The existence of for-pay stuff doesn't hurt you

Published on April 22, 2008 By Draginol In Personal Computing

I read a news announcement about a new freeware program that does some cool stuff. I check it out and it is vastly superior to an existing freeware program. Yet when I read the comments, the new, superior freeware program is being flamed. Why? Because the guy making it also offers a for-pay version that has more features.

I check out the forums of a game I enjoy playing. Normally people are singing the praises of this game. Now, the forum is full of flaming and angst. Why? Because the developer started offering optional premium content for players if they want.

Let me tell those complainers a truth about life: Money is exchanged for goods and services.

Before the current generation of l33t-speaking complainers became the norm on the net, we had a concept called shareware. Someone would make something cool and offer a version of it to try. This version might time out or it might have fewer features or it might just work on the honor system. If users liked it, they bought it. End of story.

Nowadays, we have it better. People make free stuff and release it. No nags. No missing features when compared to other "free" competitors. No time outs. But the developers will also release an even better version. And the complainers get vocal.

What annoys me is that the whiners are attempting to bully people from making stuff that many people like me want. I don't live with my mom in her basement. I don't begrudge paying a few dollars to someone who made something I want. I recognize that I already pay $80 a month for my cell phone and $60 a month for cable so bitching about paying $9 to $20 for something I want is pretty ridiculous.

And I certainly recognize that the mere existence of premium stuff doesn't hurt me. If I want it, I'll pay for it. If I don't, I won't.

Let me give you two examples:

The program ObjectDock is the best dock out there. We make it so I'm biased but it has far more features than any dock out there. It's also free. You want a cool dock on Windows, this is what you get. But there is also ObjectDock Plus. It's $20 but adds a ton of features like tabbed docks. And so what do people say? They'll say that ObjectDock is "payware" or "crippleware". Why? Because a non-free improved version exists.

Similarly, I love Team Fortress 2. It is a great game. And you know what? If Valve created a new character I could play as for say $10 I'd buy it in an instant. I want more characters in TF2 to play as. But you know the reaction they'd get. They'd probably get flamed because the parasite-class would argue that they should get that for free because buying something once to them means that the developers are perpetual slaves to them after.

I understand that we all want to keep from getting nickled and dimed but one assumes that we can make our own judgments as to whether something is worth it or not and allow others to make the same judgment.

Comments (Page 8)

106

ubernaught

on Apr 28, 2008

@ Alfonse,

Firstly, excellent post, I must admit I wasn't thinking in those terms in the slightest. However, while I feel your example carries significant weight (individuals and corps alone adapt to every empirical condition regardless if they manage to smuggle a couple of token principles along for the ride) I don't know if it can be applied to this specific example.

GC2 has more than one byte in the grave, Frogboy has said as much in the recent past, I assume this thread is something of a water test. Is the game itself complete? Sure it is. Does the product contain the undeveloped seeds of a greater future? Sure it does. Is it buggy? I've never thought so. Yet I've noticed that it is common these days to confuse "bugs" with taste.

However, I absolutely agree that in the case of a preconcieved sales model, the consumer is at a significant disadvantage. Yet then again, if trust is that much of an issue for us, we can always go play a round of golf or something.

107

Desmond Destructo

on Apr 28, 2008

@ Alfonse

Yes. This. In addition to the competitive play or skill comparison issues, this. Thank you for articulating what I really could not.

While the cost difference may not be 90$ worth of modules on top of a 30$ game instead of a 50$ game and a 30$ expansion, there is little incentive for the consumer. If you want to convince people of the value of microtransactions or module downloads, please provide us with a reason why it is good for us. I have bought games from Stardock and have enjoyed them. For me, Stardock is generally associated with quality, but this certainly does not mean acceptance of questionable pricing plans without having a rather good reason first.

108

Cauldyth

on Apr 28, 2008

The Redone UP would be a $9.95 type thing and the redone events/political system would be a second $9.95.

Cool, where do I pre-order?

109

WIllythemailboy

on Apr 29, 2008

@ Desmond Destructo

I can see two major advantages to the micro purchases.

1. Choice. Assuming the lack of any specific module leaves a completely playable game, you are free to choose which ones you want, and which ones you don't. for example, if Stardock were to release a module with additional ship-building parts, I would not buy it. You might. Presumably a good portion of the current players would, or Stardock would not make it. Same thing if a module improving the UP "improved" it even farther from what I think it should be.

2. Turn around time. Instead of waiting 15 months between expansions, we might get one every 3 or 4 months, as each one is not a massive overhaul of the game mechanics. User imput may be even more important, as suggestions would be narrowly focused on the module currently in development.

One downside for Frogboy is that, with release dates occurring several times as often, he faces this last week crunch more often. I probably shouldn't have pointed that out, he might read it

110

Desmond Destructo

on Apr 29, 2008

@Willythemailboy

As for your first point, the advantage of being more specific in which modules you purchase would be to save money by not purchasing certain modules, as opposed to the expansion mentality of purchasing all of the new features or none, ass the case may be. This advantage would likely be offset by the price disadvantages detailed by Alfonse. Further, I would assume that most people would purchase most of the modules assuming that they don't get too overspecialized. The game elements in Galactic Civilizations are interconnected enough that even a primarily military player would appreciate diplomatic additions, and a cultural player would appreciate economic or trade changes.

