I definitely enjoyed my first playthrough of DeathSpank, but I wish they had done something to add some replayability; I haven't even thought about touching it since I completed it. I'll still probably pick this one up.
" Free, only a moron would pay for something they can get for free. It'd be different however if the free version was somehow lesser in quality, IE Cave Story the free PC version of the game had worse graphics then WiiWare version, even then though I would personally still go for the free version. "
Except that if it's your favorite developer, you know that if everyone downloads it for free, the developer can't afford to produce additional games, and those with the means will usually happily pay for the game. This doesn't make them morons, it makes them fans. When you develop an audience that supports you... that audience will be willing to pay for the same thing that other people are getting for free simply because they know that their money "pays it forward" towards the development of the next game.
I have absolutely no problem spending $5 to a developer I support, especially if there's a free version to try out first. DeathSpank was an no-questions, no trial needed purchase for me, because I wanted to support Ron Gilbert putting out a new game.
I think this feeling is lost on big game developers, where it's just a faceless company that I'm forking over $60 for. But with smaller dev companies, stuff for Android, Xbox Live, etc, I often find developers who I can't wait to give money too. Launcher Pro for Android is a good example. For the first two months I used the software, he didn't have a paid version. By the time he finally offered a Pro version, I had become such a fan of the software and the developer that I put down money the second it was an option.
It reminds me of the Panera "pay what you want" trial that is doing so well they're opening additional stores using the model: http://consumerist.com/2010/06/panera-planning-to-add-more-pay-what-you-want-restaurants.html
Log in to comment