back_by_demand :
The 1 cent donation bundle is a stupid and extreme example, Steam have already proved that bundle packs and time limited special sales can drive vast numbers. If that 100,000 had to pay $1 instead of 1 cent, the number of downloaders would have to be 100 times less to make the same money. A dollar is nothing to some people, they could have made 10 times as much and if they had properly distributed it like Steam there would have been almost no passing on or piracy. Good principle, idiot moneymen.
Back_by_demand, I agree, it was a stupid business plan and they could have gone about it in a way that makes more money. The thing is though, even though it wasn't intended as such, it ended up being a neat little experiment. In the 90's when I was buying Duke Nukem 3D and Tribes and whatever, PC gamers who pirated - and there were LOTS of them - would claim that they only pirated because "games were too expensive" and they wouldn't pirate if they were more affordable. In the 2000's when game developers began fighting back and adding in DRM, PC gamers complained bout price and constantly complained about the restriction of DRM, saying that "pirated copies of games are easier to use, so they're punishing the people who play legally - so I pirate to use a less problematic version of the game." They also still complained about price, and they didn't care about paying as much because most of the money went to he publishers anyways..
Whether they intended it or not, the Humble Indie Bundle put these two very, very oft repeated claims about piracy to the test because one, it was as cheap as it gets, and two, there was no DRM whatsoever. What did they show? That the PC community was full of $*(% when it tried to sound like it actually had reasons for piracy other than being cheap and not really giving a rats' arse whether the people developing these games got paid or not.
So, it was bad business, but it proved one thing - that when PC gamers had a chance to prove that they actually had a good reason for pirating, more than 1 in 4 of them were cheap and underhanded. I can imagine that a lot of companies were looking at this debacle and said "Yeah, there is proof that we were right to start using DRM."
And Skeptic, I agree with you. I'm not trying to paint these companies as some saints just out to protect themselves. They are companies that exist to make money and will squeeze every dollar out of us that they can. Calling it a war is not a bad way to look at it - underhanded, greedy companies try and rip off the gamers, and underhanded greedy gamers try and rip off the companies. What I'm pointing out is that this myth that the PC gaming community is by and large fair and won't screw companies that don't screw with them is utter BS - they will lie, cheat, and steal, and then go in forums and type in al caps that they are just wonderful, reasonable people who want fair treatment. There are plenty of honest gamers, but there are *loads* of people who will pirate when they know any money they donate goes to charity and the devs and that's it.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram