Why should it matter? Because people would be willing to pay more if they know where their money is going. This is a proven sociological fact. In terms of money, most people have to budget and rationalise how they spend it, and this revolves entirely around the perceived worth of the transaction. The perceived worth is often enhanced favourably when this information is provided. THAT is why it matters.

Cool. More of this should be encouraged, in my opinion.

Actually, yes they probably should. This is because it will help them in the long run, because once again, this alters the perceived worth of a transaction for many people. As a species, we tend to have the desire to help people in need, if only because we hope that people would do the same for us. Thus, people would pay more (and, indeed, have paid more) if they feel that the money is important, rather than simply being wasted or acquired for greed.

First thing first, I am NOT interested in the base game. It has NOT piques my interest, and thus I am looking to see if the perceived value of the deluxe content is enough to persuade me to buy this game. Unfortunately, as it stands, I do not think that it is, given the information available.

Anyway, that aside, the perceived value of the music would actually increase in the eyes of people if the composer has had little to no upfront money and a small percentage of sales. The reason for this is simple - if people LIKE the music, then they will support the composer, so that the composer can go on to create more music that they like. In fact, many people will pay what is essentially charity for such a composer if they like them, and feel that they need the money.

Believe it or not, this is typically the biggest deterrent to piracy, and why GOG has such a wide fan base. If you ask the majority of people who have ever pirated anything to justify their actions, the biggest justification is that certain companies can afford the losses from piracy, while others can not. People are more likely to pirate games from the massive publishers like EA and Ubisoft, rather than smaller indie developers, because of this. Likewise, many people buy games from GOG for two main reasons - they want to support the developers of the games they like, so that those developers can go on to develop more games, and they want to support GOG, so that GOG can go on acquiring more games in the future (and in turn, go on to support the devs the games come from).

That link is so cynical - although there is a lot of truth to that marketing method, it fails to take in to account the way people actually think, and thus how they actually percieve value.

The better publishers, for example, have stopped with the idea that they are providing products, but are instead focusing on the fact that they are providing services. However, this is still combined with FARTS, simply because most publishers don't actually have the faith in their own abilities to understand that people are willing to pay for a service and support franchises that they naturally like.

Of course, this makes it incredibly hard for new developers and new franchises to break out on to the market. The way around this is to actually develop the fan base that will ultimately support your product, rather than simply trying to push units out of the door.

The idea of making people pay for deluxe content actually seems more like trying to milk as much money out of a product before dumping it, especially at this pre-order stage. It is a fire and forget policy, that smacks of a rather cynical cash grab on the part of the dev. Instead, they would be better off giving away the soundtracks, providing more gameplay trailers, and even releasing a demo version of the game, so that people can becomes fans of the game, the devs, and the franchise.

As it stands, this approach will actually be more likely to cripple the devs, as it makes people more wary of the product. People are less willing to take a gamble on this game, and will typically wait to see what others think of the game before picking it up. I certainly hope that the devs aren't relying on pre-orders to fund this game, as they are likely to be disappointed.

Thank you for this explanation. I was wondering about the - shall we say, slim - descriptions of some recent games and was thinking of posting to see if anyone else noticed. I'm glad I wasn't the only one. :)

I'm not sure about this. I love Myst clones and would buy it just based on that, but the gamecard seems to imply that puzzles are less a priority of this game as is making it accessible to a wide audience (uh oh, where have I heard that before). I hope it just doesn't end up as a Dear Esther/Amnesia Pigs/Gone Home type game, so-called "Walking Simulators" more focused on being "immersive" and telling a story than on challenging puzzles. This is also why I'm not fond of pre-order discounts, because it's tempting you to buy a game before you even know it's worth buying.

EDIT: Also speaking on first-person adventures, where is Journeyman Project: Pegasus Prime ScummVM port?

I think the teaser video is counter-productive - it gives so little information about the game or how it plays that I am discouraged from pre-ordering.

Thanks for the effort on adding newer products, but in my opinion this is a failure of marketing you should avoid.

oh yes, that is a possibility. Just read about "SpecialEffect" and new input devices for people with disabilities and thought that it was a great thing :)

This looks really interesting, must get it. Also much thanks for being awesome as always for the nice pre-order offer

+1. They're just chasing for a bonus on their preorders.
If you pay extra, it's not bonus.

FWIW 14.99 is a tad steep for a soundtrack - most soundtracks which are sold separately on bandcamp etc are around 5-10 buck mark (Strike Zero's nice one was around 10 bucks).Having said that, it could be worse - Kickstarted Dreamfall Chapters The Journey - to get the sound track you needed to pay double the game price $25 (including a couple of pdf files.the Audio CD Soundtrack physical addon listed at $30 (no digital soundtrack option for some reason)..like wtf....) ----> i bet GOG wont be offering this deluxe version when its out :D

And I tell you this is fucked up because it boils down to camwhoring: supporting the lifestyle of an artist instead of their actual work. This sort of mentality rewards people who are good at public relations rather than people who make good stuff, shifts the focus from the work to the (fake) personality of the creator.

Now, it's normal to expect devs not to be . I'm not talking ab out the basic "don't be an asshole" thing. I'm talking about calls for a [url=http://www.salon.com/2013/12/31/yoga_spinning_and_a_murder_my_strange_months_at_lululemon/]culture of near-mandatory disclosure where the artist is expected to make entertainment out of their private life.

No, this is fucked up. You want youtube mouthbreathers decide who gets paid and who doesn't in a bizarre hot-or-not contest. "Greedy or nice? vote now!!!1!" As long as piracy is illegal and you are required to pay money for a copyrighted work that is being sold for money, making the creator to disclose their expenses is no less wrong than making you disclose your private life to your employer in order to receive your salary.

I'm not talking about this game in particular and you in particular. Cases where auxiliary material is in more demand than the base product are few and far between. In the vast majority of cases, people buy soundtracks because they like or are interested in the game.

Uh, no, I don't believe this in the slightest because it's just plain false. "Support the creator" is indie rhetoric, the success of which varies. Humble Bundle posts insane amounts of $$ but amok here who apparently has insider info tells us they're not exactly rolling in all that money. GOG's primary fan base are adults who grew up playing "old games" and value convenience above chump change; the money they pay for those old games goes to anyone but the original creators. And they are okay with that; they have this unexamined Kantian nail in the head that piracy is wrong because it's wrong and you wouldn't download a car except they totally would if they could, and they pay for games because of convenience and habit and respect for GOG. Not for Meadowbrook and Generic Capital Investment United Partnership.

That link is entirely correct, because that's what youa re saying ITT except with mushier words. You want content creators to disclose details of their lives (or, rather, create fake personalities more suited for begging for money) like reality tv stars and make a virtue out of donating money to a specific nice person because they're so nice, awww, rather than paying for the creation of new cultural treasures. "College girl [s]does anal[/s] makes an RPG for the first time." I'm not saying there's no money in it. I'm saying this is fucked up, and the industry in which popularity contests, cronyism and camwhoring are the primary product isn't going to produce things I and other like-minded people want to see.

And here's the real-life example why this attitude is fucked up.You're here ITT giving straight-from-the-ass financial advice to the devs while being completely clueless*, and you think they should disclose their financial information so you could give better advice. Which is to say, devs must spend a considerable amount of time persuading various randroids and cryptonuts that their expenses are sound, pls giev $$. Yes, I totally get that by not doing so, they're going to lose you as a customer - but it's a weird, unreasonable, creepy, and most of all un-economic demand. Because establishing a meaningful public relationship with every clueless krugerite and juggling interpretations and lies only to make, like, $9 per customer is not economically viable and never will be.

