Sure, if you're buying crappy games. Are you? I know I buy games I will never play, but I don't buy crap. I buy stuff that I think is interesting and I *might* play some day. I have less choice with bundles, but most bundles don't include crap.

If I think about my spending in games now vs. before, more of my money has gone to experimental, artistic or niche games. If I'd be buying less games per year, I'd buy more 'safe' stuff like sequels. Even if I don't ever play those experimental titles, I'm not the least unhappy that my money goes towards taking this industry in new directions. I also have to say that I've been pleasantly surprised by many of them, and my palate has grown more varied. My husband had almost given up on gaming until he started going through the Humble Bundle backlog. Most of those games he'll just quickly try and goes to the next, but so far each bundle has had one or two surprise hits we'd never experienced had it not been in a bundle.

I know this is anecdotal, but I hear people saying they've bough games from Steam sales because the game had been reviewed really well and people had been recommending them, and since the price was so low then why not? I don't think people are buying bad games because they're cheap when there are too many cheap good games to buy.

Maybe so.

And yet you split bundles.

Which experiment do you mean?

They had pay-what-you-want sales two or three times where somehow the price was not really PWYW but a more convoluted scheme including a high priced part and a low priced part. Afaik they stoped doing that.

Another attempt was a low permanent 30% discount albeit for a longer time 2 months. They definitely did it only once and it didn't sound as if they ever wanted to do it again.

So I guess the results weren't satisfying and we are back with weekend and daily sales of 1 to 20 games and two times a year almost all for at least 50%. The other times it's bascially not worth visiting GOG. :)

I was thinking about people having a mega huge backlog (like > 500 unplayed games). If someone spent $500 in games that he/she hasn't played, he/she could think that it's a waste of money, and couldn't afford of spending more in unplayed games, since he/she has to focus on essential to him/her?

I agree, but gamers are mainly casuals, and since budgets are increasing, the number of devs and projects are increasing, even if the number of gamers is increasing, would the number of hobbyists enough to satisfy everyone?

I agree, when I was thinking about ambitious games, I wasn't refering to CoD or GTA, or any fancy game with same-as-old gameplay or storytelling or both. I was more refering to games like Torment: Tides of Numenera, The Banner Saga or The Long Dark. Graphics can be nice sure, but I am expecting of more games of that kind in 2013: more mature games with not only killing gameplays, with good storytelling or atmosphere, etc... More to games with a real huge Choices and Consequences' tree, allowing the player to explore, to use diplomacy, to fight if he/she has to, to spare life if he/she wants to. And these kinds of games need more budget than linear games with same deepness.

But if you look at KS statistics here, more than 65% of gaming projects failed to succeed, and if IIRC budgets asking for more than $1M had an very low rate of success, compared to projects asking for less. I think it's a huge rate of failure.

If the "normal price" of games is so decreasing, as many people think that crowdfunding is a pre-order, I'm expecting many people to complain about the first pledge allowed to have the digital game (like here). So what's next? Having starting pledge at the "real value" of games of tomorrow, like what, $1 or $2? Sure, there could be more people pledging, but what about the total amount of pledges? What about the total amount of money asked?

So again, if budgets are increasing, if the number of devs is increasing, if the number of projects is increasing, if the price of games is decreasing, if the number of people is increasing, is that rate of increase of hobbyists (since they will always be in a minority) enough? I don't think so.
In the other hand, I disagree with people saying "the KS fatigue", because I think too that there'll still be people want to make projects to succeed.

But if you are a new developper with a small team and you have a great ambitious project, your chances of success of funding are tiny, and you will have to reduce your project to make it happen, hoping to make it happen many years later when you have got sufficient exposure, at best. Or you have to forget it, in the worst case.

What I'm afraid of, is that even crowdfunding games would be focused on what people already use to play, and on big names of the industry who would be the only ones to make ambitious games - if they dare be interested in.

Some are to expensive and GOG needs to work on those.

I have some games on wish list but Im not paying more then $4.00 for each of them, because of how old they are.
But GOG has them at $9.99 each

Ill just watch each sale and wait for their turn to come around.

I haven't bought a game in a year but that's not because they are too expensive. It's just that I have so many games I haven't played at the moment - it makes it kind of pointless for me to buy any other games in my wishlist.

so in short no, I actually think most of the games are too cheap - I feel bad when I buy a game on sale sometimes actually.. This is why I like bandcamp for example - pay what you think the thing you are buying is worth. Great concept and motivates me to spend money!

I don't know. As said, I usually don't even recognize most of the games in active indie bundles, at least so much that I could make up my mind whether I'd consider it a good game. Or if I do, I probably already have them at that point. There is such a massive influx of indie games that at least I don't keep up which are good and which are not, before they enter bundles.

Sometimes these blind purchases turn out to be quite good (Awesomenauts, LIMBO etc.), sometimes not (Canabalt).

It's possible, but it seems to me like people are increasing their backlogs just out of the pleasure of buying and owning more games. people don't necessarily think that they are spending $500 per year on games, only that they're spending $2 per game, which makes it seem like a cheap habit.

Hard to say, but the number of hobbyists also keeps on increasing.

Yes, and those types of games don't seem to be coming from the big devs. It seems to me like those games come from the devs who are getting a surge of money from the discounts and bundles.

