The IAP/Freemium Thread

Discussion in 'General Game Discussion and Questions' started by Lost_Deputy, Feb 16, 2013.

  1. Lost_Deputy

    Lost_Deputy Well-Known Member

    Jan 27, 2013
    1,773
    0
    0
    Venue Manager
    Sydney
    Lets put all our cards on the table. In app purchases/freemium games are not only here to stay in portable gaming but its pay model is infiltrating its console brethren.

    The standard method of paying for a finished and complete product is not gone but it is becoming a minority.

    This is not a whinge thread. Lets assume that we all prefer the pay for product business model. This thread is for:

    -Highlighting games that do not require IAP
    -Highlighting games that do IAP well
    -Highlighting games that do IAP poorly
    -Ideas for a fair and balanced IAP model
    -Alternatives to IAPs not including premium models-advertising etc.

    :)
     
  2. Oh no, another Real Racing 3 hate thread in the making.

    I get mad about videogames.
     
  3. racer-007

    racer-007 Well-Known Member

    Feb 15, 2013
    290
    0
    0
    Dude, thats basically like every single game included in this thread. Narrow down the focus.
     
  4. racer-007

    racer-007 Well-Known Member

    Feb 15, 2013
    290
    0
    0
    Dude, I think you have been causing some slight problems today. NO one mentioned that name here, so dont sully this thread.
     
  5. Lost_Deputy

    Lost_Deputy Well-Known Member

    Jan 27, 2013
    1,773
    0
    0
    Venue Manager
    Sydney
    Whatever the case there is heaps of random rage out there spewing in every which way. It would be cool to focus the rage into something constructive so maybe devs could look at and re think their options :)
     
  6. Lost_Deputy

    Lost_Deputy Well-Known Member

    Jan 27, 2013
    1,773
    0
    0
    Venue Manager
    Sydney
    The games that just use IAPs as enhancers are obviously stomachable. Jet Pack Joyride springs to mind. You could get an advantage or a small shortcut but it wasn't rammed down your throat
     
  7. racer-007

    racer-007 Well-Known Member

    Feb 15, 2013
    290
    0
    0
    Just my 2c

    IAP for new content, vanity, and maybe early unlocks of levels/items are fine by me

    IAP in games for primary currency, secondary currency is nono. And also timers is no.
     
  8. september

    september Well-Known Member

    Sep 14, 2012
    2,673
    0
    0
    I was thinking about this today, but doing a review site based on the IAP types, frequency and requirement to gameplay for new games.

    It's become such a minefield, good devs getting blasted for truly optional IAP, bad devs gouging unashamedly people trying to support indies. It's not a bad system in itself, it's just really overly abused. Some warning specific to game titles would be good, seems to be the first thing people (no doubt previously burnt) ask in release threads.
     
  9. Yeah, I can go with this, but heck no to wait timers and huge pay walls.
     
  10. Lost_Deputy

    Lost_Deputy Well-Known Member

    Jan 27, 2013
    1,773
    0
    0
    Venue Manager
    Sydney
    Agreed. Its the wild West out there. Huge problem is that (believe it or not) we are relatively knowledgeable gamers/consumers. We check forums, we read previews, we ask questions. The majority of people don't. They just go along for the ride. So far Gameevil and Glu Games are two of the worst repeat offenders I've encountered.

    For example Contract Killer 2 is not a game. Its an advertisment/cash sponge. This is a big turn off for me for the advertising model as an alternative to IAPs
     
  11. worldcitizen1919

    worldcitizen1919 Well-Known Member

    Jun 27, 2012
    1,615
    0
    36
    I think the problem we have is not enough people speaking out about IAP so its getting worse ala RR3. The latest is that RR3 is making changes. Is that because of people protesting? Sure looks like it. Greed knows no limits so the only way to get devs to back off and give a fairer deal is to put objections in public view. The success of their game depends a lot on word of mouth -our mouths so we can to a certain extent direct fairness our way.

    If RR3 back off on the timer issue that all devs will stand up and take note.
     
  12. elgingo

    elgingo Member

    Nov 22, 2012
    14
    0
    0
    Freemium is the most profitable way for developers to make money from their games. iOS gamers are tight. Most are reluctant to even pay $0.99 for game they have no way of trying out to see if they like it before they buy it. But with iap in a free game, people can and do spend significantly more than $0.99.

    Real racing 2 had a budget of like $2 million with real racing 3 probably more. Let's say $3 million for arguments sake. If they sold the game for $4.99 dollars with no iap they would need close too 1 million downloads just to break even ( after you minus apple's cut). That's a lot of downloads for a paid game at $0.99 let alone $4.99.

    I read somewhere a while ago the average iap spent on games is $14 per person so that works out to roughly $10 to the developer after apple's cut. not sure on the validity of this figure but sounds right

    So that means with a $3 mill budget you only need 300,000 people spending money on iap to break even. And if your game is free to play then you exponentially increase its player base.

    Just compare temple run 2 to temple run brave. Temple run brave has like 2.5 million downloads on ios at $0.99 whilst temple run temple run 2 has over 30 million downloads.

    Granted not all these extra players are going to pay any money to play a free game, but you just need a few. So let's say TR brave made $1.75 million just on its purchase prIce and not including its iap. For temple run 2 to make more money than it at the $14 average spend on iap then it only needs 175,000 people to spend that to make the same amount of money.

    Even if you you think the $14 mark is high, even if you bring the average number down to $5 then temple run 2 would still only 500,000 people to make the same amount of money as TR brave. And with over 30 million downloads I am willing to bet a lot more than half a million people have bought iap on temple run 2.

    I know temple run is an extreme example but I'm guessing the developers of real racing 3 will be aiming for something similar by making their game free to play.

    You can't really blame developers for going down this route, it simply makes a lot more money.

    In most games going from a premium model to a freemium model isn't just a case of taking off the price tag and slapping some iap into a game. it means drastically changing the way the game plays. What's the point of having all this iap if there is no reason for people to buy it.

    Timers are by far the most frequently used method of getting people fork out their cash. Timers slow the game down enticing people to spend to speed the game up. If you removed the timers from such games, most would become incredibly dull and shallow affairs. Thinking about it, most are boring even with timers.

    Restricting someone from playing a game with timers reeks of bad game design. Why would you want someone not playing because they are waiting on timers? Surely you want the people playing your game to have no reason to go off do something else.

    There are very few games which do iap without offensive but it seems like enough people happily pay to play these freemium games that it's starting to infect all games. So my advice is just learn to deal with it. Things aren't going to get better they are going to get worse, unless of course you can make everyone pay $20 for games like real racing 3.
     
  13. That's why I am boycotting EA until they remove their wait timers completely. But at least they reduced them somewhat in the last update. I am hopeful that they will completely take them out by the US launch cause of all the uproar. Can you imagine when it launches soon in the US, the uproar will be EVEN bigger than it was a couple of days ago on Toucharcade which is sad.

    Wait timers for coins or money are just about the worst inapp devices other than huge paywalls after 30 minutes of play. I wish developers would just get back to the old style of things and publish both a premium and lite version of their games. Or if they are freemiums make them balanced with no wait timers, huge paywalls; essentially find a way to make buying inapps fun like unlocking maps fast, cool paint jobs on cars, new tracks in future updates, etc...

    Seems like the last year has been the year of freemium in that the big name companies are going this route.

    Let's all hope that next year things will focus on something else like good console like games period, not business models.
     
  14. themyst

    themyst Member

    Jul 12, 2010
    24
    0
    0
    #14 themyst, Feb 16, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2013
    Whatever happened to the old days where devs released a "lite" version to try before you buy? All the negative reviews bellyaching over the fact the entire app isn't free?

    My two cents:

    Try the Kakao brand of IAP games (Anipang, Puzzle ZooZoo, Wind Runner, etc.). They provide incentives for daily play, and in Wind Runner's case, a 1000000 KRW (about $1000 USD) drawing for anyone who exceeds 5000m. They use a regen timer, but it is well within reason (one play regenerates every 8-10 minutes, and you can "store" up to 5 or 6 plays. If you have a large friend list active within the said game, they can also send you "plays", so it almost never becomes an issue. The IAP, while not cheap, is reasonable. $9.99 will get you plenty of in-game items for what you need to progress. If you do not wish to pay, you can grind for days or even play without the in-game items and still be competitive. If you look at the average review score for these games, it appears most people are happy with it.

    Then there are devs like Gamevil which are far too greedy They use soft paywalls which make it IMPOSSIBLE to progress and include an upgrade FAILURE model for premium item purchases.

    Let's use Baseball Superstars 2013 as an example. You must purchase "upgrade stones" at 5 stars a piece. These stars do not come cheap, and the free star option requires that you install and play virtually every Gamevil game for 10-20 stars a piece. Comes out to 400 stars. Problem is, you can only get about 80 of these upgrade stones, which FAIL unless you spend more stars on an upgrade potion which can STILL fail as you progress. And with a failure to upgrade can sometimes mean you get de-leveled.

    So you spend money to possibly make your character WEAKER. With that said, at least there is no ridiculous wait times to continue play.

    Anyway, there is IAP done right, and there is IAP done horribly wrong. I seriously wish both Google and Apple banned "bribing" users for a few in-game items for a 5-star review for one. And two, I wish TA (or some other site) would rate the fairness or implementation of the IAP system in their reviews.
     
  15. Lost_Deputy

    Lost_Deputy Well-Known Member

    Jan 27, 2013
    1,773
    0
    0
    Venue Manager
    Sydney
    #15 Lost_Deputy, Feb 16, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2013
    There's some great stuff here already. Sites like this giving apps a separate value rating perhaps.

    Also the possibility of ranking the developer on their merit in the App Store. Much like eBay. It goes off an aggregate user score from all their products ratings.