*inb4 NO U: being the executive producer of a game** which is sold here on GOG never felt so good.
**completely unrelated to Ether One

Which either means they don't have a high opinion of their own game and expect to make most of the sales during the preorder or that they want to give a sensible discount. After all preordering is like taking part in a lottery.

The equivalent to the "Pot of luck" sale from last weekend. Very cheap but you don't know what you get.

I don't even need to read all of this to see that you have clearly misunderstood the difference between being a celebrity and providing a service.

Being a celebrity is based entirely upon who you are, self promotion, and the entire pursuit of fame. This is NOT a service, because celebrities don't really help anyone other than themselves. Some celebrities provide a service, but being a celebrity is not, in itself, a service.

Everything to do with being a celebrity is ultimately detrimental to a service, because it requires that the individual do things in order to maintain their celebrity status. This clearly detracts from their work, and the services they provide.

For the most part, people don't really care about celebrities - rather, they take an interest in how the services such celebrities may provide are affected by their private lives. There is no requirements for this, but in general, most devs should be open and transparent enough to disclose factors in their private lives, their business dealings, and so on. The reason why they should do this isn't related to moral or ethical grounds, but because it is normally beneficial for such devs to do so.

Support the creator is clearly indie rhetoric, as you say, but it is still otherwise valid. This is because the full rhetoric is actually "support the creator so that they can continue to create." In essence, support the service they provide so that they can continue to provide the service. It is not "support the creator so that they can waste everything on hookers and blow while they go on celebrity big brother following their inevitable rehab."

Contrary to opinion, there is a large difference between "making a living" and "rolling in dough." Ultimately, as long as any dev is able to make enough revenue to support themselves and their ability to continue to provide a service, then they are "making a living."

As for that link - what that link is actually on about is advertising and marketing spin, which is the product equivalent of being a celebrity. It is about producing hype, and making people act upon things based on who or what they are, rather than their actual worth. It is based on the idea that perpetuates the idea that somehow Pepsi and Coca-Cola are somehow worth more than normal cola, simply because they are Pepsi and Coca-Cola.

That has NOTHING to do with what I am saying, regardless of the "mushier words" I appear to be using. I am not advocating celebrity in any way. I am advocating that being a dev is a service-based profession, not a product-based one. This is a fundamental shift in many industries, particularly in creative media. Musicians are actually make more of a living touring and performing, than they are simply creating music, because music is a product, while performing is a service. This actually makes content-creation more of a form of advertising, than anything else.

This also applies to devs, because while they create games, in today's consumerist society, such content creation is really just advertising for their future ability to create games. This is because, games design actually has a large academic element involved, which is why such things like the GDC exist. It is advertising for their expertise as a games dev. It is their portfolio, much like an archetect, artist, or writer. All of these are typically judged by quality over quantity, and supporting them and their service allows them to concentrate on quality over quantity.

Ultimately, you are confusing my comments as advocating celebrity as the primary focus, when I am actually advocating a service as being the primary focus. This is because providing a service is about much more than just producing products. Products are standalone, where as a service is a continual process. A service can provide products. Focusing on a service means providing the service that people want to see - and that can include producing things that people want to see.

Any industry in which celebrity is the primary focus will inevitably be fucked up, because celebrity itself is not a service. At best, it is a by-product created through customer actions as a result of the service. If an industry forgoes their actual service for celebrity, then they will find that they will actually have a much reduced service, and their celebrity will also dry up.

Believe it or not, the same actually goes for games as well, and is typically the failing behind franchises. Once such franchises stop focusing on being games, to focus on being "part of the franchise," the franchise will begin to fade. However, it is entirely possible for a game to be part of a franchise, while still being an excellent game, because the franchise aspects are quite often simply a by-product of the game.