The old truth was that the only way to compete in the gaming indistry is to be really, really big and have inflated budgets. The situation has changed now, and for the better. You *can* succeed with a small team and a small budget.

True, but how much of it is because of cheap prices? i think the rate of failure would be huge just the same.

That's always been the case, but indie devs seem to be having more money now on hand than ever before. There are always limits to how many devs the industry can support, but this is a healthy industry. There have never been so many game developers making money, and especially the indie scene and middle-tier has exploded. Some of it migt have happened at the expense of the big guns, but I don't personally think that's a problem.
The way I see it, it's a bit of a tip to indie development in general. They don't necessarily succeed at their first attempt, but getting some money from the attempt keeps them trying, and maybe doing something great some day. I think it's in our benefit to have a large pool of devs trying new things. It'll increase the number of turkies for sure, but also the diamonds.

Right, because wasting a resource I will never use makes far less sense. That's the kind of squandering excess that led us into the current resource-scarce world we now inhabit.

EDIT: Removed my unconstructive comment and posted a more thorough reply below.

Nope, and here's why: Most mobile apps, regardless of retail cost, come with a much bigger price - IAPs and data-mining permissions.

GOG ftw!!

If you really care about this issue, it's better to engage your opposition constructively. Trying to get in a one-line zinger may feel like a win, but it doesn't advance your argument. Worse, it can make you look childish and arrogant, and is a behaviour which people associate with trolls. Those are all things which will only increase how entrenched people become in their stances.

If I were to reply against my own post, I would have gone with something like this:

You say you understand the value of paying a fair price, but you also break apart bundles where the price is already minimal, further reducing the value of the items and cheating the vendor of a fair price. Isn't it hypocritical to denounce a practice on one hand and then indulge in it yourself on the other?

Something like that makes a much better argument, and carries the force of logic. In fact, I've almost convinced myself. My "out" is that I pay much more than the BTA on bundles when I know there are games I don't want in it and will give away, and that this extra payment is to cover the fact. Naturally I could buy several bundles at the asking price instead of one at the combined price and be more in line with the terms and conditions, but my credit card flags up when there are multiple payments to the same place in a short period of time. So it is more economical for me to make one big payment instead.

That being said, I admit there is still room for the argument to be made against what I am doing. But so far no one has properly engaged me on the issue. Instead they have simply sniped and scolded without ever giving a better argument than "because". Some people prefer to feel like they are oppressed and in the minority because they are right and everyone else is stupid, so there is no hope for constructive engagement from them. But for people who genuinely care about being heard and getting their point across, I hope they turn to using real dialogues.

I think I can weigh in with a constructive argument. Everybody understanding the value of a fair price could easily try to donate large amounts directly to workers without going through all the hops like not buying at the cheapest sale etc. where the money probably is lost on the way via coporate profits or taxes or just inefficiency. After all cheap prices are also a sign of highly efficient workings of an economy. So while your excuses for splitting bundles seem reasonable to some extent they probably change not much about the situation (undervalued work) that you described. More drastic steps would be necessary to really change something. I don't see what could be an effective measure to really improve the situation of the workers at Walmart. Everybody should pay for good quality a reasonable amount, but paying premium will probably not much improve the situation of the workers directly. So you touch an interesting point but we also need ideas for solutions to go forward. So far being a cheapskate seems reasonable as long as you don't overdo it.

Thank you for the response, and you bring up a good point which I had neglected. Namely, that paying higher prices does not always translate in more money to the worker. As you say, we need more responsible corporate governance as well as fair prices for a livable wage.

Your advice about being a bargain hunter in moderation is good as well. I am more than happy to pay fair prices for essentials such as food and utilities, and am one of the rare Americans that does not balk at paying his taxes because I realise we need the infrastructure those taxes fund. My bargain-hunting side tends to come out for luxury goods (or if you prefer, non-essentials), such as games. This is abetted by my huge backlog of the same - I am not motivated to buy many games since I have so many yet unplayed, but if an irresistible bargain appears then I am more likely to indulge.

So long as I find some of the titles here retailing (not on sale either) in stores for almost half of the price of GOG... I have to say yes, for some titles. I generally wait for those games to go on sale here just because I'd prefer it being DRM-free.

Just one very strong wish of mine that I already have for a long time but which is not really relevant for this discussion here: I would like to have on every piece of clothing that is sold a tag which says what the average salary of the person producing this piece was. It doesn't hurt at all because customers can perfectly choose to ignore this information but still I know that the clothes companies would campaign against such a move with all their might. Every customer could then decide if it is really worth buying the cheaper shirt when he sees what the workers who did the actual work got from each. Wonderful. A bit complex but simply great. And that's why it won't happen (soon)!

One could extend it to all products. Just a public database where companies list their workers average salaries per product that they sell.

It would still be in the hands of the customers to ensure that the workers get a fair salary, but without this information I don't see how they can make the right decisions. Without such information one of the best alternative strategies is to be a cheapskate (rather I have the money than somebody else) and try to donate to your less fortunate fellow citizens and/or try to increase taxes on the more fortunate ones.

I guess that's what you are doing. Saving your money so that one day you can do lots of purely good things with it. I do the same.
Then one should buy it in the Appstore.