IAP vs a GameGenie???

Well, even if you ignore leaderboards and multiplayer, then there are still issues.

Often a game designed in this manner is balanced specifically to encourage the additional purchase of consumable IAP. In the old days, games were balanced for maximizing player enjoyment. The more people enjoyed the game, the better it sold, the more money it made. Everyone benefitted from the same thing, the game's design being focused on the user experience. Freemium games are often balanced so that free play becomes frustrating, boring, and an overall not so great experience (not at first, they need to suck you in at first), and then you have to use your IAP game shark "cheat" to experience the game as it should have been designed in the first place. Developers and players no longer benefit from the same thing.

Old cartridges did not come packaged with the game shark, freemium apps do. So there is the simple temptation factor that distinguishes the two experiences as well. People who didn't want to be tempted to cheat didn't buy a game shark. People playing freemium games have no choice, not only is it included, it's usually right in your face.

Freemium style consumable IAP isn't priced the same way as a game shark either. That was a device you paid for and used for any game whenever you wanted. Consumable IAP is a 1 time use thing. Say you decide you want to pay for X amount of consumables to get the playing experience you want from a freemium game. If you finish and want to play again, and experience the game the same way, you will need to pay again, and again, and so forth.

Finally, for some people, and I'm seeing that this is a minority more and more, the mere presence of such consumables cheapen the experience in much the same manner as in game ads. It just degrades the overall experience of playing the game even if it has no impact on gameplay.

 

Well, first of all a 1 time pay to unlock any sort of mode isn't really freemium style IAP. Terminology aside though I would have no problem with that. The problem is how do you let people know that your game is balanced for enjoyment and not cash generation? Every game is bound to claim as much, and there are a zillion freemium apps out there. I guess what I'm saying is I wouldn't have a problem with such a setup but I'm not I'm not sure how you would distinguish yourself from the less nicely balanced hordes. I'm also not sure how you'd make money

 

There was some discussion of this in the WazHack thread I believe. The idea of permadeath being optional would probably upset the more hardcore players. Mainly I think for the reason I mentioned before, temptation. Sure you can choose not to use it, but if the option is there, it might be hard to resist, and then if you do use it, the game's not really what you wanted (as a roguelike fan) any more. So it's not really the end of the world but there are people who wouldn't like it. It would really come down to your target player base in a case like that.

 

Part of the issue is: what do you want your game to be, and for who? IMO, Permadeath is a defining feature of a game. It's an important element that defines the audience nearly as much as the genre, setting, art style, or platform. Optional permadeath defines a different audience. I'm not sure it's wise to say "Oh, you other gamers need to pay more to enjoy my game." Especially given the pseudo-"classist" overtones of paying for an "easy" or "casual" mode (there's enough hate against "gamers who don't enjoy games the way I do" as it is).

I think IAP that removes ads or unlocks game content (the rest of the game, new level packets, new guns or whatever) are the most attractive and reasonable IAP. I'm also down with cosmetic IAP like the ubiquitous hat.

 

If I could pay for one Game Genie app and use it on all my games, sure, why not. The game genie was a one time fee, but iaps will just continue to get more and more expensive. I've payed for Action Replays (kinda the modern GG) for different systems, and didn't care because it was a one time fee (well, one per system), but I'd never pay for cheats if it were a dollar per cheat, or even a few dollars per game.

 

It would be quite good to pay say 69p for an IAP for a 'god mode'. So many games i may give up on after a few weeks due to frustration on a certain level, again with so many games to play i tend to move on if one app annoys me ! So to pay to have a 'god mode' where i can complete it is quite a good idea.

But as others have pointed out IAP's have a bad bad reputation as it seems lots of devs 'force' people to pay for IAP's , you hear all the time 'you can complete it with IAPs', too right you should be able to ! Mostly it seems to be you get to a certain level, say level 40 so the game suckers you in to play it tons and then you HAVE to buy iaps to survive

As for a god mode messing up Game Centre etc i dont care for that at all, i come from the generation where the second i turn off my computer i lose all my scores. I'm never going to beat some 15 year old kid from Kentucky who plays the game 24/7 while i have to work and look after a baby. Dont care if i'm the best 3054th player on a certain game in the world !

But as always when IAPs are done right they work well, just way way too often IAPs seem to 'force' the player to spend much more

 

Not really, no; that's not a "common consensus" at all, and the anti-IAP sentiment is drastically exaggerated by a diehard minority, especially around here, where you'll find most posters aren't actually overly bothered by the concept of IAP on the whole. IAP as an easy target and convenient scapegoat for player-centric issues has already been addressed at length here at TA.

The stats reveal that people are willing to take advantage of IAP when it is made available as an option to them, in stark opposition to the anecdotes and guesswork claiming otherwise. The risible claim that games that include IAP are invariably focused around it to their detriment simply isn't based in reality, and in checking the notable releases of the past couple of months you'd be hard-pressed to find any game that works in such a manner. Look over the IAP-inclusive games being discussed in the TA forums, and the one comment you'll see repeated over and over again from multiple sources is, "Yes, the IAP is entirely optional." That's not a coincidence or the result of some weird iOS Stockholm syndrome.

