Price break for bulk purchases?

#1 Wow it's not cheap enough already? If you have a project that needs 5 programmers and you really intend to complete it then $500 shouldn't be an issue.

Remember only people working directly on the C++ code need licenses, artists, level designers, scripters etc. are all clear.

Also if you're building a team from the community, a fair few people will have their own licenses. It doesn't have to be for your 'product' or anything like that.

Also if you think you're going to chop and change programmers a lot and you'll need to buy them a license, then you could get a commercial one. Since this can be per seat rather than explicitly per person. That saves you $5 ;)

#2 $500 might not be an issue if you've already completed a project and are earning at least some income from it, but before that happens it can be difficult for a startup team to find.

Yes, $100 is cheap for what the product seems to offer, but that doesn't mean that a further reduction for bulk purchases wouldn't benefit both parties.

If 5 licenses could be purchased for say $450, a team with only 4 programmers might consider buying 5 rather than 4 (to allow for exapansion).

As the team would likely only download one copy of the software, and nominate one member to represent the them in this community, there would be less cost involved for Garage Games.

That's all I was thinking.

#3 The way the indie license is structured there's no 'room' to allow a bulk discount since every sale is to an individual. A 'company' can't own an indie license it has to go to an individual. There's no need to have a 'spare' for expansion (nor is it possible), since it's not a restricted purchase. You need another one, buy another one. Maybe there's merit in bulk discount on commercial licenses, but considering they just dropped that from $10k to $495 that's probably a bit cheeky to go for too.

What I was getting at was a project that needs 5 programmers will be huge. The amount of time required to finish a game is substantial and if you don't have $100 to 'invest' per head, then where are you going to find the 'time' to actually complete it? Time is money remember.

Remember it's not optional to buy a license if you need it, if you have 5 programmers you need 5 licenses, the programmer 'cost' should be a load more than the torque license ever will be.

Guess it never hurts to ask, but I honestly couldn't do it without expecting to be told where to 'shove it' :)

#4 I know there's no need to have a spare license for expansion, I was merely suggesting that a team might club together to get one if it worked out less expensive that way.

Okay, so Indie licenses are non-transferable, but I'm sure a method could be found to allocate a "blank" license with a generic username. The details could then be added when it was activated, at which point a password could be sent to the owner/user.

Another method would be merely to use some sort of credit system or electronic voucher that could be exchanged for a license at a later date. In other words, a prepay system.

5 full-time programmers may well be excessive for most projects, but many independant teams consist of people who can only work on it for a limited number of hours per week, due to other commitments (such as work, school or college).

I realise that it is not optional to buy a license if a person is going to use the engine. However, someone who could only spare 1 or 2 hours a week might well decide to join another team using a cheaper product instead.

It's also possible that someone else might leave the team, and as we're talking about Indie licenses, they'd take that with them. A "spare" license (or prepaid voucher) would be handy in that situation.

That also reminds me of something else I was wondering about: do Garage Games have any plans to introduce gift certificates?

#5 [quote]However, someone who could only spare 1 or 2 hours a week might well decide to join another team using a cheaper product instead./[quote]

if you can find a cheaper product that is just as powerful go for it, your arguments don't hold water. $100 US per programmer is for all practical purposes FREE to begin with.

Understand that the license is NON-TRANSFERABLE period you can't have someone leave and NOT take their personal license. Because it is a INDIVIDUAL license.

This is a non-issue, if you can't afford the licenses then scale back your project, extend the timeline or go get a temporary job $100 US is not impossible to come by. I mean if 10% of $500 US is a make or break for you and you can't figure out between 5 of you how to come up with $50 ( $10 each ) then you aren't going to be able to figure out how to finish a game either.

#6 GG alrady scaled it back from $10,000 to $495 for per-seat licensing.

That's a pretty big cut. Bulk licensing doesn't make much sense in this environment.

#7 And bulk usually means a lot more than 5....

#8

Quote:if you can find a cheaper product that is just as powerful go for it, your arguments don't hold water. $100 US per programmer is for all practical purposes FREE to begin with.

Whether the cheaper product is as powerful would be secondary to a person who is both on a budget and only intends to use it on a part time basis.

A Ferrari is more powerful than a Ford Escort, but if you can't afford the former, you're more likely to buy the latter than walk everywhere.

Quote:Understand that the license is NON-TRANSFERABLE period you can't have someone leave and NOT take their personal license. Because it is a INDIVIDUAL license.