Your second point is a good one, and one that I don't really have an answer too. It would decrease time between feature releases. This may decreases reliability and decrease overall polish, however, from the collective testing that new features undergo in an expansion test. An expansion testing process could test more features at a time and could establish those changes in the context of larger changes to the game instead of individual changes. With Dark Avatar the Krynn were connected with the new espionage system, and in Twilight of the Arnor the economic changes and fleet module additions reflect the changes in economic and military changes in the new tech trees- without one the other makes less sense. These are not the greatest examples, but it does come down between a choice among these two points, among other differences- between time between additions and ease and polish in implementing these features. Between those two aspects, I would gladly choose the better, not the more hastily released game.

111

Tova7

on Apr 29, 2008

I'm just thankful to be able to get QUALITY free stuff....wasn't so long ago I was downloading things with more viruses than a group of tourists on the Nile.

112

Alfonse

on Apr 29, 2008

I don't know if it can be applied to this specific example.

I'm not saying it necessarily does. But that's the fear. And we won't know if it applies or not until we see how StarDock does with their first game to use this system.

The thing about hidden price changes is this. I don't mind adjusting the price of something. I know inflation exists, and I know it has to happen at some point. On some level, I expect to be paying more for GC3 than GC2. However, what I don't like is the possibility of this cost being hidden and the cost increase large because of the hiding.

113

Huff54

on Apr 30, 2008

Let me tell the whiners a truth about life: Money is exchanged for goods and services. Great Line and one great article

114

lordwilliam

on Apr 30, 2008

I disagree. Apple has the best dock. As far as the subject goes I think I will offer these two words: open source.

Since you firmly believe this, I sugest you get to spending all your time writing it and giving it away for free, then people would have no reason to bitch. Have at it buddy.

115

pjdark

on Apr 30, 2008

HOORAY for choice then!

116

Grismantel

on Apr 30, 2008

Some people on internet (or anywhere) should definitely learn something about politeness. Even when i don't agree with a behavior, i try to express it in the proper maner and with a minimum of emendation. If i fail, i fail to respect myself and fail to defend my point of view.

A clear and legitimate opinion never nead insults or calling names to appear for what it is. It just needs facts and arguments. Passion too, but you don't have to call names to express passion. Or that means your mean of expression are rather limited.

That's a thing usually (or that should be) teached by our parents or by others. Insults and vulgarity don't make your point better. It's just prove that you can't express yourself without being rude and vulgar.

Plus, of course it's always easiest to call names comfortably on the net, rather than on an IRL discussion

. At least, when you call names on some people IRL, you have to deal with the consequences immediately and to explain.

That's said, i'm always happy to pay someone for what he does (and obviously, a lot of people are not enough paid for the services they do for me, like teachers, nurses, firefighters, dustmen, the guys who give me food in a fast-food, a lot of workers etc...), so im' rather off-topic when it cames about the subject of the thread. But the way it was expressed only, makes me doubt about all that has been said.

117

GeoffM

on Apr 30, 2008

Hey I heard a rumor about 64bit.. really we'll get computing at 64 bit... but hey it's just a rumor...

118

Leauki

on May 01, 2008

Meaning more programs should be open source as opposed to having to be paid for.

I like the open source concept, but I really don't think money is the issue. I don't mind paying for software and I regularly do. The advantage of open source, to me, is not that it's free (as in beer) but that it guarantees me that a given program will stick around and can be supported by someone else if need be.

I suggest that you haven't understood the open source spirit.

Realise that the Free Software Foundation do sell their products. And they are expensive too.

But if you want more open source software out there, there is luckily a way to do that. The FSF will gladly give you developer tools and an excellent compiler. Write as much as you can! Don't worry about cost. It's free!

Draginol,

I think I see your point. Reminds me of the iPhone hysteria in Europe where many customers and government agencies demanded that it be sold cheaper or without being locked to a specific contract.

It's a yuppie toy! Nobody needs it. The world will not end if only snobs can buy it. Don't we have other problems?

(Speaking of other problems... food prices went up, especially for rice. My flatmate is a student from a third world country. His father is a rice farmer. He couldn't be happier! The food crisis will really help his family and country.)

I have an iPhone and I love it. But why should I care if everyone can afford it? It's not important. Nobody needs an iPhone. It's a yuppie toy.

And the same goes for software that makes the desktop look prettier. It's, as Draginol said, luxury. It's a toy. And if it's a toy for rich kids only the world is not worse off because of it.

119

robertthew

on May 01, 2008

FREE, yea' FREE is good. I spent enough on this lap top; FREE is good. I'll take it and whatever comes with it, if I like it I keep it and hope the developer throws out a few more FREE bones to go with it. I like the dock, one of the few things about the Mac I like; so I'll keep it. Not to sure about the skins yet; guess we'll see. Oh, did someone say this guy's the CEO? Of what a small tech shop he runs out of his basement office? Or was it that Frog guy? Damn I'm confused! Anyway, any legit business wouldn't what it's self represented in this light, those opinions are best discussed internally. Just my opinion, you know?

120

ZubaZ

on May 01, 2008

Oh, did someone say this guy's the CEO?

Yes

Of what a small tech shop he runs out of his basement office?

His "basement":

Or was it that Frog guy?

Draginol = Frogboy = Brad Wardell

Anyway, any legit business wouldn't what it's self represented in this light, those opinions are best discussed internally. Just my opinion, you know?

It's all Brad's toys. HE can do what he wants and say what he wants when he wants. He may do things differently but many respect him for that. I do.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!