Link

In mid-July, we’ll be rolling out a new iteration of sliders that creates even more opportunities to support important causes. While splits on each bundle will vary, on average there will be a minimum amount for Humble Bundle between 15 – 30%. Sliders will clearly indicate any minimums to customers and the flexibility to adjust donations will be available in every purchase of a bundle. This change comes after ten years of having the option to lower Humble’s percentage to zero.

Well, no more 100% charity on all bundles but

We’ll also continue to create more ways to give back such as with our 100% to charity bundles.

What do you think? Is IGN getting greedy?

2 years ago

Comment has been collapsed.

if this means better games for their bundles, i don't mind. besides, people were suggesting for this when they removed the sliders anyway.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

30%? Don't tell Epic.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

lol

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I don't think they're getting greedy, moreso just reasonable. I reckon the majority of people modified the sliders to give to the devs or charity, and I mean, they gotta make money somehow. If you're buying the bundles with the intent to give to charity, you can always give to charity without Humble Bundle as the middleman, so personally I don't see any issue at all.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I used to think like "There are greedy" and partly it is true.

But after I thought about it, if they can make good bundles that sell instead of bad ones that don't sell, I think it can be better.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

better than having no slider or charity capped at what was it, 10%?

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Every corporation is "greedy", that's just how it works. No company is in business to lose money. That said though, there's a such thing as reasonable greed, and I think this counts as reasonable. If you set Humble to zero, they get no money, and they need at minimum enough to pay their bills and their employees. 15% - 30% to Humble doesn't seem unreasonable, and the rest still goes to charity and the devs, which is still more than can be said about many other sellers of games.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'll decide on exactly how greedy they are when I see the default for the slider. Currently it's at 40%, which IMO is very greedy.

I have no problem with Humble taking a minimum cut, but Epic led the market with 12%, Microsoft will also be moving to a 12% cut on Windows, and Apple and Google reduced developer cut to 15% for many cases. 15% seems fine to me, but 15%-30%, without describing the specific cases where the 30% minimum will be applied to, does seem greedy to me when other companies are dropping their cut.

2 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

it seems like one of those sales titled -99% off where 1 product is discounted at 99% and the rest get 5-10% off

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

At least it's 15%-30%, not 15%-95%. :)

We'll have to see over time what kind of percentage Humble takes.

By the way, Humble was the one who led the way with a small cut in their store. Humble took just 5% for sales through the Humble widget, and I think that their store started with 15% + 10% to charity. It's a pity that a store that led the way in taking a smaller cut is now becoming one of the worst.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

In my book, thats a change from the old "too good to be true" towards a new "totally fair".

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Notice that they only talk about a Humble minimum. No word on a minimum on the dev siider.
They really don't care if you screw the devs to give more to charity as long as IGN is getting their 30%

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

^^^

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

honestly, I'd think a 15/15 for dev/humble minimum would actually be okay to me, compared to the usual presets humble does

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'd be fine with it too. I am just noticing that they are only concerned about their share and don't seem to worry about the devs getting screwed on their share.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

not unexpected tbh

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

While what you say is true, they allow everything, it's not really any more evil than it was. Yes, they take their cut, which is an issue, but not giving anything to devs was always possible. It's not "screwing devs" any more than it was. People were always given the choice to allocate everything to charity, or charity + humble, and give devs nothing. The only difference is that Humble will now always take a cut. Yes, it's somewhat of an issue, but it's also not related to whether devs get anything.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Oh I'm not one of the "IGN is evil" people.
I was just noting that they make sure people can't screw them anymore but they don't have plans (or they don't mention them) to make sure there's a minimum for the devs.
But since there are still sliders and only theirs will be locked to a minimum, it is directly related to what the others get, although I suspect the IGN slider was the one most often slid to zero.

I never did that but I think that if one is set with a minimum value (the one for the people who are setting it all up), they should all be set with minimum. If they don't, it falls right into the unfair business practice category. IGN should get a cut but so should the guys making the games.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

They could in theory put minimal values on both devs and charity, but I don't think it's really unfair business practice. The devs that sign up do allow that they money will go completely to charity. I don't know if by law that counts as a donation, but that's possible. If it does, the developers / publishers are already getting something from it.

From a consumer standpoint it will be even worse. There are enough people who see buying Humble bundles as giving to charity, and would not be happy if their ability to do this is reduced even further.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

But it's already reduced. If anyone should see their money reduced, it's the intermediary.
If IGN didn't want to raise money for charity with bundles, they shouldn't have bought Humble Bundle.
The devs are trying to make a little money for the games they made and get their games known.
You can't buy a store who's in the charity business and let others bear the cost.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I found this message confusing.

If Humble takes a minimum of 30% to itself in a bundle, suppose it also put a 30% minimum on the dev cut. This means that a person can only give 40% to charity, as opposed to 70% to charity if there's no minimum cut for devs. Obviously that'd be worse for people who want to give to charity.

I understand the ethical problem with the idea of a store cut, but it's not that different than running an actual charity. When a charity takes money from people, or from, say, selling or auctioning stuff that was donated to it, part of the money goes to sustain the charity. People working for the charity are allowed to make money even though it's taken from donations.

So I'd say that IGN could be within the letter of the law even if these bundles are viewed as charity (though I do think there's a difference, and it would be interesting to know if there's a legal case here). It would be up to devs and consumers to reign them in, and if devs and consumers feel that they gain more by continuing to offer games and to buy them even with IGN taking a cut, then IGN could continue with this.

tl;dr: Yes, they can own a store that's in the charity business and let others bear the cost. That's normal. Forcing a minimum dev cut would only make it worse for consumers who are interested in the charity aspect, as less will go to charity. Devs should still make money on the assumption that they also made money previously, they will just make a little less due to the store cut.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This is much better than I thought they were going to do. They've had to do this by sacrificing the point of the company tho

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

also its ign, soo take what they say with a grain of salt

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

They would need to come up with a bundle that's worth purchasing first. I'll think about those sliders when I buy one, but I haven't bought one in a long time (apart from Choice, that is).

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I can live with this. Just hope they keep the option to choose your charity. I don't want to give to the crap they generally push.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Just another reason for me not to use HB anymore.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

good move

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If the bundles get better, I´m definitely fine with it. 15-30% to Humble sounds totally fair for me, the rest still goes to charity and the devs.
It´s definitely better than the short time without a slider and I´m really happy that humble still has the charity option in general.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I am ok with this, I doubt that majority of buyers mess with sliders at all, they are just there to buy games. I am interested if there will be minimum amount assigned to developers/publishers.

2 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Closed 2 years ago by Sh4dowKill.