They have a weekly sale, but the HIB is more rare. They're up to 9 and they started in May 2010, so... every few months rather than weekly. I don't mind that getting upvoted if the games are good.
As the guy who submitted the front-paged link to the Origin bundle, I thought it was interesting because it was a significant departure from the usual Humble Bundle fare and perceived ethos.
Submitting every bundle that's offered, however, is just annoying. They have a mailing list for a that.
Perhaps it's just my personal feelings towards the relevant companies but I felt like it was a totally different affair than the Origin bundle, though you are right that it was different from the original ethos.
The main similarity to the Origin bundle was that only DRM-full copies were available and, again, this was definitely a departure.
On the other hand, while THQ was technically a AAA developer/publisher as well, by that point it was largely an in-name-only sort of deal. The THQ bundle was (or at least looked to be; I don't know if there's a definite official word on it) a last ditch effort to save a well-liked company from bankruptcy. Maybe trying to prop up a large company is not quite in the same vein as trying to support a tiny company but I personally felt like the spirit was mostly intact.
The Origin bundle, on the other hand, was a different beast. EA is a large, stable company and has a strong reputation for being anti-consumer. They also only provided DRM-full games in the Bundle but most of the games were only available on a service used by fewer people. And, for that matter, that seemed to be the entire point of the bundle: actually get people to use Origin. As much as I hate to say this phrase, the Origin bundle definitely felt like the HB guys selling out.
The Origin bundle was entirely for charity, though. Kind of hard to consider it "selling out." AND EA let them post Steam keys for some of the games, even though the whole point of the bundle was to promote Origin.
I'm not happy about them not having Linux games, but it's hard to really feel bad about buying that bundle. At least for me.
It would be one thing if it felt like EA had decided they wanted to do a charity event out of the goodness of their heart or at least like the charity was the point of it. As was, it felt more like EA didn't think they could get away with positive PR by actually making money directly from the Humble Bundle but they didn't particularly care since their point was getting buy-in.
I don't mean to say anybody should feel bad about buying it--I don't think they should feel bad even if EA had gotten all the profits--but backing EA's attempt to get market share does feel like a major shift for Humble Bundle.
I'm happy to read that you're complaining about the Humble Bundle's attempt get EA market share. That's as if someone were to complain about Orval trying to get Anheuser-Bush Inbev market share because their lead brewer once said he would buy a Budweiser.
First, if you think I'm complaining you may be misreading. I'm explaining the difference in perceived ethos but I have no problem with HB at all.
Second, I think you already realise that your analogy is only analogous in that there's a multi-billion dollar company and a much smaller company are both involved.
For example, AB InBev makes up half of the US beer sales with Budweiser and Bud Light being the top two US beers and the Budweiser family is the best selling worldwide. On the other hand, while Valve doesn't release many numbers, it's estimated that Steam has a strong majority of the PC game digital distribution market and Origin's market share is, obviously, lagging far behind.
Also, it doesn't take into account the vast difference between Origin and Budweiser. Origin exists to sell you other products and you have to use the service in order for this to happen. It is difficult to overcome the initial user inertia to get them to join and install the service and to keep it running on their system so that things can be further pushed on them. Once this inertia is overcome there is very little extra resistance to using the service to purchase games. This inertia is also increased because the market of people who would use a DRM-full digital distribution service is not at rest but is rather largely moving along happily with another service. By offering a significant discount on popular games if you start using their service they could convince people to get and run Origin giving them that initial hook.
Further, the Humble Bundle was creating an opportunity to have a significant effect on their user numbers. At 50,000,000 users in July, even if only half of the bundle purchasers were new Origin users, that's an extra 2% of people using their service, and they created positive exposure to many more that may have also joined or may be more inclined to join in the future.
And, finally, I don't think HB was attempting to get EA market share at all. EA was trying to increase Origin market share; Humble Bundle was trying to grow their own service and make some money. (People keep saying the Origin Bundle was "all for charity" or whatever, but don't forget that sending a portion of the money to Humble Bundle was an option that I'm sure some people chose, if only by default.) Again, I don't fault HB for this but it is a noteworthy difference from their prior operations.
Thanks for the additional thoughts. I'm not arguing with you. I genuinely appreciate that Humble Bundle is being compared to EA. I think their distribution model is a huge improvement to EA's.
FTL and Fez are real damn good.