Is Freemium the Future of iOS Gaming?

I'd rather just outright pay for the game. So far the best model for a freemium game is "Bullet Time HD" and the worst freemium models for games are Glu Mobile's games. Gun Bros., Contract Killer Zombies, etc..good games crippled by greedy bs insane prices. $500 dollars for a gun in Gun Bros. !?! That's just craziness.

 

don't really like Freemium games...won't pay $50 for airplane or gun...

 

Freemium seems to be the future simply because freemium games make more money than premium priced ones. A number of surveys and reports that are floating around (some of which ended up as articles on the front page here) suggest just that.
I dislike freemium games, especially the ones that are specifically designed to suck as much money out of you as possible. Freemium devs are the ones who rake in the cash though, so for a dev to do well, freemium model is the one to adopt.
They have a choice though: create a great game where IAP is truly optional or create a POS that requires you to spend money to get any kind of enjoyment.
I am still hopeful that there will be enough honourable devs who would care about their product and customers' good will.
Case in point. Backflip. I used to think they are great devs. Since they adopted IAP for all of their new games while providing increasingly subpar content I am beginning to suspect that their focus now is on generating income at the expense of quality. Glu are bastards in the category of their own.

 

I sure hope not. Not solely because I think freemium games are weak, undriven, and annoying, but also (not counting when freemium is done right of course, like say Slam Dunk King) they are very rarely ANY fun at ALL. I have very few freemium games plainly because I don't find them much fun at all...

 

I've littered my comments/opinions all around this forum about freemium games, so I don't want to get too long winded!

Freemium is a strong revenue model; nothing more, nothing less.

Other than that, I agree with what has been posted so far.

 

Yeah, I've been talking about how IAP cheapens the value of games like Modern Combat and Infinity Blade, but this comes from a guy that was a hardcore console player. I would like for people to actually earn their ranks and equipment.

SNG's are a whole 'nother beast in my opinion. You go into these types of games knowing that you will be waiting for energy or buying IAP, hence the name sit'n'go. I will say Please Stay Calm is one of the few SNG's that feel well balanced, meaning that you don't have to wait a "lifetime" to do something new.

Yeah, true freemium (pay to play) is a joke. NUFF SAID!

I think "freemium the right way" was in reference to games like Bullet Time. In all honesty, it does feel balanced as in in-game guns and IAP guns are pretty closely spec'd and and you can play through the game without having to buy IAP. Also, you get crystals for completing things and leveling. But, you do have to work hard for your money and at times your like what if I could get that other gun. After investing a large amount of time, I see their IAP sweet spot; pretty sure it's boosts, especially med packs. Overall, it's as balanced as I think these types of models will get and I do enjoy the game.

[[EDIT]]
Forgot to add this: IAP for new levels and such is okay as long as the original game is a "full" game and the new stuff is actually worth it.

 

I certainly hope not. Freemium is bullshit, just charge us once and be done with it. At the beginning of the app store's life, there was a great model: "lite" versions, and "premium" versions. Try a game, if you like it, buy it. Great. Some games had the full game as an unlockable IAP within the lite game. That was a great time. Slowly over time this has been tweaked and manipulated by greedy devs in order to line their pockets, and reach deeper and deeper into ours. Now we have pay-to-play, sit n' go, and all kinds of other crap that we could do without.
Remember when Gameloft was like "the little dev that could"? Look at them now. Greedy money-grubbers. Have you ever played Let's Golf 3? That has got to be the worst offender of all. Slowing down a GOLF game by making you wait for turns or pay the price? We would have gladly paid 7 bucks to just HAVE the game. Take a look at Com2us' new game, Homerun Battle 2. It has all the shitty IAP of the first game, and we complained our asses off about the IAP system of that game! The complaints and distaste were made very public, and Com2us was made very aware. Did that stop them from trying to hang us by the ankles a second time? Nooooo. And now, guess what? Even if we were to go outside of their offices with flaming torches and picket signs, they CAN'T get rid of the IAP model, because some poor bastard out there already paid for it, and if they took it away now, it's unfair to that guy. So now they "have" to keep that model in the interest of "fairness". By the way, that same "fairness" allows that guy to kick our asses in the game, simply because he was willing to buy a bunch of stuff that we weren't big enough suckers to buy. Real fair. What kind of irony is that?! That was greed in the most shameless of forms...and if I ever meet the developers of Smurfs Village, I'm going to throw a CroCop high kick at each of their faces.
I wish to God more devs would listen to their customer's complaints and put a stop to this crap. Just look in the Homerun Battle 2 thread. People complain their asses off about the IAP system, and then when Com2us actually appears in the thread, they COMPLETELY ignore those concerns, and just go on talking about how awesome HRB2 is and how everyone should go out and buy it..because what else are they going to say? They're forced to sit there and act like they don't hear it, because they're not going to change it since it would hit them in the pocketbook, and it pisses me off. I actually tweeted them back and forth a bit on Twitter, and when I finally inquired about the garbage IAP model, surprise surprise, no response. After I called them on it, they suddenly changed from posting like human beings, and started posting like corporate robots. "We appreciate your feedback, and will take your suggestions into consideration." Yeah, sure thing. Boycotting is the only way, and you'd better believe I've been boycotting my ass off lately to devs who make quality games, just to take a stand against their greedy bastard-ness, and I suggest you do too, if we're ever going to see a change. /rant

