Draginol Draginol

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

▼

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

from JoeUser Forums

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.

491,188 views 207 replies
Reply #26 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Oh wah. Please do not ever buy anything from us again. How is that?
End of quote


I don't agree with you very often about Politics, but when it comes to software development, you're right on.

And you're a 'jerk' when someone says something stupid. And I love that in a CEO. ;)
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top

I really think it's interesting when someone complains about paying $15 or $20 for an application they will use every day.  I'd really like to see how people spend their money, I mean I spent almost $20 at Dunkin Donuts the other day.

 

DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #28 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I mean I spent almost $20 at Dunkin Donuts the other day.
End of quote


Good point, but I quote this to bring up something purely non sequitur -

Did you know in Europe, for some indiscernible reason, Dunkin' Donuts is named Dunkin' Coffee?

How exactly does one dunk coffee, anyway?
Reply #29 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Open source is a license type
End of quote
That is very correct Brad and being open source is not free. It means that it is a program that can be contributed too. By the people that use and/or willing to help develope it. Some programs have many developers and it has to be this way till sometime where it is agreed that it is ready for final development and people will pay for it as a reg. program. Even at some point some actually close the program development after a given point to get everyone involved to agree to market the program. Open source would only be good at Stardock if there was something that everyone could work on together. This should not be confused with just testing a beta program or any other new programs. But that those who would work on the program are excepted into the source and have their input used for the program. Works good for a free program - but I believe I have seen problems trying to do this with any marketed for sale programs. Your article is very good and to the point Brad - I like this one. But it is always usual for people in general to complain no matter what. In this case - when you make a place for it. It does seem to surface more and more aggressively. It is too bad now days people are as such. But it will never change... Hey ID bring some those high dollar donuts you got there! They are free now that you bought them right? I'll take two or three - please sir!!! SGT :D 
Reply #30 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Meaning more programs should be open source as opposed to having to be paid for.
End of quote
Kona you should be reading this as well as some other info about open source and free software...

WWW Link

Reply #31 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Was stardock as a whole in a bad mood April 22nd?

Anyways, thanks for the great games and effort!

;)
Reply #32 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Did you know in Europe, for some indiscernible reason, Dunkin' Donuts is named Dunkin' Coffee?
End of quote


Isn't "Dunkin'" = thank you in Holland? Ok i know its not but it sounds a little like it.

Back to topic:

I have to say that I've seen other posts by Stardock peeps that are similar in language to this one. But, I've never thought "they can't say that to a customer", in fact I find it refreshing that their opinion is being stated as they feel it and not sugar coated. It reads like a converstion, as I imagine they would be telling it to anyone. I feel that on this forum there is more of an equalness between everyone, that we are all people and its not developer verses custom.

I don't really have an opinion on the post itself except to agree. The only free software i had was AVG anti viruse and i never begrudged the company for selling a better version. I was greatful that i was getting something for free even knowing it wasnt as good as the for-pay one.
Reply #33 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Wait... $60 on cable ? What channels do YOU get ???  ;) 
Reply #34 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Draginol - let me ax you dis: Why does a My Colors theme cost 20 bucks and a masters suite only cost say 9.95? Dats all I wants to know. Everything else you say I agree with... :)
Reply #35 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

