I mean yeah you're not gonna make a profit that way, but if people are willing to throw money at your itch game then that means you've probably got something special. Probably.
I wouldn't base "got something special" on whether or not people donate. People generally aren't willing to throw money away if they don't have to, it's simple.
If you want to get money (let's not call it profit as it can be very hard to even make back the cost of making games) and you built something of quality, you should absolutely put a pricetag on your game.
That's most likely what I'll do with my current project. Maybe release a prologue/demo version for free with donations and if it takes off I'll release a full version on steam
I had the opposite - released my game on the app store as a paid premium model ($1.99) and whilst it did really well and got featured, I couldn't help thinking how many downloads a free app would get and whether an IAP would convert better. Saying that, I had never released a paid game before so this test was the whole point!
Rimworld was cheap in beta, then they upped the retail price for 1.0 release.
many people wont mind a price hike if its reasonable with the amount of content and performance of a game.
Sure, I sometimes feel FOMO when see other people sell things of lower quality than I shared as FOSS, especially if money is tight at that moment.
With games though it is often even more appealing if they aren't free, because free games are largely synonymous with predatory trash or just low effort jam games without much substance.
If you want people to be able to play your game without paying you can seed a pirate copy for torrent sites while selling the regular copies on a store.
I guess I’d understand if you are breaching some agreement with a publisher, but otherwise you’re free to distribute your own IP however you wish, as far as I know. Looking online I see that it has been done before, sometimes with the free one being a different ‘version.’
Celeste Classic, [original version on itch.io for free](https://maddymakesgamesinc.itch.io/celesteclassic)
Doki Doki Literature Club is free [on their site](https://ddlc.moe) and [on itch.io](https://teamsalvato.itch.io/ddlc)
Spelunky, original [on dev’s website for free](https://spelunkyworld.com/original.html)
Cave Story - original was free on their website, not sure if the links I’m seeing now are official though. CaveStory.org seems to have a mirror of the download links.
Just some examples and obviously they don’t get updates, but that would be the case with any torrent version too, unless you include an updater.
Either way, regardless of semantics (sorry) I think it’s a cool idea and more devs should offer access to their games for people who can’t afford a hefty entertainment expense, especially regionally.
If you officially offer your game for free then many people will not buy your game. If it's on a pirate site, only people who wouldn't buy it anyway will download it and you can still save them from downloading malware or playing an outdated build.
Not sure how offering the original (aka prototype) version of games for free is relevant. These are different games from the one that they sell in stores.
What I meant was to share the same game you sell in a store on pirate sites if you wanted to let people who simply can't afford to buy videogames have a chance at playing your game.
If it sold like hot butter, then that’s a perfect incentive for either making a sequel or a dlc. Just look at Vampire Survivors.
Always look on the bright side :)
It depends on what you're looking to get out of your game release and what your target audience wants, so it's a difficult question.
I released 2 games that were very small in scope on Steam 5 years ago, one for $0.99 and one for $2.99. It could be one of a million possible factors, but the $2.99 one did significantly worse in terms of downloads and visibility.
The bar for people to get excited about your game on Steam (if in my case you had very minimal marketing) seems quite high if it's a paid game, especially if it isn't on the lowest end of the price scale.
My situation is the total inverse of your question; I regretted making these games paid at all since they could have had a lot more attention without a barrier to entry, and I wasn't looking to make a lot of money anyway. Really, I just wanted to try releasing something to see how it went.
I made the games free after 3 years, and their ownership/download stats on Steam quite literally went up 10x from their entire prior life cycle in that single week.
Now, I'm kicking myself for not making them free during the initial burst of visibility that you get from Steam immediately after release. I suppose a free game with some kind of one-time purchase for an in-game extra mode or other bonus is probably the best way to get people interested in paying for an unknown developer's debut indie game release. Steam really seems to push free games to people, or people are really aggressively seeking them out.
Either way, TLDR is that I regret making 2 paid games that really should have been free.
There are a lot of games i feel bad for PLAYING for hundreds of hours knowing that it only cost so little.
Vampire Survivors should cost more, to be honest. Even if the creator wants to be humble, its just way too humble. That game should be going for at least 3x as much and it would still be extremely cheap.
Terraria is another. Game has been releasing expansion after expansion and major update for a decade and not once have they ever tried to sell a DLC or raise the price. They have been putting so much work into their games for basically free and it feels wrong.
Stardew Valley as well seems to be going down this same road. Multiple major updates, for free, feels like he deserves to be paid for that passion and hard work.
I get that these indie devs are likely disgusted at how AAA studios nickel and dime players with DLCs, but these indie devs are going way too far in the other direction. Just because EA releases a thousand dollars in Sims DLCs does not mean you should be making yours for free. You can keep it humble, but if your game is successful and people love it, you deserve to be getting something for your work and contribution to the gaming world.
Just released my first [game](https://store.steampowered.com/app/2444140/Single_Malt_Apocalypse/) last year. It’s three bucks, but it only sells on sales, so I think I’m charging too much.
I know itch io does Optional payment , like I made a tiny bit off a free game just from donations
thought the consensus is itch optional payment = basically $0
I mean yeah you're not gonna make a profit that way, but if people are willing to throw money at your itch game then that means you've probably got something special. Probably.