The ultimate difficulty however is always going to based on assigning value and worth to a content and service, particularly for an unknown entity such as this game. You are correct in thinking that most people will pick up the soundtrack if they like and support the game, but how is this truly possible if people have yet to experience the game? This is actually more a case of supporting the service provided by the developer, but once again, how can we truly decide on the value of the service, if we have yet to experience that service?

This ultimately comes down to a judgement call based on our own values, our own individual circumstances, and our own experiences. There is no real right or wrong answer here, because we are all individuals, but we are being told that we are getting a pre-order bonus worth $14.99 without being able to justify such a claim. Any additional information to help validate such a claim would therefore be appreciated. However, it is not required, but generally if such information isn't forthcoming, then it typically does not exist.

As for me, while I don't class the freebies GOG.com provides as a "core principle," I feel loathe to support a trend where such freebies (and only such freebies) are assigned such an arbitrarily high value without due merit. It implies that the devs are over-valuing their work, which is akin to arrogance. It is always better that devs under-value their work, and that their customer base clamours to support them. This may not seem like good business sense, but it is good sense when providing a service. Such over-pricing implies that this is a "fire and forget" product from a potential one-hit wonder dev looking for a quick cash-grab.

This, however, deserves a specific response.

For a start, you have no idea about my expertise. As such, to dismiss is as "straight-from-the-ass" while I am being "completely clueless" is just an argument to dismiss me as being unreasonable, thus meaning that you can justify a simple response of "this is fucked up" and "I am not listening to you."

On the contrary, while I may not know the specifics of the given arrangement (which is why I am asking for them, so that I can make a better judgement), I do actually have a significant grounding in the indie development industry, albeit in a different field. This doesn't make me completely clueless, and it doesn't make my financial advice "straight-from-my ass." Instead, it actually represents my ability to pass on my expertise - without actually knowing the expertise of the other person. If my expertise is greater than theirs, then maybe it will help. If not, they are free to ignore it.

Academically, I am a trained psycho-sociologist, which is why I can understand the difference between providing a service - expertise - and being a celebrity. Something which you clearly fail to see, given from your responses that the voluntary disclosure of additional information at request is akin to camwhoring.

I don't know your expertise, so I will refrain from calling you the "krugerite" in this situation. Feel free to share it with me, but don't try and pretend that this is in any way a requirement. You probably should however, if only so that it gives better insight into your responses.

But ultimately, establishing a meaningful public relationship is typically worth a LOT more than $9, particularly in the long term if you are intent upon providing a service. It only fails to make economic sense if you are just selling a single product, and aiming to get units out the door. The fact that such "krugerites" are willing to ask for more information and take an interest in your service should be enough to persuade any service provider that they are not a lost sale, but rather that they are still in the process of making the required judgement call on the value of their service.

No indie dev ever gets anywhere by refusing to deal with their customers. More importantly, dealing with customers is such a big part of being an indie dev, although this is often an undervalued and invisible part of the job for which they rarely get valued for when it comes to selling their products, yet this is very much a fundamental part of the service.

I'll pre-order it just because it looks like my kind of game and because it's only 16.99$, whats that, like, 2 beers? Although I am a little skeptical about pre-ordering indie games (hell, any game for that matter!) I'm quite confident the GOG team makes good choices regarding which games they put out like this.

Looking forward to playing it!

Thank you for the update, Judas!

This trailer does, indeed, showcase a bit better how the game works. It still won't do much for people who wanted a "new" Myst, or those who are actively against story-driven games, but those weren't interested in the first place. I'm a big fan of Dear Esther, but I'm also a fan of point-and-click adventures, and from what I gather Ether One is mixing the best of those. I think people shouldn't be afraid of this game being a "walking simulator" like Gone Home, Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs or Dear Esther (oh, and as a fan of those kinds of games, I resent the ironic air quotes in innovative, they're definitely more innovative than Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty or any of that crap), from the new trailer alone, those fears should be put to rest. It doesn't seem to be as cryptic and hard as Myst, but it definitely has some puzzle elements in there.