*grin* Brad, I gotta confess you sound seriously riled up by this - if it didn't come through in your post, it certainly stands out in the comments on this article. ^_^ I entirely agree with you on all the points you made here. As you've stated, it applies for all digital products and services available today, not just Stardock products. Although obviously the issue is personal for you Brad, when it comes to Stardock products which you have conceived, designed, produced and updated through years of interaction with a development team and the community base. For what its worth I like the distribution model Stardock uses. Digital delivery, with free software and themes available and premium content for when you want to receive that special product polish. With this method I demonstrate that I feel a theme or product is valuable/exceptional by paying for it with money. I think that many internet communities today are populated mostly by children, teens and young adults. Factor in that unless the language used reflects the age of the poster, it is hard to ascertain someones age from a comment or forum post. I think that these are the people who create the negative 'buzz' about products and services. I see a few reasons for this, such as: a disproportionate value on commodities they actually pay for, a desire to 'own' a complete product (everything), a difficulty in obtaining subscription services illegally... and a belief that corporate markets are inherently evil (and the consumer is naturally the wronged victim of such thieving ways) and will suck away your life essence if you let them. ^_^ I guess as always, those who are impressed by a product will recommend it to a friend or even write a review.. those for whom the product 'does what they expected' will probably never say anything either way about it, and those who feel wronged somehow or disappointed will express their opinions with eloquent vehemence on every forum they frequent.... Brad, Stardock make fantastic, quality software. I guess their are a lot of people who are unprepared or unable to purchase the software - and to make themselves feel better they try and convince themselves, and everyone else they can, that the software wasn't worth having in the first place. I say: Their loss. If I'm reading your comments above correctly as well, it sounds like you are happy Stardock doesn't have these types as customers anyway.
End of quote

My god the quoting on our forums stinks.  It wipes out the paragraph spaces.  Anyway... :)

I just want people to have choices. I am a big believer that people are smart enough to decide for themselves. They don't need someone else telling them that something is a bad idea or not.  If someone wants to give their opinion, fine.  But where I have a problem is when people decide a concept is bad and make it their business to try to quash it rather than letting people decide for themselves.  That's an over simplification I admit but that's the basic point I'm trying to make.

What is really a shame was the whole "Horse Armor" incident because it really gave people a bad taste in their mouths about the concept of micropayments for content.

I've been putting in massive hours to finish Twilight for the Arnor for GalCiv II (one reason I'm so cranky) and I think it's a real shame that other than the 2.0 update we'll be making later on, that's pretty much it for the game for many years. 

I'd love to put up a module that just changes the United Planets in GalCiv II. Or a module that adds new types of planets or new super abilities or new random events or whatever.  But I'm not doing that for free.  We'd have to be paid for it. I'd probably ask for $9.95 or something per module.  But would we get massively flamed? Probably.

Reply #36 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Draginol - let me ax you dis: Why does a My Colors theme cost 20 bucks and a masters suite only cost say 9.95? Dats all I wants to know. Everything else you say I agree with...
End of quote

MyColors themes include the software you need. The Suites are just content. If you have Object Desktop, you can get MyColors themes for $9.95 (see the Object Desktop discount on the MyColors page).

Reply #37 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
But would we get massively flamed? Probably.
End of quote


But would the flaming of a few dozen people who feel entitled really hurt Stardock's goodwill? Or seriously effect the bottom line return on such a module based venture? Isn't it possible that offering more "pay for this feature" content - that for whatever reason you choose to package as less than a full expansion - would still generate a net return of increased goodwill, player interest, and game quality?

I'm an interested party. I've made no secret that I want more expansions/content... and the price point for this product is such that I'm a guaranteed sale. So, I want the calculus to come down on the side of it being more advantageous to pursue the module system.


You yourself have asked the question: do game developers just want to be rockstars? You seem to be taking the opposite tack here (no offense) - making a business decision to avoid the annoyance of being attacked by those with an unjustified sense of entitlement. Is the flaming of a few teenagers really SO annoying that it is worth you a) abandoning working on a project you enjoy, b) abandoning a potential revenue stream, c) abandoning a potential net gain in (intangible) good will towards your company for the continued support.

Really, I guess the question revolves around c. Are you really going to lose brand good will over pursuing a module system? I have my own answer, but I don't run your company. You are undoubtedly the most experienced person at managing the risks that Stardock takes. Is this really such a bad gamble?

Just curious,
~ Wyndstar
Reply #39 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Oh wah. Please do not ever buy anything from us again. How is that? If I had a nickel for every time some guy came onto the forum and said that something I said offended them or predicted that my posts would drive the company out of business I'd be insanely rich.
End of quote
Wow, what a shitty way to treat a customer. If it wasn't for the fact that Stardock basically has a monopoly on windows skinning products (and make no mistake, just by virtue of the fact that they work with the OS, and not against it via hacking files like most skinning programs do), you WOULD go out of business with that type of serious lack of customer respect.
Reply #40 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I think Fungus has a point there, but as opposed to him I enjoy Brad's posts. I hardly ever agree with what he says, but the fact that these forums aren't cleansed by the PR departement and the CEO is dares to say what he think is quite refreshing. Just for I that I like Stardock as a company. And then there are all the other cool and unique things like good games, great support, ...
End of quote
Thank you. I have no problem with Brad speaking his mind. In fact I applauded and complimented Stardock as a whole. It's just this "Fuck you, you have to buy it from us or you just don't get it" attitude that pisses me off. It's the customers that keep you in business, way to treat them like garbage.
Reply #41 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I'd love to put up a module that just changes the United Planets in GalCiv II. Or a module that adds new types of planets or new super abilities or new random events or whatever. But I'm not doing that for free. We'd have to be paid for it. I'd probably ask for $9.95 or something per module. But would we get massively flamed? Probably.
End of quote
Flamed by whom though? Like the above poster said, by a few people who wouldn't pay for it even if they could? I doubt it. There are people who always complain about paying for upgrades. Yet, how many people play World of Warcraft, which gouges players left and right CONSTANTLY? 20 bucks for a retail key? 15 bucks a month (when the average player uses maybe 4 or 5 dollars worth of bandwidth a month? 30 bucks for each expansion? 10 bucks for an upgrade/expansion is nothing. I've spent more than that on a flash based online game. If it's worthwhile, people will pay for it, but there will *always* be complainers whenever anything costs money. It's always nice when things are free, but yes, the aforementioned "sense of entitlement" people expect everything to be free. Pffft. Personally, I have zero problem with your products, I just ask that you treat your customers with a little more respect (afterall, they ARE the ones who shelled out for your product ;) ).
Reply #42 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think Frogboy's attitude could be more accurately summed up as: There are lots of people who think he's doing a good thing, so losing a few customers - or even a dozen or two due to bad word of mouth from said disgruntled customers - is worth the time, effort, and money saved by not appeasing them.

Personally, I would jump at the chance to buy additional modules. Nothing beats new content to keep people coming back to their crack deal... I mean, favorite game company  :D 

The only possible problem would be Metaverse functionality, and nearly everyone who posts there would snap up modules just to keep up with the Joneses.
Reply #43 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I think Frogboy's attitude could be more accurately summed up as: There are lots of people who think he's doing a good thing, so losing a few customers - or even a dozen or two due to bad word of mouth from said disgruntled customers - is worth the time, effort, and money saved by not appeasing them.
End of quote
If you're referring to my specific exchange with him, I would ask you to re-read the posts. I *complimented* Stardock. I've spent over 80 dollars on stardock products. Does that sound like someone who was "disgruntled" and spreading bad word of mouth? I got pissed on when I commented (and rightly so) that his tirade was entirely unprofessional (there's no reason, especially with him being CEO, that he couldn't have at least worded his essay more courteously). I know originally he wasn't addressing his rant at me, because I am not one of those "sense of entitlement" people. As I said, I liked the products, I paid for them. There's no reason to treat me like shit just because I found his specific wording to be antagonistic in general. I'm glad he felt strongly enough to voice his opinion on the issue, and I never asked him to "appease people", only show a modicum of respect. If you weren't referring to my specific exchange with him, then I apologize for stepping in :)
Reply #44 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No, I was referring to you. Asking for the "modicum of respect" is a pretty hefty form of appeasement - one might say you seem to feel yourself "entitled" to said respect.

