[tcaudilllg]

Does it work on a small scale?

[Nodtveidt]

Not usually. Crowdfunding is the best way to go if you're looking for any kind of "donations" on a smaller scale, though of course you have to have something to give in return to those who invest.
_________________
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows. - wallace

[RampantCoyote]

From very limited first-hand and a bit of second / third-hand knowledge, I can confirm what Nodtveidt has said. Donations, in general, seem to be a "go big or go home" kind of thing. I've no doubt that exceptions exist - particularly for charities or for religious service - but in general you need a lot of people to generate a little bit of revenue.
_________________
Tales of the Rampant Coyote - Old-School Game Developer talks Indie Games, RPGs, and the Games Biz

[tcaudilllg]

Well I'd like to offer software for free, because I know there are people who can't afford it. However I have to make a profit, right? Besides if someone can afford to pay for software they use often, shouldn't they offer a donation? A donation in this sense is "deferred payment", not charity. Why would someone choose not to pay someone for software that has functionality they would have bought from somebody else if money was demanded?

I remember that post RampantC put up about how a group of designers had made a million dollars off games that really weren't that exceptional or good, just because they let the user determine how much they were willing to pay. But they still demanded at least a penny. What's the difference? Is free software so deplorable that it is to be financially strangled, even though it is acknowledged as functional? What is the ethics there?

I guess my real question is that how we, as people who want to permit everyone, regardless of their financial status, to enjoy our products, can achieve this goal and remain financially afloat?

[RampantCoyote]

Part of the success of the "Humble Indie Bundle" was that part of the donations went to charity (there were default percentages, but anyone could customize their donations). So people got to feel good about donating to worthy organizations AND giving indie devs a token amount.

Since they were successful (as the "first"), there have been dozens of others that have tried to follow suit, but not done nearly as well. One of the laws of marketing, I guess. The other thing that worked was that the bundle was time-limited. You only have a couple of weeks to act, which is a *huge* deal.

As I have independently verified as best as I can, when you have something for sale for 50% off for a limited time, you can get massive sales. When you do a permanent price cut by 50%, you usually get a bump in sales, but then it returns to normal. The limited-time-deal is a huge motivator.

Anyway, I hear what you are saying, and I agree that in an ideal world, that would be what I'd prefer. But the truth is that very few people think that way, and even those that do (like me) tend to pick-and-choose what software or websites I give donations to. I usually don't even think about it until there's a call for donations... but if that call gets too constant, I filter it out. Again, marketing.

I know some projects - even games - have done quite well as donationware. Dwarf Fortress comes to mind. And even they offer something in direct return for donations. So in a sense, it's still a transaction. It's basically a token from someone whose celebrity is rooted exclusively in one game that a lot of people love, but it's good enough when couched as a "reward" for a donation of support to the company.

And for every Dwarf Fortress that earns a livable wage for its creators, there are thousands of projects that never hit that critical mass and make almost nothing (or literally nothing, much of the time).

So for my best guess, to do well through donationware would require a larger audience, and it would probably require you to hustle and market and push just as hard - or even harder - than any other monetization system. It's still capitalism, it's still marketing and sales, it's just a different way of going about it.
_________________
Tales of the Rampant Coyote - Old-School Game Developer talks Indie Games, RPGs, and the Games Biz

[tcaudilllg]

OK, well why not donate software licenses to the impoverished, and demand money from all other users?

[tcaudilllg]

My impression is that I can't succeed on a pay model anyway. The reason why is that the system is not encrypted or protected in any way. Doing so would bog down performance, especially in a web browser. Some self-styled Robin Hood could come along and make it free to everyone by offering an alternative with similar functionality. I could withhold features from the free version and someone could create a patch to put those features in the free version.

One technique I'm considering, as such, is a charity system. Under charity, when you buy one copy, someone else gets the opportunity for a free copy.

[Nodtveidt]

If you don't think that you can succeed on a pay model, then you cannot succeed on a pay model. Half of the success of the pay model is having the guts to develop something good enough that people will buy it. If you don't think you're gonna get far with the pay model, you're never going to be able to develop something worth paying for.
_________________
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows. - wallace

[tcaudilllg]

[tcaudilllg]

I think a non-nagging shareware model works best, along with a low price point (as in, below probable equilibrium). People pay for speed... if they want to use my software, I will give them all the functionality... but they will have to pay to see it run full-speed on a low end machine. ;)

[RampantCoyote]

[Nodtveidt]

[RampantCoyote]

[tcaudilllg]

I'll only venture that a -very- thorough understanding of psychology enriches your mind a thousand ways. ;) It's like Megaman: the more you understand others, the more you are like them, the more ability you have.

On the matter of psychology, it is my understanding that the main pirates are psychopaths, like the Joker. Their only real intention is to create as much anarchy as possible, which they do by driving people to desperation. The whole point is to ensure you don't succeed. On the other side is their enemy, the corporate sadist, who enjoys seeing other people jump when they say jump, especially if it creates friction in the private lives of their subjects.

RC, you say you're working on a Mac version? That could be a very good investment: Mac people, as a rule, are affluent, honest, and very appreciative of any software that is made for Apple devices. You might even go so far as to make it playable on an iPad.

Oh, and they LOVE games and typically have a great sense of humor. And they love unique art.

[Nodtveidt]

I think you spend way too much time reading and partially understanding psyche journals.
_________________
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows. - wallace