Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Humble Indie "Frozenbyte" Bundle 3 Slows Down

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    510

    Default

    For those who haven't bought the bundle yet: Trine is worth it. The Jack Claw license is a damn shame, but Trine more than makes up for it!

    I also have an idea of how to get the average purchase price up: hook it up to something like Facebook (optionally, of course) so that everybody can see who is buying the bundle, and for how much. The mechanism of a social network will spread the word and will pressure people to spend more money.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skeetre View Post
    This could be bad for Linux gamers in the long run though... we're showing that we'll pay more for games. I could see a windows game being released for $30, and for Linux getting charged $40 for the same game. With some excuse that it costs them more to develop it for the Linux OS.
    I won't buy a game in such scenario then.
    I hope producers get this: Linux users reward freedom of choice.
    Being forced to pay more than a Windows copy would be viewed as an insult.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeiF View Post
    I won't buy a game in such scenario then.
    I hope producers get this: Linux users reward freedom of choice.
    Being forced to pay more than a Windows copy would be viewed as an insult.
    There's a certain cost to develop a Linux port even though artwork and other resources can be shared across target OSes. If it turns out that the Linux-specific costs can only be covered by paying a relatively higher per-copy price for the Linux version, what *would* you expect to happen ?

    - vendors don't produce a Linux port because they would lose money (no games)
    - vendors produce a Linux port and lose money on it (no future)
    - vendors charge more for the Linux port to make it worth doing ("an insult")

    Are there other options I missed ? Which option would you expect to see ?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    There's a certain cost to develop a Linux port even though artwork and other resources can be shared across target OSes. If it turns out that the Linux-specific costs can only be covered by paying a relatively higher per-copy price for the Linux version, what *would* you expect to happen ?

    - vendors don't produce a Linux port because they would lose money (no games)
    - vendors produce a Linux port and lose money on it (no future)
    - vendors charge more for the Linux port to make it worth doing ("an insult")

    Are there other options I missed ? Which option would you expect to see ?
    Don't produce Linux games if you lose money on it and don't want to lose money on it. Some games are ported because it's cool (Id games), some games are ported because it makes money (World of Goo). Some games are developed on multiple platforms from the start (Wolfire games).

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Making a program multiplatform from day one is not as difficult as porting a program made exclusively for one platform.
    Specially if such a game uses well known multiplatform engines (which because they are already multiplatform, they don't need to be ported).

    For example, if some vendor produces a Windows game based exclusively on Unigine they have no excuse to make a Linux version. And if they make it I will not accept to be charged more than other platforms, because the cost of doing so is almost negligible.

    If they charge more is because of poor planing or just because they see an opportunity to charge more.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •