[patio11]

In general, you will find that a very small fraction of your user base constitutes a huge portion of support requests. A fraction of this fraction has entitlement issues and simultaneously believes you are trying to cheat them (dimestore psychology: because they know they'd cheat you if they could get away with it). Those are pathological users.

I have repeatedly found personally, and talked to other software developers, that increasing your price drives pathological users away and decreasing your price (particularly dramatically decreasing your price) draws them in like flies.

I do not think it is obviously true that selling 8 games for, e.g., $1 is better than not having that sale. If folks offered me the option of participating in a similar deal, I would decline. In addition to customers paying essentially nothing but requiring disproportionate support, I would be worried about auto-commoditizing my software offering. Why pay $30 when I've publicly demonstrated that I consider it to be worth less than a buck?

On a related topic: dangrover's comments about participating in Macheist are a great read, regardless of your feelings on the matter.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=945869

[reitzensteinm]

I think you'd be justified in doing a refund-only support model here. Game doesn't work on your machine? Happy to give a refund!

[patio11]

Can you explain to me how the developers of World of Goo, who field the support requests for WoG, are going to refund the bundle price despite a) having not actually received the bundle price and b) having no direct commercial relationship with the customer which would let them click the Refund button in Paypal?

[reitzensteinm]

Prior arrangement with the organizers of the deal. I just don't think that this is a big problem.

[algorias]

You have a point regarding pathological users, but this promotion also draws in people who might have already played or heard of one or two of these games, and are willing to drop $30 or $40 to check out the remaining ones.

Also, even a cost of $1 incurs the friction of the transaction. That ought to turn away a significant percentage of the freeloaders, who probably paid 0 on pirate bay a long time ago anyway.

[jerf]

"Why pay $30 when I've publicly demonstrated that I consider it to be worth less than a buck?"

I think that's where the charity comes in. I see a generous indie developer giving to a good cause, not one admitting their goods are worthless.

In general I see what you're saying.