Hi folks, Just started thinking loudly on virtual money IAP. As of now, in our upcoming game we have 2 items players can buy via IAP. And then some feature creep happened, and there would be a possibility to include more items to buy... However, maybe it would be easier, if players buy virtual money, and then they can decide how to spend it in the game, therefore instead of having 5-6 separate IAPs, we would have only 1... For the first look it seems to me that this simplify things a lot. What are your experiences regarding virtual money IAP? Many thanks for advices, best, Gyula
Madgarden is considering doing this with his game Sword of Fargoal so he might have an opinion worth hearing
I was looking into this back when we were thinking of taking RoboArena F2P. It was also the route that Pocket Legends took as well. Initially they had specific items you could buy, but then they changed it to virtual gold that you purchase and spend on whatever you want, and it ended up making them a great deal more money. I think it's best to offer a few tiers of virtual money, with the bigger purchases giving you bigger bonuses to encourage bigger purchases. When it comes to pricing, by using a bit of decision architecture and buyer psychology 101, you can make a good deal more money by controlling the internal conversation a person has when they go to buy your currency: "For .99 I get 100 coins, and for 1.99 I can get 225... or as a one time special deal I can spend 1.99 and get 300 coins!" For them, the decision is obvious, and you just potentially doubled your income in that instance. Anyway, those were some of the results I came up with in my market research. Looking forwards to seeing how you do it!
Yes, I would like to offer 3-4 tiers, just as you advised. Thank you very much for the decision architecture link!
The perception many people have of virtual currency is that it's tied to consumables, and that the devs are trying to rip people of (eliminate). Alternatively, we have games like tap resort, where there are hundreds of things only attainable by IAP. Virtual currency justly has a fairly hated reputation among gamers.
I suppose it all depends on the type of game, and the type of ripoff-age the developers are engaging in. Nothing saying it can't be fairly handled. Virtual currency really does make a lot of sense and simplify things... I'm not going to let a few seedy developers (who happen make a helluvalot of money at it) spoil it for me.
I'd also say it depends on what kinds of gamers you are talking about. Casual gamers who don't frequent web boards about game development to gripe about IAPs and just want to play games to pass the time make up the VAST majority of iPhone gamers out there. These are the ones that don't mind virtual currency and actually kind of like it. These are the ones that will make you your money and be your best customers. Of course, as Madgarden says, there are non-seedy ways of dealing with virtual currency and I'm all for that. We can't let smurf berries ruin IAPs for us! But in the end if it comes down to making a ridiculously profitable game or not pissing off the vocal minority... I'm all for the former!
Yeah, there is such perception, I'm sure. But, imho, one of the very reason, that virtual currencies and various consumable IAP exists, is the game pricing in the Store. Let's take an example, like PvsZ. Players buy the game for a premium price and then they can use the internal (free) money to purchase the various plants. But many people complain about premium prices (and basically because of prices in general). An real indie is rarely be able to charge premium price for his/her game, but would like to still justify at least the dev costs. One way to do this, is IAP. (Just to repeat the common words.) I think if the Store's ecosytem would not push us towards free or 0.99 prices, IAPs would not be so popular in these days. Why bother with internal stores in my game, if I could charge 4.99, and let's say, that would be the avarage minimum price? But this is not the reality. However, we have to implement virtual currencies wisely and not to make the customers angry. Players are still earning internal free money, but if they want to go faster, they can purchase extra (gold/seashell, whatever), as Madgarden wrote in his thread. Sure, in certain games, virtual currencies are extreme, you can easily spend 99USD within seconds. I think many of us here does not go for those prices, we just would like to get 4.99 for the whole game, but we cannnot charge 4.99 upfront...
Coming mainly from a gamers view, the idea of buying "money" I don't like, especially if this "money" only helps you out in the game (IE, not a map, an exclusive weapon). However, if the app is cheap and has in-game purchase, I might consider it. If you're looking at only selling, say, maps and weapons, creating a "token" system would draw me in. I buy 1 token for 99ยข, 3 for $1.99 and 10 for $4.99. With these tokens I can buy a weapon, or a map, my choice, and they don't expire. A map might be 2 tokens, if it's something different, or they might all be a flat 1 token. This is just my point of view, but FYI, buying a "premium" game ($1.99+) with in-game stuff can be hit and miss for me
So, you could accept virtual money IAPs only in free games? Edit: And I'm a bit surprised, that 1.99 would be the borderline between premium and non-premium games...
On one of our next games we are also looking into IAP. This is good post . I've been deciding on if the game should be free with IAP or charge a price and also include IAP. Mostly looking at games like infinity blade, and overkill. Unfortunately I don't want to go into any specific details on our game since it's still pretty early. My plan is to charge for the game. Around $1.99-2.99 with IAP. However the IAP is not necessary to complete the game. I'm not a fan of IAP games where you're forced to grind only to come to a complete stop because you have to make an IAP. In most cases these games do require a bit of grind. Goal here is to make it fun so you don't feel like grinding. We do plan to charge for things to advance through the game faster, vanity items and add-on levels. We also considered doing a freemium version (full game with IAP) and then a special edition which is around $1.99-2.99 with some extra goodies to start with but also include IAP. Be great to get more people to respond to this post, especially from TA gamers.
I don't mind IAPs to unlock new content such as a new character class with unique abilities. Something that actually changes the game up a bit but still remains optional. If it's just a cosmetic change I might be tempted but I'll get over it in the end and save my money.
With Sword of Fargoal, we are doing a free upgrade from 1.x to 2. The price will remain around the same, the basic features will remain the same (albeit greatly enhanced and coolified in 2.0). So when you buy Fargoal, you're getting the core game as it was and will be. We are adding IAP so that players may expand the playing experience with new character classes and other modes and such. People don't have to expand beyond the core experience if they don't want to, as there are no gameplay advantages to be had and such... just different experiences... for those who choose to unlock the extra features. As for tokens vs gold, the reason we are going with gold is because the game is centered around it already. You collect gold, sacrifice gold at the temples for extra XP. This gold goes right into your pot for purchasing unlocks. So, if you really enjoy the game and are in no huge rush, you can get millions of hours of playtime out of it and unlock everything for no extra cost. And anyone who says anything about "greedy" or "double-dipping" or whatever has no idea what the costs are to create and maintain something like this. So... don't even go there, or I'ma bust some heads.
Well, I think it should depend on the basic price of the game. If the game was free, I guess people accept that if they want to procedd beyond a certain point in the game, they have to buy extra items (the virtual currency or individual consumables). If the game was not free, than I think your point is more valid: the extra items are to enhance the game, provide faster development, etc, but not necessary to complete the game. In many example internal money are offered at the start, so you are not there with empty pockets. Also, free money can be earned by complementing a specific task, but this income is much slower/smaller than just buying extra money. Also, you can provide a higher starter internal money if the game was not free, so customer will see that the free game comes with 100 gold, the paid version comes with 1000 gold, equivalent to let's say a 2.99 IAP in the free version... So many possible solutions...
Yeah I was mostly thinking about games which aren't free. In my experience, most games that are free to play but with IAP usually have a system in place that encourages the player to pay several times, perhaps indefinitely. I tend not to play those at all...
What if, developers choose to have two versions in the Store: 1. Free version, player earns a little amount of free internal money (after each successful mission) or no free money at all, so in a way the player is encouraged to buy virtual money to be able to finish the game; 2. Paid version, when player earns much more free internal money after the missions, more than enough to be able to finish the game. As for the pricing, one of the virtual money IAP would cost the same as the paid version upfront price, so customers can choose between the paid and the freemium versions. Those players who like to spend small amounts, can choose the free, those players who hate virtual money, can buy the game, and forget IAPs... Either way, the developer gets some income, and players have the freedom between the two models... Everyone is happy
My two cents: I've always wondered why there are these weird exchange rates, like 99 cents gets you 3 million Foozniks or whatever. I mean, I understand why, I know there are many reasons why, in fact. But it just doesn't suit my psychology. It makes me feel like I'm getting ripped off because I can't easily figure out what things cost. I'd be so much quicker to buy an electric cow for half a penny than for fifteen thousand Foozniks.
You answered it yourself.. The point is to obscure the real cost. If possible by having more than one vrtual currency in place. Its easier to pay 15k foozniks for an virtual cow that generates you +1 milk for 10rounds than to see that it cost you 50cents Thats the point so people dont see how much money they throw away at virtual goods without real world value. And sure yor getting ripped off, thats the reason behind it. Nothing comes for free, especialy not thoose products with the huge blinking "free to play" neon signs
Right, that's how it seems. The point is to scam people. I don't want to be on either side of that business. I guess the heart of the matter is that virtual currency *as presently done* eliminates the possibility of impulse purchase, for me. There's no way I'm going to impulse-buy something that requires mental math. Mental math is by definition the opposite of impulse. Is it possible to arrange virtual currency so that it's available to impulse? I can only think of one way: price it in real money, and price it cheap cheap cheap.