 

When I got my first IOS device less than a year ago I was so enthusiastic about gaming on it. I could see myself never buy a portable console again. And now I am not so sure anymore My first big disappointment was Diner Dash. This is an iconic time management game. When people think time management game, they think Diner Dash. And now it is just a money-pit. Why use any strategy when you can just buy those new tables or the upgraded coffee machine? Sure, it may be possible to play without IAP, but I wouldn't know that, because the game reminds me loudly each time that I can Buy More Stuff! It is indeed like Gabrien says, that causes friction between the game world and the real world, and it sucks.

I also wonder if it is really true that freemium games are the only way to make money these days, like some people say. If I look at the top 24 grossing in the Dutch iPad appstore there are only 3 freemium games, or 4 if you count Texas Poker. (8. Smurf's Village, 11. Battle Nations and 24. Blood and Gory). Other apps/games in this category include apps like Angry Birds HD, Fifa 12, TinTin, an Einstein Brain game, Minecraft Pocket Edition, Modern Combat 3, Gangstar Rio and a couple of Office/PDF apps. All those apps cost $5 or more, so that makes the notion that IOS users simply won't pay for games and that a dev has no choice but to go freemium untrue, doesn't it?

 

IAPs are perfectly fine as long as you get your money's worth. Remember, I'm referring extra levels, worlds, exclusive characters, etc. Other gaming systems have been doing this for a while. It takes a lot of money to make these games as well and the iOS wasn't seen as a huge market for hardcore gaming when it first came out, so people expect to pay $1 prices. Also, jailbreaking is an issue.

I would say some is pure greediness and some is due to necessity; depends on how you look at it.

SNG's are a different beast. They are what they are. You don't have to play that type of game. I avoid most of them.

Pay to play and buying bonuses or paying for advancement (MC3, IB & IB2) are the two huge elephants in the room!

 

IAPs when tagged as "optional", are essentially like cheat codes you pay for. Now cheat codes were never something devs ever profited out of. They were there either as a mod, or added by a dev just for some fun. Now with "optional" IAPs, as has already been said before, devs have an incentive to tweak the balance where these IAPs are compulsory. And no matter how honest a devs intentions are, these days, if people find themselves stuck at the same spot for 5 min, the game is labelled as too hard. Then, if the dev shows that theres an IAP way to go around it, he gets labelled as greedy.

Imagine, say a bike baron, a genuinely tough game where you need stars for level progression. A number of people have said they actually run out of stars to keep going ahead to see all the levels. If there were IAPs, the dev would have been caste as the villain.

Squids, where the dev was crying hoarse that IAPs were optional. Players supported him too. But a front page article stuck in the bits about IAPs and a lot of players were put off.

Alien retro space (that DSS) has weapon packs as IAPs. I was on the fence for long because of that. Eventually the dev made the game free and I did eventually get the weapons pack. But my skepticism was very real.

Point is, players will always be wary of IAPs that sell progression in a game, or threaten to filter out the full value of the game if not bought. But eventually, if this rakes in more money for the dev, then there's a good chance that this might just become the norm, no matter how bad it is for gaming. 99c price point was the original threat of iOS gaming. That has been exercised. Now it remains to be seen what happens to the IAP revenue model.


And true fremium titles... that, I am convinced, is just a fad. There are reports, that only a very small % of players shell out large bucks (20$ or more) through their lifetime with the game. The fad for these players will soon pass. What will be left will be the large mass of gamers who willalways buy only full games at full price without hidden costs. As such, I do not see this as much of a threat, because the market for these games is very different. The devs today are just catering to this segment.

 

Ah, thanks for the insight as I wasn't around back then. Two years ago you'd catch me living in console la la land.

I definitely remember Eliminate and played quite a bit, but never gave up any money because it was so new.

Chase123 actively gets into arguments on the forum, but he presents valid points as to some of the reasons why we're here. Can developers make the same profits selling premium games in the mobile market?

I say it again, a huge part of the population more than likely expect to pay under (maybe well under) $10. I mean look at how many people wait for sales on this forum alone. Look at how fast Shadowgun went on sale.