Yes, I understand that it is non-transferable, which is why I mentioned that a person leaving a team would take the license with them, thus requiring another license for their replacement. That is why some teams might want to purchase a "spare".

Quote:This is a non-issue, if you can't afford the licenses then scale back your project, extend the timeline or go get a temporary job $100 US is not impossible to come by. I mean if 10% of $500 US is a make or break for you and you can't figure out between 5 of you how to come up with $50 ( $10 each ) then you aren't going to be able to figure out how to finish a game either.

Earning $100 might well require a minimum of effort for some people, but having $100 to spare is another matter. Even if a person is earning $1000 per week, if they have commitments to pay $999 of that out, finding that $100 would be a problem.

The amount of money required is kind of beside the point anyway. No matter how cheap a product is, some people are going to have problems finding the money. All I was suggesting is that as bulk purchases are less costly for the supplier (GG), some of the savings could be passed on to the end user which would also encourage sales that might otherwise not have occured.

I'm suggesting a mutually beneficial arrangement, not some sort of charity. It isn't exactly a new idea either.

Thumbing through the ads in a PC magazine would turn up a number of companies offering software and hardware with varying discounts for purchasing different quantities of identical products.

Purchasing 5 licenses for Windows XP, Borland C++ Builder etc. would be cheaper than buying them individually, so I don't see an obvious reason why the same couldn't apply to Torque licenses.

#9 You don't get it still, "teams" can't buy a "spare" $100 license the $100 license has to belong to an individual. Someone leaves the new person has to buy their own. Very simple. You want $100 per-seat licensing and that is not going to happen that is what the $495 per-seat license is for. A business or team can buy 5 per-seat licenses, they already sell it the way you want, just not the ridiculous price you want.

and Nicolas is right "bulk" means a WHOLE lot more than 5.

What is so mutually beneficial about someone making less money and you getting a deal?

My point is you really really really WANT Torque you can easily find a way to get the $100 US. Regardless of what your previous commitments are you can always find a way to get what you want. If you aren't resourceful enough to find a way to get $100 US you aren't going to be resourceful enough to finish a game.

Source code never comes in bulk, you are buying source code, which makes it different.

And "floating" licensing which is what you are asking for is always MUCH more expensive than fixed licensing regardless of product.

#10 Guys 'bulk' is completely subjective. If you're buying aircraft carriers i'm sure 2 is a 'bulk' order.

Wysardry, your point is that 'bulk' order might earn GG more money. Maybe, no one from GG has replied, email them and ask (they're probably still recovering from the GDC atm). GG is an 'agile' company i'm sure if your circumstances really require the 'discount' they'd rather have the $450 than nothing :)

Despite Jarrod's amazing diplomatic skills / tact he's seldom wrong. If the non-existence of 'bulk' discount will kill your project, honestly i'd save your money / time and forget it.

Please don't take this the wrong way, we're actually quite a friendly bunch around here (you'd never have guessed huh). You just don't need to worry about 'licensing' until you have programmers. If you have an ace project, your best bet is to 'recruit' at least a few programmers from the current pool (and thus saving a license). TGE is excellent, but it's not for the faint of heart - and takes plenty of time to get up to speed with.

Good luck.

#11 Yeah, bulk is more or less relative, but five it ain't as that is still a few :)
Sure, you can get a "deal" by buying 5 seats of some (far from all, a lot of software vendors don't give any deals before 10 seats, and no bulk pricing before 100)
Bulk means a lot, you might even say that a retailer doesn't buy bulk, you have to go to the distributor level to find bulk pricing...
Of course, I'm generalizing, and it's all semantics, but that's all we have to understand each other, neh ? :)

#12 Just a business decision, Microsoft give bulk discount from 2+ products (and they don't even need to be the same). Adobe / Macromedia start at 5 units. Discreet from 3 etc. 10+ seems to be more common for smaller companies. However products like games tend to not have it until much larger numbers.

It's completely related to what and how many you're going to sell. Bulk discount on paper clips at 3+ would be fairly stupid, where as you could easily get a decent discount on your second for a high value item.

Just another tool in the sales toolbox. Do I think it would help GG? Not really, but I don't have any figures to work from so i'm just shooting in the dark like the rest of us here.

Edit : Speiling.

