pay $0.01 and such pricing systems would fail outright.

 

[manythings]

I take it I'm not the only one who has donated just $0.01 ..

That really makes me sad :\ These indie devs throw out these awesome games, in an awesome promotion, to try and raise some money for charity (and themselves). They give us the option to pay what we would like, and split that money up how we see fit. Yet, some people would rather pay a penny because they can *sigh*

Don't take me the wrong way, I'm not saying to spend a fortune. But, for God sakes, you can't even throw them $1? For 5 friggin games??? Just saying...

I know we're of different opinions, but if it makes you feel better - I have donated £0.01 to charity (on the first HB) and £0.02 to the devs (HB 2 + 3)

What's really sad is that you feel totally justified in being that cheap.

It's not like these guys didn't expect this. You choose your own price, that's just saying 'you can pay $0.01 for this, and we really won't mind.'

HIBs are awesome. Never bought one myself, but this one is worth whatever ridiculous amount Notch donated just for VVVVVV

I get that you can pay whatever you want but to pay a penny and flaunt that fact? That's just being a jerk off. I paid ten dollars because I want to encourage this thing even though it would've been far easier and cheaper to pay almost nothing.

 

[Gindil]

What I meant to say is that I don't value each of these games at 1p. I haven't actually played them but it takes a lot more effort for them to be worth 1p. I paid 1p simply because I had the option too. The organisers gave me the option too do it, so I did.

If these were 5 cars and I was told I could pay how much I wanted with the money going to charity and the manufacturers - I would still pay 1p.

He doesn't value the games at $0.01, he fully recognises that they are worth more than that and chooses to pay less just because he can.
If he honestly thought all 5 games were worth just $0.01 then he should pay that. He might need a lesson in the worth of things, but he wouldn't be doing anything wrong.
But that isn't the case, he recognises they are worth more than that but doesn't pay the amount he thinks they are worth and simply pays as little as he can get away with because he's that sort of person.

If he thought they were only worth $0.01 then this would be an issue of economics, but that's not the case, he's simply being selfish and trying to get as much as he can while paying as little as possible, and so it's an issue of social morality, not economics. He says it himself "If these were 5 cars and I was told I could pay how much I wanted with the money going to charity and the manufacturers - I would still pay 1p."

If morality wasn't part of the question then everyone would just pay $0.01 and such pricing systems would fail outright.

I think we all agree that Nightmare is basically gaming the system. That's firmly established. I'm pretty sure that because of his behavior (IE the flaunting of the 1p) it actually caused some people to go and donate even more. Personally, everyone's throwing a downright hissy fit for nothing. He said he'd only pay 1p because the system allows him to do so. Ok, that means the system has failed to provide an incentive to do more. It's a reason I kind of ignore the HIB myself. When the first HIB complained about people downloading on Bittorrent (Link [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humble_Indie_Bundle#Piracy]), did that stop people from buying the games? No, it did not. Somehow, everyone wants to guilt him into paying more. Social norms would say he's paying too little. But that doesn't stop anyone else from paying more.

Looking at other experiments with "pay what you want" models, people are more likely to buy [http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20110715/11105715106/when-stuff-is-free-were-more-likely-to-buy.shtml] when things are free. They also are more likely to buy when a charity is involved. Hell, some people will pay more [http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101028/23482911646/panera-s-pay-what-you-want-restaurants-are-working.shtml] to make up for that disparity, which is why I'm saying it's a waste of time to try to convince Nightmare otherwise.

If anything, this shows the weakness of the Humble Indie Bundle. From a pure economic standpoint, they've given no incentive to others for 2 turns into donating at certain tiers, similar to Kickstart or Rockethub [http://www.rockethub.com/projects/2165-extra-credits]. Now, notice the tiers on the right. Notice how they asked for $15,000 and have received well over 634% of the asking price (speaking of which, I want a T-Shirt!). So all the moral affect does is complain about his not paying enough, with a few anecdotal increases in sales.

Honestly, it's the same as everyone thinking they can fight piracy by enforcing the law against it. Or, they complain that Free 2 Play games aren't good because the "quality is cheapened". There's some good games out there. You can't fight piracy, only learn from it.

 

[Maze1125]

From a pure economic standpoint,

And that is precisely why you're not getting what we're saying.

We're not complaining because we think they're losing money.
We're not complaining because we think we can make him give more.
We're not complaining because we think he is solely responsible for economic failure of the country.

We're complaining because we think what he did was wrong. I don't give a fuck if my statement is going to make any kind of difference at all, I'm still going to make he because he did something morally bankrupt and I think it shows that he is a pretty awful person and I want to make that statement.

Nothing you said addresses that at all.

This isn't a matter of economics at all.

 

[Gindil]

From a pure economic standpoint,

And that is precisely why you're not getting what we're saying.