Games that include paywalls that "force" you to spend more and more real money in order to progress are progressively in the minority, by far; that age is already well on its way to being a memory, barring a few stragglers who didn't get the memo. You can choose to believe that IAP is universally hated and will damage your game if you include it, but you'll be basing your design decisions on a misapprehension not borne out by the facts. It'd be one thing if there were something inherently wrong with IAP and you were trying to "maintain integrity" by avoiding it, but there isn't, so you're not: you'd only be hurting yourself in an attempt to placate others who don't actually have any real interest in your success or lack thereof.

You can sit and appreciate the back-patting and encouragement of the few congratulating you on putting out your 99-cent, IAP-free game, but in a year's time when you look over your earnings and see that you've made less than $100 (as we've heard from other developers here), you'll probably come to the conclusion that, all things considered, you would actually have preferred to have made money – and further apps. There's no evidence that apps that include optional IAP rate lower, perform worse financially, or are even generally viewed in a worse light than those that don't – in fact, the evidence we do have suggests the exact opposite. That isn't to say that IAP is necessarily actively viewed as a positive thing, but for most at worst it appears to be (quite rightfully) a non-issue.

Now, in your particular example of the roguelike, it's worth looking at the game and its intended audience, especially on this platform. The number of people who will condemn a developer for providing a casual-friendly option is far lower than the number who will condemn them for making a game they can't win, but simply tacking on a $1 "easy mode" IAP isn't necessarily the most elegant solution. A developer might be better off adding an IAP character with different skills or abilities including a limited reincarnation power; players tend to prefer the concept of value for money in terms of content (however light) over simply paying to unlock options.

Not at all. If the developer is asking for money for something (optional or otherwise), that's their right; you either pay or go without. Pirating IAP extras is exactly the same as pirating the app itself in that regard: in both cases you've simply decided you'd take what somebody else was asking money for, and made up whatever story you needed to justify the theft to yourself.

If you go to Subway, and order and pay for a footlong whatever, you don't then get to jump the counter and start stuffing extra meat and such in for free because you paid for and now "own" the sandwich. You haven't paid for the extras Subway sells, just as you haven't paid for the IAP in the iOS game you bought, and the idea that you are justified in taking something for free for no reason other than you just don't want to pay for it has never been an adult argument.

 

We're talking about a game which is a few dollars, possibly 5. Are people that tight with money that they have to 'hack' into a freemium game to give them more weapons/money etc. Thats stealing.

The dev spends time creating a game for free, the only money they get back from the game is by IAP's. Thats the money they depend on to pay for the team responsible for the game, graphic designers, managers, coders, testers, a lot of wages.

And then you have some kid hacking into the free game just to give themselves infinite coins etc instead of spending 69p on a coin doubler or 40000 coins etc. Pathetic.

I dont like freemium, and companies who have paywalls and 'force' people to buy stuff to carry on playing i simply dont buy or ignore. I wouldnt hack it or think 'this free game is now mine, i'm allowed to hack into the game....' course not.

Just dont buy them, if the more of us ignore games like this then it 'might' change, but as long as people buy $150 worth of IAP's (one user admitted to that here !) then freemium will continue.

But if you dont like that the freemium app might make you spend money, dont buy it. Dont try and justify hacking into it is 'allowed' as its yours etc. Rubbish

Its hard to blame them ? Course you can. Again i'm no fan of freemium but 'some' freemium games you only have to spend a dollar or two and you have tons of coins.

Its crazy, if the games released for 99c it costs you 99c ! If a games freemium and you have to pay 99c for 50000 coins or extra levels then people start crying, 'why should i buy coins, i should have them to begin with...' etc. Its lunacy sometimes ! But no way does it give someone the right to hack into it.

One MAJOR reason we have freemium is because companies make more money that way, 99c games were getting hacked and pirated and devs werent seeing money. With freemium they seem to make much more money sadly. Its the attitude of 'well its mine now, i can hack into it...' which is harming games

 

The only thing "ethically wrong" in this discussion about IAP is the viewpoint that it's okay to take something you haven't paid for, just because you don't want to pay for it. If a developer were able to change the price you paid for something ex post facto and automatically compel you to pay the difference, that would be unethical (and illegal), but they can't: the price of IAP in games is clearly identified, and you always have the choice to pay for it or go without. What you don't have is a third option to refuse to pay and take it anyway: if you disagree with the transaction offered, then you go without.

Well, let's be very clear: nobody is being "forced" to buy in-game items with real money; it is quite literally impossible for a developer to "force" somebody to do so. You're always able to stop playing any game if you personally believe you're being aggressively steered towards IAP items intended to circumvent "grinding".

That said, while there's nothing inherently wrong with providing in-game items for real money, I do agree that deliberately arranging a game to progressively funnel people towards these items to the point that you can't succeed without them is generally not viewed in a positive light, which is why most games these days don't do that. I can't think of any game of note released in the last couple of months that does.

