Humble has coincidentally been a lot more shit since then too. I used to buy game bundles all the time, now it’s $20 to get maybe 2-3 games worth playing instead of $15 for 5-6 indie titles that were genuinely good.
They could easily make more money with the same image by limiting how much revenue goes to the charities. You can choose to not give them anything.
I'm not saying they aren't in it for the money. Most people need to make money to survive. But I think it's disingenuous to say they don't care at all. I think they do good and I feel many others agree.
A corporate marketing tool that costs such a large portion of your revenue is an inefficient tool. There must be some other value in it for them.
You haven't been able to give them nothing for over 2 years now. For this particular bundle, the minimum split for Humble is 30% and the default split is an insane 45% to Humble, 50% to the company and 5% to charity.
Humble is unfortunately still coursing by on their old reputation of being charity-friendly, but they changed to be one of the worst players around years ago. That goodwill from back then has really been depleted.
I have no idea what their motivation was, but the charity angle is a great way to differentiate themselves from Steam. I would guess they would not be so successful without it.
I'm fine with them even without the charity honestly. They sell DRM free books for cheap which is the only way I'm actually going to pay for digital books. We need more of that.
Wouldn't be bad at all, since Dollar is the only language John Riticiello (the guy doesn't deserve me looking up how he's spelled... so that's what I go for...) speaks. Not fluently, but still.