I find it sad that you consider Frogboy's comments unprofessional. He simply stated what many people who read your post were thinking - and without the profanities that most would have answered with.
Reply #45 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

I'd love to put up a module that just changes the United Planets in GalCiv II. Or a module that adds new types of planets or new super abilities or new random events or whatever.  But I'm not doing that for free.  We'd have to be paid for it. I'd probably ask for $9.95 or something per module.  But would we get massively flamed? Probably.
End of quote


Would you? Only by idiots, I'd think. I was very vocal about Horse Armor (and several other Oblivion "premium" add ons) being huge rip offs, because they were. Something as meaty and substantive as a complete UP overhaul for TA, on the other hand, would be well worth $10 IMO. A lot of companies abuse the idea of microtransactions (Paradox's latest digital-download only expansions, wherein you're essentially paying for bug fixes, is a good example). If you like the idea (and it's clear enough that you do) the trick is to be the counter-example. You guys have never ripped us off before, I'm quite certain you wouldn't now. You've got a ravenous fan community here, surely this can be made to work?
Reply #46 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No, I was referring to you. Asking for the "modicum of respect" is a pretty hefty form of appeasement - one might say you seem to feel yourself "entitled" to said respect.
End of quote


He is entitled to a modicum of respect, any poster who himself behaves respectfully is. I have to admit I'm a little baffled by Brad's unnecessary hostility in that response, I chalk it up to being overworked and generally being in a bad mood.

Reply #47 from WinCustomize Forums Top
No, I was referring to you. Asking for the "modicum of respect" is a pretty hefty form of appeasement - one might say you seem to feel yourself "entitled" to said respect.
End of quote
You seem to forget, I *did* pay for the software. That *does* entitle me to a little respect. It's not a "hefty form of appeasement". I didn't complain about the fact that they charge for their software. I owned up and purchased it because I felt that it was worth it. Since when does that give someone (especially the CEO of the company I paid the money to) to treat me like garbage? Business 101 my friend. I paid for the software, I recommend it to people. I don't expect any exceptional treatment, just normal respect. How is that "hefty appeasement"? Do you pay for software, or any goods or services, which the expectation to be treated like garbage to the person you just paid the money to? C'mon, you're just being ridiculous here if you think otherwise.
Reply #48 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I find it sad that you consider Frogboy's comments unprofessional. He simply stated what many people who read your post were thinking - and without the profanities that most would have answered with.
End of quote
What I find sad is, you and several others applaud Brad for "speaking his mind", yet chastise me for speaking mine.
Reply #49 from WinCustomize Forums Top
He is entitled to a modicum of respect, any poster who himself behaves respectfully is. I have to admit I'm a little baffled by Brad's unnecessary hostility in that response, I chalk it up to being overworked and generally being in a bad mood.
End of quote
I'm willing to chalk it up to such too (he did admit putting in a lot of work on GalCiv2 at the moment). I'd rather just bury the hatchet, because frankly, I *do* really like Stardock products, and was hoping to get into skinning more, and I'd hate to be turned off by what basically amounts to a case of the grumps :)
Reply #50 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'd love to put up a module that just changes the United Planets in GalCiv II. Or a module that adds new types of planets or new super abilities or new random events or whatever. But I'm not doing that for free. We'd have to be paid for it. I'd probably ask for $9.95 or something per module. But would we get massively flamed? Probably.
End of quote


Eh, there'd be some flaming, but retards will bitch about anything. They're just noise.

Personally, $10 for a UP overhaul (bribes please!) would be a sale for me.

Now, I mentioned in the earlier thread that I wouldn't be interested in an earlier thread that I would NOT be interested in a subscription, but that's due to something else entirely -- how I use the game. In that case, it's got nothing to do with the cash, and everything to do with the fact that I play GC2 in spurts, and a subscription doesn't really lend itself to that, as far as I'm concerned. The money isn't so much the issue as that during most months, I'd be paying for nothing. :)

Micro-transactions, on the other hand, appeal in a number of ways. I get new content cheap, and a sense of ownership. Yeah, yeah, we all know we don't "own" GCII, we license it, etc. But having the subscription looming overhead sorta implies a "if I stop paying, I lose my features!", whereas with the micro-transactions, I know that after our money has exchanged hands, that updated content will be mine to use for the forseeable future. More a psychological difference, but hey, it's how I feel about these things.

THAT SAID.

If $10 for a UP overhaul is what you guys have in mind for a cost-to-content ratio for microtransactions, I genuinely think the option has some real potential.