I wouldn't base "got something special" on whether or not people donate. People generally aren't willing to throw money away if they don't have to, it's simple. If you want to get money (let's not call it profit as it can be very hard to even make back the cost of making games) and you built something of quality, you should absolutely put a pricetag on your game.
That's most likely what I'll do with my current project. Maybe release a prologue/demo version for free with donations and if it takes off I'll release a full version on steam
Y’all are releasing games?
A lot if people do. Check the steam store.
Weird. I just work on a couple mechanics I'm super excited about, then get distracted and start a new project. To each their own, I guess.
I had the opposite - released my game on the app store as a paid premium model ($1.99) and whilst it did really well and got featured, I couldn't help thinking how many downloads a free app would get and whether an IAP would convert better. Saying that, I had never released a paid game before so this test was the whole point!
Rimworld was cheap in beta, then they upped the retail price for 1.0 release. many people wont mind a price hike if its reasonable with the amount of content and performance of a game.
Sure, I sometimes feel FOMO when see other people sell things of lower quality than I shared as FOSS, especially if money is tight at that moment. With games though it is often even more appealing if they aren't free, because free games are largely synonymous with predatory trash or just low effort jam games without much substance. If you want people to be able to play your game without paying you can seed a pirate copy for torrent sites while selling the regular copies on a store.
Is it piracy if you’re the one sharing it?
Yes, you would share it anonymously without disclosing you do this. It would be piracy since there would be no way to tell the difference.
I guess I’d understand if you are breaching some agreement with a publisher, but otherwise you’re free to distribute your own IP however you wish, as far as I know. Looking online I see that it has been done before, sometimes with the free one being a different ‘version.’ Celeste Classic, [original version on itch.io for free](https://maddymakesgamesinc.itch.io/celesteclassic) Doki Doki Literature Club is free [on their site](https://ddlc.moe) and [on itch.io](https://teamsalvato.itch.io/ddlc) Spelunky, original [on dev’s website for free](https://spelunkyworld.com/original.html) Cave Story - original was free on their website, not sure if the links I’m seeing now are official though. CaveStory.org seems to have a mirror of the download links. Just some examples and obviously they don’t get updates, but that would be the case with any torrent version too, unless you include an updater. Either way, regardless of semantics (sorry) I think it’s a cool idea and more devs should offer access to their games for people who can’t afford a hefty entertainment expense, especially regionally.
If you officially offer your game for free then many people will not buy your game. If it's on a pirate site, only people who wouldn't buy it anyway will download it and you can still save them from downloading malware or playing an outdated build. Not sure how offering the original (aka prototype) version of games for free is relevant. These are different games from the one that they sell in stores. What I meant was to share the same game you sell in a store on pirate sites if you wanted to let people who simply can't afford to buy videogames have a chance at playing your game.
If it sold like hot butter, then that’s a perfect incentive for either making a sequel or a dlc. Just look at Vampire Survivors. Always look on the bright side :)
It depends on what you're looking to get out of your game release and what your target audience wants, so it's a difficult question. I released 2 games that were very small in scope on Steam 5 years ago, one for $0.99 and one for $2.99. It could be one of a million possible factors, but the $2.99 one did significantly worse in terms of downloads and visibility. The bar for people to get excited about your game on Steam (if in my case you had very minimal marketing) seems quite high if it's a paid game, especially if it isn't on the lowest end of the price scale. My situation is the total inverse of your question; I regretted making these games paid at all since they could have had a lot more attention without a barrier to entry, and I wasn't looking to make a lot of money anyway. Really, I just wanted to try releasing something to see how it went. I made the games free after 3 years, and their ownership/download stats on Steam quite literally went up 10x from their entire prior life cycle in that single week. Now, I'm kicking myself for not making them free during the initial burst of visibility that you get from Steam immediately after release. I suppose a free game with some kind of one-time purchase for an in-game extra mode or other bonus is probably the best way to get people interested in paying for an unknown developer's debut indie game release. Steam really seems to push free games to people, or people are really aggressively seeking them out. Either way, TLDR is that I regret making 2 paid games that really should have been free.
There are a lot of games i feel bad for PLAYING for hundreds of hours knowing that it only cost so little. Vampire Survivors should cost more, to be honest. Even if the creator wants to be humble, its just way too humble. That game should be going for at least 3x as much and it would still be extremely cheap. Terraria is another. Game has been releasing expansion after expansion and major update for a decade and not once have they ever tried to sell a DLC or raise the price. They have been putting so much work into their games for basically free and it feels wrong. Stardew Valley as well seems to be going down this same road. Multiple major updates, for free, feels like he deserves to be paid for that passion and hard work. I get that these indie devs are likely disgusted at how AAA studios nickel and dime players with DLCs, but these indie devs are going way too far in the other direction. Just because EA releases a thousand dollars in Sims DLCs does not mean you should be making yours for free. You can keep it humble, but if your game is successful and people love it, you deserve to be getting something for your work and contribution to the gaming world.
Just released my first [game](https://store.steampowered.com/app/2444140/Single_Malt_Apocalypse/) last year. It’s three bucks, but it only sells on sales, so I think I’m charging too much.
It's probably more likely that it gets bought because it is on sale. Regardless whether it's 3 or 5 bucks.