Dumb Launch Strategies?

Discussion in 'Public Game Developers Forum' started by nocanwin, Aug 27, 2013.

  1. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    #1 nocanwin, Aug 27, 2013
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2013
    A. Launch at $0.99 w/ one FREE IAP that gives some type of bonus and will disable ads if they are ever turned on in the future. It's VERY important that this IAP is FREE and ads are OFF while app is paid. Dev waits to see how game does. If/When it becomes dead, i.e. less than $5 per day, switch price to free and set IAP to $0.99 and turn on Ads. Those players that bought at $0.99 and unlocked the IAP will never see ads.

    B. Launch as a free app with ads and IAP to remove. When/If it becomes dead, turn off ads and set game to $0.99. No big boost, but maybe more rev than from ads which need volume.

    C. A, but no ads.
     
  2. Razoric

    Razoric Well-Known Member

    Charging for a game and including ads seems like a bad idea. It's usually one or the other, right?
     
  3. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    Ads would always be turned off when charging for the game. They would only be turned on if the game failed as a paid app and you set it to free.

    Paid
    App 0.99
    IAP Free

    Free
    App Free
    IAP 0.99

    The IAP would just be a guaranteed way to make sure players that paid for the app never see ads if you do switch to free.
     
  4. Razoric

    Razoric Well-Known Member

    Oh... I see. That's not a bad idea except for a scenario where a person bought the App, forgot to or didn't know to get the free IAP, then you flip the switch and you have someone who bought the App but still gets ads.
     
  5. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    #5 nocanwin, Aug 27, 2013
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2013
    You'd also want to sweeten the IAP with Bonus whatever to really encourage getting it. This would also be a reward for being an early adopter.

    You could also have a player preference with a default value of "no ads" for launch. Then do an update that changes the default value to "ads" and release the update when you switch the price to free.

    A player would see ads edgecases
    • bought the game, but never ran it, got the update after the switch to free.
    • bought the game, didn't get the IAP, uninstalled and then re-installed when free
    • price and update are out of sync during transition, though you could do some things to mitigate this.
     
  6. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    Of course option A would be a whole lot simpler if you didn't have ads at all. IAP are one thing, but ads seem to be an unforgivable sin with some players. I guess that would be an option C.
     
  7. flathead

    flathead Active Member

    May 16, 2013
    30
    0
    0
    In scenario A): Why would you have to use the free IAP to remove ads? Why not just have no ads and charge .99 to purchase?
     
  8. Destined

    Destined Well-Known Member

    Aug 11, 2013
    1,063
    0
    0
    When you go from free to paid cause it is "dead" charging more in unlikely to end in more downloads. That logic is failed.

    I tend to think unless you a big publisher, no free version = no download for most people. Even for 99 cents people don't like taking a risk.
     
  9. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    There wouldn't be ads. The IAP would be there to protect the players that purchased the game if developer decided to switch the game to a freemium, ad supported game.

    Ideally the game would do great at $0.99 and you'd never have to switch it to free w/ ads.
     
  10. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    yeah, I agree. If the game didn't do good at zero it's not going to do good as paid. It will probably generate slightly more earnings. 1-5 sales a day is better than $0.20 in ad revenue.
     
  11. Nobunaga

    Nobunaga Well-Known Member

    Jun 2, 2012
    1,094
    0
    0
    I think the idea of flipping the switch on ads is a poor strategy for a smaller developer. Anytime you change an app that someone has payed for, in the process of turning it free, you will alienate the people who payed for your game.
    Have you thought about separate versions?
    One would be paid, this version would not have ads. IAP may still be there.
    One would be free. Ad supported and possibly with a slightly different game balance, perhaps earning half currency compared to paid version. You would probably still want to offer something like a "coin doubler" IAP in this version that would disable ads. As well as consumable IAP possibly.
    This would avoid alienating your paid customers and perhaps offer the best of both options listed above. Switching to free from paid can kill a developers reputation (I've seen it on this site multiple times) and limit future sales.
     
  12. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    #12 nocanwin, Aug 27, 2013
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2013
    Maybe I didn't explain it well enough, but option A is setup to protect those that paid. I updated the A description.
     
  13. Destined

    Destined Well-Known Member

    Aug 11, 2013
    1,063
    0
    0
    I guess it depends what you call dead on the free, but while 1-5 sales would be more revenue, I think the assumption you will make them doesn't have that much basis.

    Personally I would rather encourage people to play.

    I think ad's and pay to remove is a good model for indie developers because it lets people download for free. It lets people remove the ad's if they want. For those who "ad's are an unforgiveable sin" they are just silly, I got the app for free and the developer isn't allowed to make anything cause it is free. I think those people are a minority. It does depend how in your face the ads are too.

    I also think an IAP for a level pack or something is another good way to charge and keep all the downloads in one place. My next I plan to make any IAP purchase remove ads, but the IAP purchase is for a level pack or something so the remove ad's is the bonus.
     
  14. Destined

    Destined Well-Known Member

    Aug 11, 2013
    1,063
    0
    0
    I felt this too on going paid to free with my first game. I really regretted no going free. I didn't want to make the people who paid feel that way.

    I tend to think it actually best to pick a single strategy and stick with it unless you have a good reason to change.
     
  15. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    Wouldn't having game that no longer sells be a good enough reason? As long as you're protecting the early adopters.
     
  16. Destined

    Destined Well-Known Member

    Aug 11, 2013
    1,063
    0
    0
    My feeling was that I could end up with a reputation for doing that. Also apple had no way of telling me who bought the app so I couldn't make ads for only the free users.

    In the end i just made a lite version, and then learn from the experience with my next game.


    I have had people have success going free for a short period to get lots of downloads with thigns like free app for a day.
     
  17. Nobunaga

    Nobunaga Well-Known Member

    Jun 2, 2012
    1,094
    0
    0
    I looked at the updated "A)" description. With a free IAP it would work for me.
    You would have to do a pop up or something to alert users that they had to get the free IAP. Seems like a better strategy now.
    Still, the two versions seems like the safest bet to me.
    It has worked, seemingly, very well for Nekki with their title Vector.
    They released a paid game. Sales were perhaps not great. Released a free, rebalanced and possibly ad sponsored version. It slowly climbed the free charts. Seemed to do well, then the paid version made its way into top selling charts, I believe.
    I'm sure this has happened with other titles. This is just the one that came to my mind.
     
  18. nocanwin

    nocanwin Well-Known Member

    Jun 11, 2009
    399
    1
    18
    yeah, probably better just to keep it simple.
     

Share This Page