No, asking you to pay more for extras isn't remotely the same as saying you just can't use cheat codes. If the developer is actually selling cheats via IAP, then that's a straightforward business transaction, and again, your choices are to pay or go without. You have absolutely zero right to take or use IAP cheats or mods without paying for them, and I think you'll find it difficult to locate a ruling or law anywhere that states that all cheats and mods available for a game must be made available to the player free of charge.

Then don't pay; that is a perfectly legitimate stance to take. However, just because you don't want to pay, doesn't mean you can take what you want without paying. I say this with a not-so-subtle prod (directed at everybody in general), partially because it's simply the way things are, and partially because suggesting you have any justification for stealing IAP is a very good way to get a time-out and/or thread-lock around here.

No, it isn't. At all. Much as I'd love to phrase this more softly, please don't make bold statements like that when you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

Paying for the base game is not paying for the IAP extras (cheats, mods, characters, items, etc.), so by your own admission you don't have a right to use those extras if you haven't actually paid for them.

 

In my opinion, if its freemium, IAP will be theere and its valid, because you didnt pay for it, but as long as you pay for a game, its shouldnt have IAP at all. And even less consumables. IMO

 

Aside from Appletini who is very wrong, a lot of people are burnt on IAPs, you can see that everywhere, on threads, reviews, ... And more now than ever. They just bring a bad taste to the final product you like it or not. But then comes in fanatism, and when a fanatic likes a game, they will do anything to defend it at any cost, losing logic in the way and perspective. IAPs are the scumm of the iOS. Period.

I already contacted Apple and gave them a permanent solution to end piracy on iOS, and they liked it and we are working to get rid of jailbrealing forever. Good times are coming back.

 

Videogames were a form of entertainment were we could escape from our daily routines, from work and the things we didnt want to think about, but not anymore, ever since IAP came in. The world is against us: they give us the minimun wage, reduced our pensions, everything in becoming more expensive, and the one thing that helps (gaming) is getting the same treatment.

Edited many times

 

Eh ? Dont think the world is against us, I work hard and i'm not on minimum wage, i tend to think of other countries where they would WISH they were on our pensions or salaries but instead we seem to moan and moan the second something goes up in price. I'm sure many of us here dont have it bad at all. Theres lots of kids here with 300 or 400 dollar devices, back in my day (granted it wasnt a stick and a hoop) we had far less (damn i'm turning into my dad !). So kids with 300 or 400 dollar devices, decent pocket money and STILL they wait for price drops, shameful

iOS games are SO cheap, again old man lecture coming up but in the 80's and 90's games were much dearer. iOS games arent just a 1 hour throwaway game, theres a lot of huge epic games, amazing value. I think people dont realise how lucky they are when it comes to gaming.

But what happens, a team of devs work for months on a game, release it at 69p and cheapskates wait for it to be free or a 2 dollar game to drop to a dollar, are things that bad ?!?

Devs dont make as much money as they think and move to freemium. Its our fault, 'we've' created the monster, but the already cheap games when they come out and in my view you'll get less and less freemium. Keep waiting for price drops/games to go free and devs lose a lot of money and have to turn to freemium.

If these games were $40 each i could 'slightly' understand people talking about waiting for price drops and the attitude of 'i paid for the game, i can hack it'

But again we're talking about 1 or 2 dollar games and then we get lectures how poor people are, or kids begging for strangers to send them an itunes voucher etc, ridiculous.

At the end of the day i love iOS gaming, such great value, i'll keep buying games on release as i want the devs to do well, want them to have good profits so they release more games. The second more and more companies dont make enough money its over to Android or another device so we all lose out. 'We' helped create freemium by not buying enough games on release price and also crazily enough buying tons of IAPs !

 

Completely agree with this. 100%.

And I said that for the country I live in, my country: Spain, who is suffering a lot from what I said. Its sad but its very true.

 

I'm the person who admitted to spending $150 (actually, $148) on IAPs. I went through my purchase history on the iTunes store (something anyone here can do, and everyone should at least know HOW to do) and added up all my in-app purchases, to see exactly how much I've spent on IAPs. I also wrote down which games each amount went to, and divided up the spending by type (new playable content, new game content, consumables, pure ad removal). I still think most of the IAP detractors here, who've only spent "maybe $20" on IAP ought to do the same. A lot of people would be surprised by their IAP spending.

The thing I discovered by looking over my purchases is that most of the games I paid into were good, enjoyable, balanced games. As long as that's the case, I'm not going to object to IAP (also known as: paying the frickin' developers). Nor are most reasonable people, which is why IAP isn't going away.

On that note, I notice that not everyone on this forum define IAP the same way. I define IAP the way the store does: it is a purchase made inside the app. A lot of posters here define IAP as "it is a purchase made inside the app but only if I hate it!" I've read more than once from posters that IAPs that unlock game content "doesn't count" as IAPs. That's a pretty ridiculous distinction, IMO, that exists just to let people retain their hatred of IAP.

 

IAP is IAP, but freemium style IAP, which tends to be the type that causes trouble is specifically consumable, grind reducing coinage, wait timer skipping items, or pay to win powerups. These can be implemented in an inoffensive way as well, but are distinct from permanent IAPs because you know a lot more about a game with permanent IAPs up front. The influence that consumable IAPs may have on a game can be much more difficult to determine.