VN Ren'Py Ravager [v5.1.9] [4MinuteWarning]

[The_Searcher]

I recognize that. In the beginning, the game was and to an extent still is relying a lot on crowdfunding through patreon and SS for development costs. So it makes a lot of sense to put a product out there for free. But the argument that they can't put a demo out because the game is still under development doesn't hold a lot of weight for me. Act II is completely finished and has been for years, and would make for an excellent demo. it's relatively short, has plenty of opportunities for sexual content, and ends with you finding your lair and getting set up to strike back. A perfect showcase of the game's gameplay, and general tone and direction.

Perhaps manipulation isn't the best way to describe it. It certainly may not be intentional. I can see how the devs would see paywalling act V as an obvious choice, a reward for those who paid actual money for it. I dunno. I'm not the most articulate person and it's difficult for me to explain exactly why this rubs me the wrong way. But it does. I just can't reconcile putting the majority of the game out there for free and then paywalling the end.

I agree with you, and I think it's easy to understand.

We can expect that kind of move from a triple AAA cash-grave company like EA, Capcom, S-E, etc... I mean put the true end of the game behind of another pay-wall. But with a Patreon based game? An indie eroge game? They are gonna board that ship too?

If they want to sell the game, which makes total sense, then I think too it's a better idea to put a demo until the act II (like you said) since that duration give enough idea of how the game works. Anyone interested in the game, will buy it. But putting a pay-wall just for the ending part? I think that probably it will cause the opposite effect.

It's a surreal way to finish a great game project, at least in my opinion. As a I said before, maybe it's a better idea to offer all the game for free in that public version and then when it's completed, sell the complete game (that version could have certain extras that doesn't affect the main game but offers extra value.) and it will probably have success. Just like Locomalito games like Super Hydorah and Maldita Castilla.

 

[Jman9]

...another pay-wall. But with a Patreon based game? An indie eroge game? They are gonna board that ship too?

Since there is only one payment, it is another kind of ship entirely. It's not a choice of between 'pay' and 'pay more'.

But putting a pay-wall just for the ending part? I think that probably it will cause the opposite effect.

Not putting the pay-wall there would mean taking parts of the game away from current players. This would be much more likely to turn players off of the game than the current paywall.

Also, nobody says you have to play through Acts 1-4 before buying the game. Treat Act I as the demo, buy the full game if you like it. Play Act II, or III, or IV if you're still on the fence.

In any case, discussing these things on a pirate forum is likely to get a skewed response.

As a I said before, maybe it's a better idea to offer all the game for free in that public version and then when it's completed, sell the complete game (that version could have certain extras that doesn't affect the main game but offers extra value.)

So, uh, "getting to see most of the game for free bad, nickel-and-dime cosmetic DLC good"? I do not understand you people.

And "take away your free game" is somehow going to go down better than "pay for the finale"?

...and it will probably have success. Just like Locomalito games like Super Hydorah and Maldita Castilla.

Going with the free model would likely have meant a shorter and poorer game. Possibly staying with just Patreon and no act V at all.

Plus, Locamalito basically cashed in on consoles. This is entirely irrelevant to any success on PCs, and Ravager is currently reliant on that market to make it over the finish line.

 

[The_Searcher]

Plus, Locamalito basically cashed in on consoles. This is entirely irrelevant to any success on PCs, and Ravager is currently reliant on that market to make it over the finish line.

Yeah, because giving for free on his website his games didn't affected at all the posterior success in other platforms. Right?

I'm returning to reading form in this forum, seems that (as usual) it's impossible to have a little ounce of criticism on anything. Enjoy whatever model the creators/developers decided to put on their games, we are in the videogame scene that we deserve, no doubt at all.

 

[Jman9]

Yeah, because giving for free on his website his games didn't affected at all the posterior success in other platforms. Right?

Not when he was still developing the game. When Ravager embarks on a console conquest, that's when your advice becomes applicable.

I'm returning to reading form in this forum, seems that (as usual) it's impossible to have a little ounce of criticism on anything.

I'm criticising you.

Enjoy whatever model the creators/developers decided to put on their games, we are in the videogame scene that we deserve, no doubt at all.

As I've already outlined, as far as I can see the other alternatives are objectively worse, right now. Perhaps try arguing your point instead of offering "I, random internet person, think it will be better for reasons unspecified/my gut feeling" and "They are asking for payment, oh no, this means they're double dipping. Second coming of the EA!".

 

[F1forhalp]

..skimming through almost 2 pages of /walloftxt back and forth, the gist of it; quite OT.
also, the devs are the only ones to decide what they release under which conditions, mind you, and if this backfires, tough break. they alone decide what they seal off and what not. deal with it.
it'll show up here, or not, quit complaining about some part of something not being 0day.
if you want it super speedy, try and dig up some Efnets good luck if you find someone who takes you serious. they may want you to hook 'em a shell, up front, just to test you.

btw. this method of having a part of something not public, or released to paying customers first, is very common, in variations. patreon makes a big buck off this model.

