There is also an additional discount if you have a humble choice membership. For instance Duke Nukem is then $1.59 and Homeworld is $3.99 instead of $4.99.
Pretty sure the price on Homeworld Deserts of Kharak is the cheapest it has ever been and it is also $3.99 with humble choice sub. It is a super high rated RTS.
I thought pretty much everything in this sale is worth a purchase at the prices available especially with the special prices for humble choice members which I am. That gives another $3.20 off of Risk of Rain. Making it $12.79 with humble choice.
Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak was pretty fun when I played it a while back. I kind of wish it had been longer though.
Had been wanting to pick that one for a long time. Couldn't ignore it for $3.99. Finally added Duke Nukem for $1.59. Not something I expect to play a lot but nostalgia might draw me in once in a while. Also picked up Bulletstorm. Would of gotten Homeworld remastered but already had it.
I thought pretty much everything in this sale is worth a purchase at the prices available especially with the special prices for humble choice members which I am. That gives another $3.20 off of Risk of Rain. Making it $12.79 with humble choice.
We Happy Few is not a lot of fun and def not worth it at this price.
By that same token you are then screwing over the devs that put in the hard work to make the games and making it even harder for them to make a living as game sales would keep going down. Also in the case of some of these games these aren't Gearbox employees as Gearbox was only the publisher for some of the titles, not the developers.
By that same token you are then screwing over the devs that put in the hard work to make the games and making it even harder for them to make a living as game sales would keep going down. Also in the case of some of these games these aren't Gearbox employees as Gearbox was only the publisher for some of the titles, not the developers.
The devs don't get the sales money. The article stated they were promised royalties and instead are getting a flat check for Borderlands 3, so I doubt any money is leaving the publisher for titles this old.
By that same token you are then screwing over the devs that put in the hard work to make the games and making it even harder for them to make a living as game sales would keep going down. Also in the case of some of these games these aren't Gearbox employees as Gearbox was only the publisher for some of the titles, not the developers.
If you want to help the developers, you can donate directly to them. However, don't use the excuse of buying the game as you are supporting the developers. They aren't getting paid. Only the owner(s) of said company are.
If you want to help the developers, you can donate directly to them. However, don't use the excuse of buying the game as you are supporting the developers. They aren't getting paid. Only the owner(s) of said company are.
It is a circular reasoning. Of course the money goes to the company and not directly to the individuals who work at the company, but if the company is not getting money, the individuals who work at the company don't get paid and lose their job. It is simple economics.
Companies have to pay for the salaries of their staff and pay for employee benefits, and loads of other stuff. There is a reason why we don't see too many games developed entirely by a single person. Everything has a cost.
I don't understand why people are adopting this attitude for the game industry yet see no problem in companies getting money in other industries. Remember folks, the same could be said about the company you work at. What if people said not to deal with the company you work at just because you won't be directly getting the money anyway?
It is a circular reasoning. Of course the money goes to the company and not directly to the individuals who work at the company, but if the company is not getting money, the individuals who work at the company don't get paid and lose their job. It is simple economics.
The idea is to support other companies that pays their employees what they promise instead of stiffing them. If we consumer make that as part of our buying criteria, companies will follow. Logic dictates then that is all around better for everyone.
Quote
from AlexisLemarie
:
Companies have to pay for the salaries of their staff and pay for employee benefits, and loads of other stuff. There is a reason why we don't see too many games developed entirely by a single person. Everything has a cost.
Yes, and there are a crap ton of other companies that pay their employees as promised and in some cases offers more.
The crappy thing about this is that Randy Pitchford (the owner of Gearbox) is doing this on purpose, because he knows that right now it is going to be hard to find jobs and if you quit, it's actually good for him, because employees now aren't that productive and is costly. This is the time when companies start cutting the fat in preparation for it to get worse.
Quote
from AlexisLemarie
:
I don't understand why people are adopting this attitude for the game industry yet see no problem in companies getting money in other industries. Remember folks, the same could be said about the company you work at. What if people said not to deal with the company you work at just because you won't be directly getting the money anyway?
That's easy. It's because you are confused. Nobody is saying that the employees should directly getting the money from sales. Instead, what we are saying is if you promise it, don't renege on it later. Then tell them to just quit after they poured their heart and soul working on the game to make it the success it is today.
What company you buy your products from matters and if there is no repercussions for mistreating your employees (or your fellow man, animal, society or environment), then yes we should avoid them and buy from those that do to encourage the right behavior from these companies. I don't understand why that is so hard to understand.
The devs don't get the sales money. The article stated they were promised royalties and instead are getting a flat check for Borderlands 3, so I doubt any money is leaving the publisher for titles this old.
Borderlands 3 was made by Gearbox. So they are in that case developers and publishers. In the case of the other games that isn't the case they are only the publisher.
16 Comments
Your comment cannot be blank.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Pretty sure the price on Homeworld Deserts of Kharak is the cheapest it has ever been and it is also $3.99 with humble choice sub. It is a super high rated RTS.
However, there is a lot more if research him.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
However, there is a lot more if research him.
Companies have to pay for the salaries of their staff and pay for employee benefits, and loads of other stuff. There is a reason why we don't see too many games developed entirely by a single person. Everything has a cost.
I don't understand why people are adopting this attitude for the game industry yet see no problem in companies getting money in other industries. Remember folks, the same could be said about the company you work at. What if people said not to deal with the company you work at just because you won't be directly getting the money anyway?
The crappy thing about this is that Randy Pitchford (the owner of Gearbox) is doing this on purpose, because he knows that right now it is going to be hard to find jobs and if you quit, it's actually good for him, because employees now aren't that productive and is costly. This is the time when companies start cutting the fat in preparation for it to get worse.
What company you buy your products from matters and if there is no repercussions for mistreating your employees (or your fellow man, animal, society or environment), then yes we should avoid them and buy from those that do to encourage the right behavior from these companies. I don't understand why that is so hard to understand.
However, there is a lot more if research him.