    I've spent heaps on time on RR3 and I can confidently say its a great product. My issue is not the timers as they become on non factor once you have a few cars. I spent $15 outright on two car packs. I have no need to spend any more and I'm satisfied with how much fun I'm having after the purchase. Now if I wanted to blow another $5 down the track coz I love it then that's cool. I think it promotes updates and keeping the product fresh and exciting. Also if you love the crap out of your Audi then I see no reason why dropping $2 on a custom paint job is crazy.

    My issue is the lack of ceiling. There should be no $100 packages. No $80 cars. It's just devs putting their hands out and begging like crack addicts. it stinks like sh1t. It's so disrespectful.
    This is what is the problem with IAPs for me. The lack of respect and the value for money.

    For me RR3 ticks one of the boxes. Many tick both
     
  16. september

    september Well-Known Member

    Sep 14, 2012
    2,673
    0
    0
    I'm not bothering with trying RR3 but agreed. I think that's the biggest turn off for me, some developers treating their customers like morons in the hopes of catching a whale, fair trade value gets chucked out the window in the process.

    One other sore point for me is the Apple "simulated gambling" rating of 12 years, there are full on casino apps that you purchase chips for, there's no real 'simulation' aspect at all. Apple and developers are currently dodging international gambling laws knowingly, I personally look forward to the day governments catch up and start taking this sort of thing as seriously as they do any non digital form.
     
  17. Lost_Deputy

    Lost_Deputy Well-Known Member

    Jan 27, 2013
    1,773
    0
    0
    Venue Manager
    Sydney
    The gambling on the Appstore is so bogus. Gambling these days in general is crazy. The sports betting pervades every inch of space while watching TV. Its loose. The link of gambling to gaming has been around for ages. Konomi is and has been one of the biggest poker machine distributors in the world. Its the multi national corps that are the real villains tho.

    MNC's dodging international law has been going on since international laws were introduced. Usually at the expense of human rights. Its wrong but I don't think anyone should be surprised about the lack of moral practice by the big guys. I think that IAPs are slightly different as they are a new financial model. As consumers we are in the driving seat to help shape this model.

    No RR3? Are you boycotting EA?
     
  18. september

    september Well-Known Member

    Sep 14, 2012
    2,673
    0
    0
    I think the gambling aspect is dependant on country, we definitely wouldn't sanction 12 year olds gambling here and have pretty decent gambling legislation. To me paying for virtual chips is the same as physical, I don't see the difference personally.

    Nope not boycotting, just not interested. I have RR2, there's nothing in RR3 I want enough to jump through endless hoops.
     
  19. Rubicon

    Rubicon Well-Known Member

    Feb 22, 2011
    1,535
    1
    0
    Lead Programmer, Chief Bottlewasher
    Isle of Wight, UK
    I have a bit of perspective to share. And at the risk of being insulted for trying to clarify things and provide information like I did last time, here goes.

    The single biggest reason everyone seems to be switching to some style of freemium/iap heavy business model is right there in your statement.

    Many, many vocal tightwads seem to be under the impression that they have god-given rights to access a million dollar game for 99 cents. There is a far greater pool of people who would be happy to pay much more than that for the right game if it offers value for money.

    Developers are waking up to the fact that unless you have an epic runaway hit, you just can't make high quality games with tons of content by selling for a dollar or three - there's too much competition now to get a massive bulk of customers that would allow that.

    And here's the rub. As indicated, many players would happily pay miles more than 99 cents anyway, but they don't actually get the chance to - The game costs what it costs even if you would've paid one million bucks for it.

    With a fixed price model, developers are leaving all that extra money on the table and they just can't afford to do that any longer.

    Our current big title is a paid model and even includes some iap's for some strictly optional additional content. Despite rave reviews, game of the years, etc., we're struggling to just stay afloat from income of that title, whilst all the time hearing from our forum fans that they consider our game to be worth far more and would've paid up. However if we set the buy price at $15 you can imagine what would happen.

    So, freemium. We can get lots more out of those happy to pay it, less from those that feel 3 bucks is a lot, nothing from people who didn't like it but still got to trial it for free. That's a win-win for everybody and we'll be making all our future titles fit this model.

    The key is simply to not be greedy about it. But in return for that respect of the customer, developers need to start getting some in their direction. We're not all greedy assholes, we just have mortgages to pay. If you want top quality pro developers to stick around making high content great titles, you want them to pay their mortgages too, else they'll have to go work at something else.

    Hope that helps a bit.
     
  20. MidianGTX

    MidianGTX Well-Known Member

    Jun 16, 2009
    3,738
    10
    38
    In terms of consumable IAP... I'm not really being represented here. I'm happy to pay money for great games, in fact most of the games I own overall I paid over $50 for (console, obviously), but a great game let down by consumable IAP? Not a great game anymore. There is simply no such thing. I suppose that means I come under "didn't like it" but the fact is I might have thought the gameplay was fantastic, you just managed to kill it for me with the business model. So it kinda stands to reason there's a whole section of the marketplace with consumers who would gladly pay premium prices, but are being put off.

    Non-consumable IAP I judge on a case-by-case basis, as with GBWG, which I like.
     

Share This Page