 

[DipYourFingersOnMyAss]

Man... i thought we are gonna jerk off together not comparing who has a bigger pecker(morality)contest

 

[mrttao]

Not putting the pay-wall there would mean taking parts of the game away from current players. This would be much more likely to turn players off of the game than the current paywall.

the fuck? what does this even mean

 

[Enigmanic]

the fuck? what does this even mean

It means that those already supporting the dev don't get anything special.

 

[Danguy]

Cg's are godly but character sprites don't match them in quality at all. Did develop team lose their artists in the mid of making game?

 

[mrttao]

It means that those already supporting the dev don't get anything special.

Last I checked, those were donations for a dev who is allegedly committed to making a free product.
If it was just buying a game then all the supporters got ripped off. But it is not a normal product, those devs want to have their cake and eat it too. Just like the abuse triple A titles really.

 

[Jman9]

quite OT.

Discussion of whether supporting the monetisation model is okay is OT in the game's own thread?

the fuck? what does this even mean

It means there will be no further official, public free versions. AKA "they took the game away from us". Not everyone is a pirate.

Last I checked, those were donations for a dev who is allegedly committed to making a free product.

Actually, where does it say it's free? Itch and Subscribestar say nothing besides "support us and get access to ... if you liked what you saw".

If it was just buying a game then all the supporters got ripped off. But it is not a normal product, those devs want to have their cake and eat it too. Just like the abuse triple A titles really.

Nothing like the abuse. Both are essentially 'support the dev and help make the game better'. 4MW doesn't spend the cash on vacations and a bunch of excuses every six months, they spend the money to better the game.

Also, don't supporters still get their own builds? And a Steam key if they wish it? So they're basically buying an expensive 'support the developers' edition. Not a new nor exceptionally controversial concept.

I have to say that some supporters are getting ripped off due to the Ravager/Rampager thing, but this is Patreon's doing.

I'm sure that if 4MW could go back in time, the monetisation model would be different. But we are here, and I don't see the proposed alternatives being any better. Worse, actually.

 

[4MinuteWarning]

I'm not typically very active on here - I think you'd all rather I was working on Act V than camping forums - but this debate has been going on for a while, and I think it's worth at least sharing the information I have.

I made the decision to launch on Steam because I could not reasonably accomplish my ambitions without extra funding. I might have started as a hobbyist working by myself, but Ravager has grown considerably in scope since then, and I want to see it through to its conclusion. I talked about this a lot in

You must be registered to see the links

. Since then, I've been able to make all the extra hires that I wanted to - but that also means a lot more mouths to feed.

The decision of where to make the split was made because:

• I consider myself to have a responsibility to old backers to keep the content they've supported free.
• I believe it's right to thank people who do support the game, by purchase or patronage, with unique content.
• I have faith that our asking price is reasonable, and that our free content is proof enough of our quality.

The idea of charging for something that you've spent a lot of resources making is relatively uncontroversial. People will naturally argue over where the best place to make the cut is - some say it should be earlier, some say it shouldn't exist at all - but I think that what we've done has struck the right balance between opposing forces. My first responsibility is to the project, and the people who work on it, so that we can actually finish this game (and then make many more).

I've avoided quoting or reacting to posts because I am very busy at the moment, and I can't afford to get drawn too far in, but hopefully it helps to have my perspective on things. Thank you to everyone who found Ravager here, and went on to support the project - I couldn't do it without you all, and I really do love doing it.

 

[mrttao]

Making money off of something you worked on makes perfect sense. It is not controversial.

Switching a licensing model after X years of development doesn't, even if it is technically legal (see oracle buying sun and close sourcing all their foss products) it will naturally induce a backlash. Especially among those who supported it during its time in a different license. Potentially a costly one (see libre office completely replacing openoffice)

This game specifically was never FOSS, but it did have a different licensing scheme / financial model (donate to help support the development of this here free game). Every person donating knew there was also a public version, can you really say that none of them cared? that none of them were donating specifically because there was a public version?

In regards to demo. A demo is when a complete software product is made, then a small portion is made freely available to "try before you buy".
A formerly free product suddenly changing their licensing model is not a demo. Even if it does coincidentally result in a "try before you buy" situation, the details differ.

As for launching on steam, that is a separate issue.
How is that making more money? I just checked and steam is a one time purchase of $15, while patreon costs $5/month subscription to get the latest version. Sounds far cheaper to me to get it on steam.
Steam's model relies on getting a constant stream of new customers, while patreon relies on retaining your patrons, supporters who donate to support you for month after month. There might be an initial lump sum from steam but it will taper off much more quickly.
Only way to get more on steam is via DLC glut. But that just makes for an even tougher sell as it alienates many customers.
And they are now customers, not patrons... customers are far more demanding than patrons.

I am sympathetic to the plight of the indie dev. It is hard work and you are underpaid.
But you really got to be very very careful in thinking through the long term consequences of fiddling with licensing / financial models.

 

[Jman9]

Switching a licensing model...

There never was one here.

This game specifically was never FOSS, but it did have a different licensing scheme / financial model (donate to help support the development of this here free game). Every person donating knew there was also a public version, can you really say that none of them cared? that none of them were donating specifically because there was a public version?