#13 The answer is that we do not do "bulk" purchases for the Indie License. Five would not be considered bulk. The EULA would not allow purchase of a license without knowing who it would be assigned to since it is non transferable.

Now that we have the Commercial License, which can be owned by a company, we are considering a way to have a mini site license with a "manager" system for allowing the entity that owns the "seat" to assign/remove access rights. This is not immediately on the list, but will be done.

You could imagine something like a company starter pack of three seats for $1350 (don't hold me to this because we don't know the pricing yet).

-Jeff Tunnell GG

#14 Jarrod Roberson: I understand the distinction perfectly and am not asking for per seat licensing. If I was, a "spare" would not be needed if someone left. I'm also not necessarily going to use the option myself, even if it were implemented, as I mentioned in my initial post.

The price was also only an example.

Perhaps "bulk" is not quite the right word for 5 items, but it's the only one I've seen used in this context. It all depends on how many items are usually purchased at once.

What is so mutually beneficial about someone making less money and you getting a deal? Well, first off, in the example I gave, GG wouldn't be making less money, because as I said, the online services they provide would only be used once instead of five times.

If the reason for a team purchasing a group of licenses at once was to have a "spare", then they'd actually be paying more than they needed to. From that point in time until the license was actually allocated to a person, GG could place that additional money in a bank account and earn interest on it.

Whether I want to license and use Torque is irrelevant in this scenario, as I've already indicated that my concern was for team members short of time and/or money. In fact, during the course of this discussion I have purchased a license.

It isn't the source code that is being sold, it is the license to use it, which are commonly discounted when larger quantities are purchased together.

In any case, if every company and organisation only offered a service if everyone else did, there would be little reason to choose one over another.


Gareth Davies: Well, as I mentioned initially, I'm not currently in a position to take advantage of a deal like this even if one were available. I can see it being a possibility for us in the future though, and it might help others.

I am currently in the early stages of planning one project, along with several other members of an online community, and there is a possibility that the community might start several other semi-independant projects.

Fairly obviously, it would help if the members of the other teams used Torque too, as we could share resources more easily, but it would be up to them to make their own decisions on what technologies to use.

When I initially came here I was about 75% certain that I would choose to use Torque. A short while ago I had to stop typing this reply as my step-brother had arrived to use his VISA card to purchase a license for me (as my card isn't VISA or Mastercard).

In my experience, when posting in almost every community someone will take an opposing position against any suggestion, but that can be constructive too as long as tempers don't get frayed, as it can lead to a better explanation of the idea.

It certainly tends to lead to longer discussions than a reply such as "Yes, I agree" or "Good idea" would.


Jeff Tunnell: If the EULA would cause problems with issuing "blank" licenses, would some sort of electronic credit note or voucher be possible. In other words, something that could be redeemed later, like an Amazon gift certificate.

One of the main reasons I decided to look at Torque more closely was posts made at other forums by people who had actually used it. I would imagine that more than a few prospective customers base their decision on word of mouth too.

If only 2 or 3 additional people per year purchase a license, their opinions may help sway many times that number of additional people to do so too.

#15

Quote:It isn't the source code that is being sold, it is the license to use it, which are commonly discounted when larger quantities are purchased together.

that is just a semantically distinction, that is why the license is non-transferable. A license to use the source code is useless without the source code right. It is a symbiotic relationship one is useless without the other.

Also, it costs GG money for bandwidth to the CVS server, the forums and what not.

And there is way more than 2 - 3 people a year buying licenses to Torque I can guarantee you that!

I think the gist of the responses you and anyone else that complains about price gets, are pretty natural since Torque for all practical purposes is free as many others have stated before in other threads. That and the most recent more liberal license just makes it all the more ridiculous to try and get any more of a deal. Torque at $1000 US would be a deal compared to just about any other engine that was used in a AAA title that actually shipped.

If you really need this "spare" then put a $100 bill in plastic baggie, and freeze it in a bowl of water in the freezer, then when someone quits the team, you can give the next team member the frozen money and tell them to get online and buy a license for themselves. It is instant!

There is just no reason for a "spare" indie license scheme. That is what the per-seat license is for.

#16

Quote:that is just a semantically distinction, that is why the license is non-transferable. A license to use the source code is useless without the source code right. It is a symbiotic relationship one is useless without the other.

Yes, one is useless without the other. Having the source code is also useless without permission (a license) to actually use it.

