So how did the full game in-app purchases pan out?

Discussion in 'Public Game Developers Forum' started by GDSage, Jan 28, 2010.

  1. GDSage

    GDSage Well-Known Member

    Feb 4, 2009
    472
    0
    0
    When in-app purchases came onto the scene I remember it being held up as a potential positive step towards battling piracy, specifically the method in which you charge for the full game within a lite version. I know some games have opted for this method but I am surprised because with such a prospect as 'no piracy' one would expect almost everyone would be jumping in on it.

    So how did it pan out for those that tried it out, especially to those that changed the same game from full game payment to full game in-app? Did it actually have a positive effect on sales, or was the image thus appeal of your game damaged by the fact that anybody (including trolls) could review your game (well, the free part of it)?

    I apologise if this has been discussed before, I am just curious as to the success of this payment method for the app store. Thank you.
     
  2. D-Cypher

    D-Cypher Well-Known Member

    I'm interested as well. The problem I have with it is that it's very constraining the way they have set it up wrt cross game upgrades (at least as far as I can tell).
     
  3. mobile1up

    mobile1up Well-Known Member

    Nov 6, 2008
    754
    0
    16
    Technical Director
    Munich, Germany
    DLC requires iphone os 3.0

    keep in mind a bunch of developers know that a lot of ipod touch users are using iphone os 2.2.1 - and did not make the upgrade. it is really difficult to justify switching to 3.0 as the minimal os version and use DLC.. we are debating it for an upcoming game we are working on
     
  4. abruce42

    abruce42 Well-Known Member

    Dec 3, 2009
    814
    1
    0
    ,,,,,,,
    I think, just my opinion anyway, that it should be the game with a good amount of content for the base price, say 99c or like 1.99. then for extras and other things that enhance the gameplay, it should be in-app purchaces. I think the new game cogs works perfectly with this idea.
     
  5. GDSage

    GDSage Well-Known Member

    Feb 4, 2009
    472
    0
    0
    Ah..... see, I forgot about that. It is a pity Apple doesn't make it free for the benefit of developers (which will end up benefitting them in the long-run as they take a cut from software sales), considering most other companies dothis with regards to firmware updates.
     
  6. DropDKeith

    DropDKeith Well-Known Member

    We went this way with Tap Studio. The full functionality is available with our PRO Upgrade in app purchase.

    We're currently getting around a 2% conversion rate (free users who purchase PRO). We're hoping to improve that rate with our next update that will be out soon. :)

    We've been quite happy with how it's worked out. There have been a few issues for some users, but it's typically related to jailbroken devices and other installed apps.

    It's true about piracy, our PRO Upgrade has not been cracked. So that's nice, especially since we have server side support for those users.

    We are planning to release a standalone PRO version soon though. Just looking for more exposure. Hopefully the pirates won't overwhelm our server.
     
  7. Mew2468

    Mew2468 Well-Known Member

    Oct 20, 2008
    1,652
    5
    0
    Vancouver, BC
    I'd also like to see more opinions as to how this strategy turned out.

    I never thought of it this way; the only negative I've ever thought of was not appearing on the paid list.
     
  8. MrBlue

    MrBlue Well-Known Member

    Sep 3, 2008
    320
    1
    0
    iPhone Developer
    I'm surprised no one mentioned this:
    http://gamesfromwithin.com/making-a-living-barely-on-the-iphone-app-store

    He breaks down the numbers of in-app purchases for full and lite versions.


    I believe this is an accounting issue. The law known as Sarbanes-Oxley prohibits adding features to products that have already been paid for. Minor revisions don't add features, but the jump from 2.x to 3.x probably violates this. IIRC, iPhones aren't subjected to this b/c the user is still paying monthly.
     
  9. daveak

    daveak Well-Known Member

    That is often mentioned, so how do Microsoft for instance get away with giving away service packs for free? These include new features. Same thing applies to firmware for the PS3 and I'm sure there are other cases.

    As others provide feature upgrades I am more inclined to think there is a charge simple because Apple want to charge a fee, and provide an additional incentive to purchase the more expensive iPhone instead of an iPod.
     
  10. markx2

    markx2 Well-Known Member

    Dec 28, 2008
    685
    0
    16
    Sarbanes-Oxley

    I call crap. Apple make people pay because they can make make people pay.

    If it's not crap someone please point to absolute proof from a tax entity that say Apple UK can make me pay for an american tax. No hearsay, no "My mate said", no 'Well it says on that site..."
     
  11. MrBlue

    MrBlue Well-Known Member

    Sep 3, 2008
    320
    1
    0
    iPhone Developer
  12. gekkota

    gekkota Well-Known Member

    Jul 17, 2008
    1,490
    2
    38
    As a Touch owner still running 2.2.1 I can tell you that it's not about the $5 it costs to upgrade. There are a lot of complaints about wifi not working as well with 3.x as it does with 2.2.1---and since the Touch relies solely on wifi, it's a big concern. Part of it is that the updates don't include functions that a lot of Touch owners find useful. For me--it's the wifi issue.

    I do find it interesting that major players like Gameloft are astute enough to recognize that by making their games compatible with 2.x they are increasing their potential customer base.

