From: cokin@aludra.usc.edu (Darren Cokin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.games
Subject: Re: Mac game developer seeks advice
Date: 18 Nov 1992 18:12:45 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu


I tried to post this 2 days ago, but my server was down (again).


In article <1992Nov17.063249.13029@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@rainbow.uchicago.edu (Hui Dong) writes:

>I wrote SpaceInvader!, from sumex site only,
>there are more than 1100 downloads so far (not even counting American On
>Line and more than 6 shareware distributors' disks and CDs), I only got
>two checks by now (I did get more emails though). 

Your numbers are meaningless.  I download nearly every game posted to sumex.
I trash most of them within a day.  People download because the description
is interesting, and it's free.  That DOES NOT mean 1100 people are playing
your game without paying for it.

>Although I think the game
>has pretty good quality among most shareware games, you can certainly
>argue about that. 

OK, I will argue.  I've seen your game.  It sucks.  (No offense intended, just
my opinion)  I am in shock 2 people actually enjoyed it enough to pay for it.
They must not know what else is out there.

>The rule should be that if you play games second time after
>you know what the games are about, you are obligated to pay. 

I have to disagree here.  You can't play a game once and instantly decide
whether your going to like it or not.  Many games I've loved the first time
I played losed their appeal quickly.  Others I initialy dislike, I have grown
to love.  I try to give games a chance.  Unless a game is obviously terrible
I won't delete it after 1 game.  I'll play a few times before I trash
it.  Does that mean I should be obligated to pay?  Of course not.  Your being
silly.

>Just like you spend $6 to go see a movie, you buy that one
>and half hour good time. We should require the shareware fee be paid if 
>you play the game more than once, because you are getting fun from it,
>so you should pay for it. 

Your analogy doesn't fit.  You pay before you see the movie.  The whole point
of shareware is 'try before you buy.'  People download your game because 
downloading is free, and there is no commitment.  If you had to pay the 
shareware fee before downloading, nowhere near 1100 people would have 
downloaded your game. 

>It reminds me there's a utility called DepthGauge,
>the authors estimate 2000 download from 1990, they only got 10 donations.

Again, DepthGauge might have sucked and not been worth the money.  Maybe only
10 people kept it.  Number of downloads only tells you how good the poster
is as writing positive descriptions.  You also used the word 'donation.'
Is that what the authors called it?  If so that might explain the few
responses.  Something that says "This is free, but if you'd like to make
a donation send..." is going to get much less money then one that says "if
you use this regulary your are expected to pay...."  A good example of this
is Bachman.  The about box says something like "this game is free for personal
use, but if you register you will recieve a level editor."  That sentence is
the reason it sat on my drive for 6 months before I sent in the registration
last week.  I sent it in to encourage the development of a color version.
If it had said I must register I would have long ago.  Backman is a fun game I
play fairly frequently.  SpaceInvader is bad game I played a few times.  I 
paid for one, I didn't pay for the other.  If anyone out there acually liked
this game, post so.  I'd be interested to hear your opinions.  Good games
make money for their authors.  Bad ones don't.


                                                             Darren