If they care about that, and care enough, they're free to stop donating. That is entirely in line with what donating means.

In regards to demo. A demo is when a complete software product is made, then a small portion is made freely available to "try before you buy".
A formerly free product suddenly changing their licensing model is not a demo. Even if it does coincidentally result in a "try before you buy" situation, the details differ.

Act V was never a 'free product'. The actual, 'demo' part never changed. Well, okay, it changed but for the better, Steam money being used to improve the 'demo'.

And people here were advocating for reducing the current amount of 'demo' by a factor of 4 or so. They thought having too much of the game available to try was somehow 'manipulative', whatever that actually means.

Let us be clear. What exactly are you arguing for here? The removal of Acts II-IV from the free version? The addition of Act V to the free version? The removal of the free version altogether? Something else?

Steam
...
How is that making more money?

Massively bigger market share in advertising the game. A convenient e-publishing platform that cuts down costs a lot.

Are you being intentionally obtuse, or is this genuinely the first time you've encountered Steam's advantages for everyone involved, including indie devs? Never wondered why Steam is swamped with shovelware and why there are so many indie devs around today? Steam is a gigantic enabler for the small developer.

Steam's model relies on getting a constant stream of new customers, while patreon relies on retaining your patrons, supporters who donate to support you for month after month. There might be an initial lump sum from steam but it will taper off much more quickly.

You're massively underestimating how much smaller Patreon is compared to Steam. Even a trickle by Steam standards is quite respectable for anyone who's not in the absolute top of Patreon.

Also, the game is not complete. So right now, the Steam version is basically a preorder/early access/in development/whatever kind of game. Yeah, potentially manipulative. But unlike the vast majority of companies who practice that, Ravager actually lets you sample pretty much everything that's ready for free. If 4MW actually manages to take all the Steam moneys and fails to produce Act V, then we can start talking about actual manipulation.

In any case, it's nearing a year on Steam, and 4MW looks to be satisfied with the money they're getting from there. Your theorycrafting (with zero actual numbers or analysis!) means little in comparison.

Only way to get more on steam is via DLC glut. But that just makes for an even tougher sell as it alienates many customers.

Which is why The_Searcher proposed adding "certain extras that doesn't affect the main game but offers extra value" aka DLC?

I hate DLC as much as the next grumpy gamer, but people are not as opposed to DLC these days as you'd think.

But you really got to be very very careful in thinking through the long term consequences of fiddling with licensing / financial models.

There is no licencing. There is only a cut-off point where they say: this is as far as we are able/willing to work for free/using donations. Nothing is removed that anybody ever had, or was promised to get.

 

[mrttao]

Massively bigger market share in advertising the game.

You are making a huge assumption, that steam will be advertising this game. Since when is steam advertising early access porn games?

 

[Dysphorika]

You are making a huge assumption, that steam will be advertising this game. Since when is steam advertising early access porn games?

Well, dunno about ads, but Steam has now an history of having porn games in early access from some time on their store...

 

[Jman9]

You are making a huge assumption, that steam will be advertising this game. Since when is steam advertising early access porn games?

Since games can be searched for on Steam. Steam does not advertise (well, not mainly) by throwing ads at you. Steam advertises by having a search feature. Well, that and discounts/sales.

 

[DipYourFingersOnMyAss]

I'm not typically very active on here - I think you'd all rather I was working on Act V than camping forums - but this debate has been going on for a while, and I think it's worth at least sharing the information I have.

I made the decision to launch on Steam because I could not reasonably accomplish my ambitions without extra funding. I might have started as a hobbyist working by myself, but Ravager has grown considerably in scope since then, and I want to see it through to its conclusion. I talked about this a lot in

You must be registered to see the links

. Since then, I've been able to make all the extra hires that I wanted to - but that also means a lot more mouths to feed.

The decision of where to make the split was made because:

• I consider myself to have a responsibility to old backers to keep the content they've supported free.
• I believe it's right to thank people who do support the game, by purchase or patronage, with unique content.
• I have faith that our asking price is reasonable, and that our free content is proof enough of our quality.

The idea of charging for something that you've spent a lot of resources making is relatively uncontroversial. People will naturally argue over where the best place to make the cut is - some say it should be earlier, some say it shouldn't exist at all - but I think that what we've done has struck the right balance between opposing forces. My first responsibility is to the project, and the people who work on it, so that we can actually finish this game (and then make many more).

I've avoided quoting or reacting to posts because I am very busy at the moment, and I can't afford to get drawn too far in, but hopefully it helps to have my perspective on things. Thank you to everyone who found Ravager here, and went on to support the project - I couldn't do it without you all, and I really do love doing it.

Okay Mr 4MinuteWarning please dont overwork yourself i completely understand and support whatever your choice for the development of the game
"sending you hugs and pat your head virtually telling that everything is going to be okay"

 

[Enigmanic]

You are making a huge assumption, that steam will be advertising this game. Since when is steam advertising early access porn games?

There is a section that shows suggestions based on "games you like".

 

[Tosk]

There is a section that shows suggestions based on "games you like".

Yup. If you have adult games enabled and have bought some then the algorithm will show you more.