    A lot of indie devs are needlessly requiring 3.1.2...and then they have the audacity to bitch and moan that nobody is buying their games! :rolleyes:
    Mobile1up seems to "get it"--and they have repeatedly tried to explain it to other devs in this forum. The response seems to be, "Well, if we stop making games compatible with 2.x, everyone will have to upgrade!"
    Yeah...how's that working out for ya? ;)

    As a 1st gen Touch owner, I don't plan to upgrade to 3.1.2. Ever. But I do have $729 burning a hole in my pocket....just waiting for the day I can buy my new iPad! :)
     
  13. mobile1up

    mobile1up Well-Known Member

    Nov 6, 2008
    754
    0
    16
    Technical Director
    Munich, Germany
    hey, nice to be quoted :p heh

    Code:
    >> Mobile 1UP : OS Versions (2010-01)
    
    iPhone OS v2.0		0.00%	100.00%
    iPhone OS v2.0.1	0.20%	100.00%
    iPhone OS v2.0.2	0.00%	99.80%
    iPhone OS v2.1		0.59%	99.80%
    iPhone OS v2.1.1	0.00%	99.22%
    iPhone OS v2.2		4.31%	99.22%
    iPhone OS v2.2.1	7.84%	94.90%
    iPhone OS v3.0		15.69%	87.06%
    iPhone OS v3.0.1	5.10%	71.37%
    iPhone OS v3.1		2.75%	66.27%
    iPhone OS v3.1.1	0.39%	63.53%
    iPhone OS v3.1.2	63.14%	63.14%
    this is our report for 2010-01 (just finishing up) first column is percentage of users; second is complete market share if you support the device. 3.1.2 is 63% - NOT GOOD. supporting 2.2.1 at least gives you 94.90% device support.

    now; keep in mind this is high score submission reports - not everyone does this (note: there is a 79/21 percent advantage with iphone's). so i would expect the "reality" to be worse than this. not all ipod touch users actually use wifi and the network - iphone users always have network access via the SIM card.

    i have a few devices and when i am asked to download a game/app for reference; it annoys me when it says i need 3.1.2 - for what? seriously. this is just lazy on the developers side.. i *expect* that there is still some users running v2.0 - sure, they can upgrade for free - but some just simply don't want to; some are scared that they'll lose their apps/purchases.. it is just something we have to live with!

    the best thing for us? we support 2.0 through to 3.1.2. :) that is what matters.
     
  14. DropDKeith

    DropDKeith Well-Known Member

    Sox doesn't prevent software vendors from adding features or giving them away.

    What it does in this case is force vendors to recognize the revenue they receive from the initial sale over a 12 month period instead of recognizing all of the revenue at the time of sale.

    So, if they gave away the 3.0 update, the revenue (all or a portion, I don't know) from those iPod touch 2.x sales would have to be spread out over a 12 month period.

    So if Apple wants to recognize that $299 per device in the quarter that it was sold, they cannot give the 3.0 update away for free. That's why they charge $5-$10 for the update.

    It may be stupid, but it's currently the law.

    I'm no accountant, but that's how I understand it.
     
  15. EssentialParadox

    EssentialParadox Well-Known Member

    Sep 21, 2009
    602
    0
    0
    UK / Toronto
    What feature of the OS 3.0 are you debating over? Or is it because you're thinking of taking the 'upgrade to full' using DLC approach?
     
  16. mobile1up

    mobile1up Well-Known Member

    Nov 6, 2008
    754
    0
    16
    Technical Director
    Munich, Germany
    issue is we want to support 2.x :)

    i have a game in development which could use DLC to purchase level packs (not just characters) and they would be excellent value for money. if DLC solves the piracy issue to a certain degree - i'm debating it :) of course; we have our own servers so it isn't a question of hosting - we already host our own high score databases et al.

    i am not convinced i like forcing the user to sync with a web server to validate purchases either. but i have build many DRM systems over the years; so i know how i can handle it without causing in-convenience to the end-user. it just sucks i cannot use DLC payment (in app purchase) on 2.x. if i could - i would do it in a heart beat.
     
  17. EssentialParadox

    EssentialParadox Well-Known Member

    Sep 21, 2009
    602
    0
    0
    UK / Toronto
    This is correct.

    BUT - here comes the good news! - Apple, among other companies including Microsoft, lobbied to have this law amended, and just before Christmas it was changed.

    Now the rumor is that starting with OS 4.0, the update will be free for iPod touch users. And likely with iPad owners too.

    http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/09/accounting-rules-change-could-end-ipod-touch-update-fee.ars
     
  18. D-Cypher

    D-Cypher Well-Known Member

    This is great news. The percentage of adoption of OS 3.0 and greater by iPod Touch users is a concern. Removing the barrier of adoption for upgrades by those users and it makes it a heck of a lot easier for us developers.

    Here is the breakdown of OS's as of December per AdMob.

    Not sure what the latest breakdown of #'s of iPhones vs Touches. Assuming it's roughly 50/50 you get 18% or so of AdMob users being at OS 2.2.1 or less. That's not negligible. If they can get a free upgrade with 3.2, then we are happy campers as devs. If not, there is a fracturing of features in the marketplace, which is freaking annoying.

    Especially if (like myself) you want to sell games that use the IAP system.
     
  19. drelbs

    drelbs Well-Known Member

    Jun 25, 2009
    11,200
    7
    38
    I sure hope so. I bet devs hate having to test on older OS's (especially since it's so hard to downgrade your OS!)

    That and I'm looking forward to not having to shell out another $10 for an OS upgrade (especially this soon, with a new feature list that doesn't look that exciting so far...)
     
  20. mobile1up

    mobile1up Well-Known Member

    Nov 6, 2008
    754
    0
    16
    Technical Director
    Munich, Germany
    keep in mind that you'll find 80% of ipod touch users NEVER go online :)
     

Share This Page