My point was, that you're only buying the right to use the code, not the code itself, and most companies make this distinction when selling their products. I've yet to see anywhere that sells source code alone, yet there are plenty of places that sell licenses in varying quantities.

"Source code never comes in bulk" is not a valid reason for dismissing the idea if source code isn't sold in any quantity anyway.

Quote:Also, it costs GG money for bandwidth to the CVS server, the forums and what not.

Yes, so it would cost them less money if all those were used once instead of four or five times, right?

Quote:And there is way more than 2 - 3 people a year buying licenses to Torque I can guarantee you that!

I actually wrote, "If only 2 or 3 additional people per year purchase a license..."

Quote:I think the gist of the responses you and anyone else that complains about price gets, are pretty natural since Torque for all practical purposes is free as many others have stated before in other threads.

I have not once complained about the price in this thread or any other, that's just your interpretation of it. I've already stated that the actual price is irrelevant to the concept of greater quantities being cheaper for both the supplier and their customer/client.

Quote:That and the most recent more liberal license just makes it all the more ridiculous to try and get any more of a deal. Torque at $1000 US would be a deal compared to just about any other engine that was used in a AAA title that actually shipped.

The recent change to the commercial license only affects those earning a substantial income from their products, it makes little difference to those starting out with nothing. As far as I can tell, the only change to the Indie license was the requirement to show a logo, and that didn't affect the price.

Quote:If you really need this "spare" then put a $100 bill in plastic baggie, and freeze it in a bowl of water...

I don't see any merit in trying to dignify that with a response.

Quote:There is just no reason for a "spare" indie license scheme. That is what the per-seat license is for.

We've already established that that is your opinion, but it doesn't necessarily follow that everyone feels the same way.

#17 Wysardry: The idea of giving discounts for bulk purchases is a good one. We have done it a lot with educational entities. Now that we have the new pricing for Commercial licenses, we are already being asked about it by big government entities. However, the numbers are a lot bigger than five.

That said, we feel that the pricing for the Indie License is already as low as we can go. Some day, we may change our mind, but for now it is not on the short list of things to do.

I do hope you purchase the Torque and get a lot out of it.

-Jeff Tunnell GG

#18 Price is relevant if it is already dirt cheap which Torque is, thus the rest of the argument is academic at best and whining at worst.

The GG have made lots of changes all for the better in the last two years since I bought my license, they have taken lots of strides into uncharted territory and made MILLIONS of dollars worth of software development available to anyone who can walk down the street and pick up enough aluminum cans to get $100 US together ( which is saying something! ).

Just the suggestion that they lower the price even further for 5 copies would be really insulting to me.

#19 Jeff Tunnell: I chose 5 as an example because I could realistically see small groups purchasing that number at once. A group with more programmers than that couldn't really be considered small, would probably have a larger budget and/or could gain tax benefits anyway.

Knowing that the possibility exists for larger quantities might help someone else out though.

I purchased an Indie license several hours ago, and am currently making sure I have collected together the relevant support docs and tools, despite the fact that it's now gone 7:30 AM here and I haven't been to bed yet.

Getting anything out of the SDK will have to wait until after I've had some sleep. ;)


Jarrod Roberson: So, if you purchased a pack of 5 Mars bars, you'd expect that to cost the same as buying them individually? They're a lot cheaper than $100 each, and much closer to my definition of "dirt cheap".

Yes, the Torque license is extremely good value for money, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of further reductions in certain circumstances. As Jeff Tunnell just mentioned, GG has done so in the past for larger quantities.

As for walking down the street and picking up aluminium cans to raise $100, that would require the person to live in an area where they get thrown on the street instead of in the refuse receptacles provided and in a country where it's possible to get paid for them .

It certainly seems as if you are insulted at the suggestion, even if the reasons aren't readily apparent. *shrug*

#20 Man you are comparing apples to monkeys with the candy bar analogy, it just is ridiculous, consumables vs non-consumables to begin with.

actually the price does preclude further reductions in price, once something is "at cost" which Torque "indie" license is pretty close if not at, you can't reduce the price any further.

And your arguement that 1 person should pay full price but 5 should get a discount but more than 5 should pay full price because they can afford it again shows the socialist mentality that you argument has. You reasoning is to personal to be logical. You want more of a deal on something that is already the deal of the century and thing that if you can afford it you should not get a deal.

the "possiblity" for larger quantities does exist, just buy more.