We're not complaining because we think they're losing money.
We're not complaining because we think we can make him give more.
We're not complaining because we think he is solely responsible for economic failure of the country.

We're complaining because we think what he did was wrong. I don't give a fuck if my statement is going to make any kind of difference at all, I'm still going to make he because he did something morally bankrupt and I think it shows that he is a pretty awful person and I want to make that statement.

Nothing you said addresses that at all.

This isn't a matter of economics at all.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. Seeing as how there's been people using the exact same "pay what you want" model, I'm sure there's other cheapos that didn't pay what others believed was a fair share. I saw him getting lambasted for about 3 pages and stated it's time to move on. Others paid the difference, which I've pointed out. He gets to pay what he want, he did. If all everyone wants to do is think he should pay more, well, good luck in trying to do so. I don't think it's a moral bankruptcy. It's the same as people paying a penny for the new Radiohead mp3 if given a chance. That's the main thing I pointed out. It's a failure in how the system works.

 

[Maze1125]

Seeing as how there's been people using the exact same "pay what you want" model, I'm sure there's other cheapos that didn't pay what others believed was a fair share.

The issue isn't that he didn't pay what I thought was a fair share, the issue is that he didn't pay what he thought was a fair share.

He made a decision to refuse to give people money he knew they deserved simply because he could get away with it. That's immoral.

I saw him getting lambasted for about 3 pages and stated it's time to move on.

That's just your opinion, obviously those who were still doing it felt differently.

Others paid the difference, which I've pointed out.

And now you're back on the economics of the situation.
The issue isn't at all whether or not the developers made money. Do you think he would have made a different decision if the developers were losing out?
Of course he wouldn't, he'd have just seen that as justification that paying $0.01 was fine as everyone else was doing it.

The issue isn't the money, it's his selfish attitude.

He gets to pay what he want, he did.

Just because he's legally allowed to do it, doesn't justify it.

If all everyone wants to do is think he should pay more, well, good luck in trying to do so.

Again, I doubt any of us believe what we're saying is going to change anything, we're saying it for the sake of saying it. We want to make the statement for its own sake.

I don't think it's a moral bankruptcy.

What's moral bankruptcy other than doing anything you can get away with to get the most for yourself regardless of anyone else?

It's the same as people paying a penny for the new Radiohead mp3 if given a chance.

And the same is true of them.

That's the main thing I pointed out. It's a failure in how the system works.

You can't put the blame on only one part of the system. The failure lies in the two issues together.

If there weren't people in the world who were willing to rip others off for their own sake then this wouldn't be a failure in the system.
Equally, if it were possible to do the system with a minimum price, without undermining the whole principle, then it wouldn't matter so much that some people are willing to be so entirely selfish.

Problem comes from the two combined, not either on their own.

But, again, we're on the economics of the situation, which don't matter at all. Even if they system were perfect, and he couldn't exploit it at all, that wouldn't change the fact he's still the same morally bankrupt person who would exploit the system if he could.

The fact that this time he could doesn't make him that way, it merely proves it.

 

[MrTub]

Hmm.. After reading this thread Im going to buy the bundle for 0.05 just because some people are breaking the rules with their comment but I know they will not get a punishment.

Will probably not download it since most indie stuff is crap.

 

[WalrusPowers]

Does anybody else feel bad about the payment dividing thing. I just can't decide between giving money to charity or to Indy game devs. Sure, you can just even it out but maybe going full for one of the others would be better.

Drives me insane

 

[ydkwidrmw]

I think you should also be able to allocate between developers as well. I already owned 3 of the games and felt a bigger share should have been given to the devs I'm actually buying the pack for.

 

[Cptn_M]

Could we please change the topic ?
I also think that people who pays 0,01$ (yes I am from Europe and we use a comma for that ) are making me sad, that we share the same race (humanity), but I think this got chewed through enough.

It is a fact that we can't change.
Accept it.

Back on Topic:
had 2 of them but now I own all 5 on steam. Rejoice!
I think 10$ is reasonable since I won't play them a lot/at all (yes I hoard games for the sake of having them (why do I do that (why do i talk to myself in text form?)?))

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Well, I bought all the other ones and they haven't let me down so I guess I'll be buying this one as well. But here's a question... normally, if you buy a game on Steam that you already have, you can gift it to someone else. This isn't on Steam, but is redeemable on Steam... I already own VVVVVV, so can I gift it? I'm buying this pack regardless.

 

[Cptn_M]

Well, I bought all the other ones and they haven't let me down so I guess I'll be buying this one as well. But here's a question... normally, if you buy a game on Steam that you already have, you can gift it to someone else. This isn't on Steam, but is redeemable on Steam... I already own VVVVVV, so can I gift it? I'm buying this pack regardless.

I can gift my extra copy of "cogs"