$60/year is $5/month. You said “game” and “company” — how is that not a tiny fraction of your total costs?

Nowadays games assets are just crazily huge. AAA games tends to ship at 50G. Now think about the raw assets size and saving all the intermediate revisions.

It's quite easy to burn 1000G of storage on GitHub/GitLab (again, don't forget all the revisions). That puts just the storage cost at $6000/year. At this price point, it's really worth hosting on your own.

As Danieru mentioned they are forcing ppl to manually do cleanups, that probably indicates the storage costs are even higher which worth manual interventions.

Can I afford it? Yes. Do I need it? Yes.

An I happy paying 6 dollars a year for a single gigabyte: I'd rather pay less.

Edit: I pay attention to costs, and repo size is the sort of thing which has a. Habit of growing. All else being equal I'd prefer my team receive the money. A dollar I can give to my team/employees feels good, a dollar paying for over priced storage feels bad.

Doesn't that also apply to, say, GitLab paying their team? The pricing for a highly-available service isn't as cheap as it could be but it doesn't seem terribly far off of S3's pricing.

I know that a small game studio must have a tight budget — and yours looks like a really interesting project (just subscribed) — but it seemed like an awfully strong objection to what I would have assumed would be a small fraction of your total expenses.

It's good for GitLab to pay their teams, but that stops being a justification to pay them more once the profit margin for a service gets high enough.

> it doesn't seem terribly far off of S3's pricing

GitHub's offering is close to S3 but only because AWS charges so much for bandwidth. The storage portion is less than a quarter of the equivalent bill.

And then GitLab is charging 5x as much as GitHub.

The problem is that it's per ten gi-- actually, looking it up, I found a page saying there is a 10GB cap!