Eventual Royalty Free license?

[fgf]

Would anyone else like to see a comitment to release the game in future under a royalty free license? I'm not talking about day one, more 3-5 years down the line.

 

The pro's

• I think that a commitment of this kind shows that a company 'gets' kickstarter and the sentiments behind it an understands how to give back more than just a product.
  
• Obsidain gets a burst of cheap promotion and goodwill when the release happens much the same way as when Bethesda released its old elder scrolls games. Obviously the soon its done the more of each happens.
  
• It allows people to legititmately do something that people can do in an illegitimate manner anyway most notably it will allow people in poorer countries where the dollar cost of a game may be a month wages to legally play it eventually (and before you ask where the hardware comes from those prices localise better than digital goods especially for 3 year+ out of date machines.)
  
• It allows the game to reach its maximum potential audience which can only be good for the genre and the next kickstarter
  
• The 'digital dexule' (i.e. sound tracks, downloads etc) and box copies can still be sold. Releasing the game royalty free 3 years after release my even result in a spike of sales of these products.
  

Why its possible

• The game will be funded up front. Even if post kickstarter sales are a factor in funding development (as opposed to being regarded as bonus profit if they occur) 3 years will get 99%+ of the total sales the game will ever have.
  
• A royalty free license means you retain all IP rights so you are not giving up materials for future products as you would if you open sourced. (Tho please open source if the project is ever abandoned as a comericial venture no matter how far in the future)
  

The con's

• Loss of 0.01% of total revenue ?
  

More important than all the detail this could be a move in the direction of reputation based business which fits with the digital age. What can make it less socailly acceptable to pirate than a commitment to make the game free to all once the company has had fair chance to turn a profit? What is a more effective deterant to piracy than making it socially unacceptable? (who would pirate a humble indie bundle for example). What can a games company do that more positive than contributing to every one whilst still making a profit?

 

Hopefully the whole kickstarter thing and related (in my mind at least) things such vodo will lead to a world where people and companies will produce media with an intention of voluntarily enriching the public domain.

 

(Ok royalty free != public domain but you get the idea)

[fan]

I dunno.

 

It's not like we're talking about food, or a basic necessity. Paying a low price for an old game is quite alright. Somehow it means it's still worth something. I'm talking $3.5-5.

 

Piracy is so easy, that anyone who wants the game for free will get it without any hassle anyway. Developing country citizens with broadband access (usually $20-60 a month) have the money for this kind of investment. Aside from "honest pay for honest work", I feel that paying a token appreciation makes you cherish the game a little more.

[fgf]

Piracy is so easy is a reason not to do it, its a major reason for it.

 

I suppose what I'd ultimately want to see is money gathered up front for projects which will be free and open source. People still get what they want (perhaps much more specificaly want the want), companies get paid, a companies reputation is important and piracy is a non issue.

 

Consumers would need to adjust a little to not begrude paying for something that others get for free but I'm already there (at least if I can pay a reasonable commodity type price like I can with project eternity and other kickstarter games). Companies would have to give up the idea of massive profit for a massive hit in return for guaranteed funding (its paid up front after all).

 

 

 

It also has the side benefit of marginalising traditional media publishing

[Tagaziel]

Ten years is worth consideration. Three to five? Why not have Obsidian release it for free IMMEDIATELY?

 

Gaming is not a right. It is a privilege. If you can't pay the full sum, there are sales, discounts, used games. However, suggesting that Obsidian cut off a stream of revenue for a bunch of people feeling entitled to games is, well, asinine. Particularly when you consider that sales for good games (that aren't overmarketed blockbusters tailor made for maximizing day one sales, e.g. Call of Duty) stretch over a longer period of time.

[fgf]

suggesting that Obsidian cut off a stream of revenue for a bunch of people feeling entitled to games is, well, asinine.

 

I think you are missing the point. I'm paying for it (and would be paying more if there were any higher tier download only options) its other people who would be getting something for free.

 

I've already covered the idea that consumers need to evolve (or self select) for this model to not feel riped off that they paid for something that other got for free (even tho is is exactly what happens with legitimate sales verus piracy).

 

I backed this game as a simple transaction. A amount of money equivelent to a game moderately priced game for a game in the future since the current terms of the kickstarter are simply transactional. I don't currently agree with people throwing huge amounts of money at the higher tiers, they are not paying a sensible price for what they get in return. I think that people know fine well this is the case and choose to do it anyway.

 

What would make me care and want to contribute beyond the actual value I'll receive would be the commitment to make something (for a reasonable profit) and then share it with the world. Other people have there own reason for buying higher tiers, that would be mine.

 

Gaming is neither a right nor a privilege, its a transaction. The terms of the transaction vary from game to game. A self selected group paying upfront for an ultimately free product is one potential type of transaction. I'm saying there is a market for products which ultimately end up freely distributed. It happens in open source developement all the time except the transaction is usually time and expertise instead of money.

[Semper]

oh come on, it's not the heilsarmee. obsidian needs every penny to establish their own ip, to support the game with patches and to continue with a sequel or expansions or whatever awaits. if this game becomes a classic with a great reputation it's a steady income everybody should grant them. btw buying it in 10+ years for like 10 bucks IS royalty free license.

[Hornet85]

I don't think its necessary.

 

I mean, we can still buy games like Baldur's Gate or other old games on GOG at a very low price, and I think that's how it should be. Over the years, the price should come down to $10 or lesser. But there's no reason to make the game completely free.

 

You raise a very good point about promoting the game to younger generation in the future, but perhaps a sales at $2.50 will do the trick.

[fgf]

You raise a very good point about promoting the game to younger generation in the future, but perhaps a sales at $2.50 will do the trick.

 

I think the point about international markets is stronger tho. You can't have a unrestricted digital product that sells for a reasonable price all round the world. If you sell at a first world prices globaly you lock out poorer countries (which will just pirate anyway). If you sell it cheaply in those countries with out restriction first worlders will just buy from there cheaply. If you restrict it to enforce the price differential you are into the relams of DRM which just promotes the 'Pirated product is superior so pirate it' crowd.

 

All of this is unneccessary if you a) achieve funding (and a profit margin) in advance and B) release a royalty free product.

 

Now since this project has already hit its goal and its first stretch a) is clearly achievable (kudos to them if there is no planned profit in that and the expect that from sales)

 

As for B, Obsidian has offcourse made no promises to me or anyone else but the are considering the related issue of DRM free. Since once a game is DRM free and widely legally distributed its essentially in the hands of anyone who wants it anyway why not get the positive of actually giving it to people direct?

 

As for buying on Gog or what ever who heavily support their deals with extra content and a good service I don't think the existance of a basic royalty free version will actually impact the sales of an all signing all dancing version on a service like that. Price for the product itself just isn't the highest driving force in a purchase from them, things like support to get it running on modern machines are more valuable. You could easily sell a supported dos box ready or packaged version of a game right next to a free version you have to set up your self and not lose many (first world at least) sales.