Maybe, maybe not. Trending, however, is a part of life.

 

Good point, when i see some peoples reactions when a games $1.99 and they say stuff like 'i'll pass on this till it comes down in price' i just laugh. Games are SO cheap on iOS, theres so many of them, i bet many of us here have bought a game, played it for a day or two and then forgotton about it and finally deleted it as we think 'it was only 99c'.

I dont mind freemium games one bit, i dont see the fuss over them. Theres so many disposable games on the app store, with a freemium game you could download it, play it for a few days and you arent keen then move on. I've bought over 600 apps this year since i've discovered iOS gaming. I've played many freemium titles, i havent been 'forced' to buy lots of IAP or money in the game to carry on, often i play a game without buying anything and often complete them.

I'm loving Bullet Time at the moment, completed the first chapter without buying anything so the game was 'free' to me. Loved it so much before i started chapter 2 i purposely bought some 'gold' mostly because it was my way of saying 'thanks devs for this amazing game'. Didnt neccessarily need the weapons but wanted to make a contribution

If theres a freemium game and to then get to level 2 will cost you a 'crystal costing you $4.99' then people wont buy it, will moan, the devs wont make any money so they will drop prices.

But when a game such as Bullet Time is free and you dont have to buy anything if you dont want to (and can carry on, you dont need these weapons) then whats the issue ?

Everyones expecting some game with 30 hour gameplay for only 99c and will whinge if they dont get that. Companies have to make money, i'm happy to contribute buying lots of games (and not waiting for them to be free or very cheap) and IAP's so these companies carry on with iOS gaming and continue making great games

If we were all cheapskates and waited for games to be free, never bought IAP's and companies were losing money as they had hardly any sales they'll just move onto a console/gadget where they can make a lot of money

With freemium games i never spend that much, if i like the game i'll fork out $1.99 max as to me thats how much i would have paid for the game if it wasnt free. So its my way of saying 'thanks devs, heres some money'.

Its a stupid idea to 'boycott' or call these companies 'greedy' when they make all these quality games, EVEN if you have to (shock horror) spend 99c on IAP's in a freemium game. A joke. Sorry but a lot of kids are spoiled nowadays and seem to want everything for free and are 'shocked' when they have to pay a measely dollar or so in a game. Ridiculous

 

Well Freemiuim games are the modern way of capturing and luring people into your net so that you can have the same amount of income but in a different way. In this way, once a person is inside a game, he/she wont think much about paying and will pay to continue and do well in game, while on other hand the normal routine is that when u put a price of a game, people avoid to buy it considering a useless wastage of money and something like that.

 

Yup, iOS is very much still a casual platform.

Pretty much!

 

To begin with, the games in question are "bagged" by the same few people over and over, who often appear in other threads, wailing, gnashing, and otherwise being drama queens any time IAP is mentioned in any capacity, very often without even having played the game in question. Some even wring their hands, sighing and wondering if it is time they gave up iOS gaming altogether, or make overly melodramatic comments about IAP "actively destroying gaming". The rest of the people - who are apparently quite happy with the games and the systems therein - are off paying and playing, not complaining about them here.

Primarily, it's about profit: the vast majority of developers release their apps with the intention of making money, or they wouldn't even be charging the insultingly low $1 everybody demands they sell their apps for. The vast majority of developers are not raking in huge wads of cash: Angry Birds is an aberration, not the norm, and as has been pointed out more than once, even the developers of certain well-known and respected apps have stated that they are only breaking even, if that. Even with all this, people still demand price drops, sales, and a lifetime of free updates that will only harm these developers further.

I'd rather not see a first-time developer release a fun, inspired game only to be subjected to an endless barrage of players demanding that they make changes that will result in them losing money, and have to walk away with the realisation that it's going to be a waste of their time and energy to deal with the app store and its vampiric community. However, here we are.

On a tangent, a small handful of people here seem to be falling into the trap of thinking that TA is the official hub of iOS gaming, and that they are part of an elite cadre of taste makers and opinion formers, when the majority of iOS gamers don't actually come here. This view of themselves doesn't quite gel with their actual representation, with their constant demands for free games, 99-cent games, sales, a lifetime of free updates, and other app changes intended to benefit themselves over the developers. Observation of these forums over the past year indicates that at the moment, making changes based on feedback provided here is more likely to be harmful than beneficial to a developer.

TA is a good resource, absolutely, but its reviews are no more legitimate or useful than any other site's reviews, and its forums contain too many people primarily looking after their own interests. It has become so bad that I've seen posters actually become angry because developers chose to facilitate their community contact on their own websites or Facebook pages, rather than on this site. BoardGameGeek is a good example of a website that is incredibly powerful in terms of its use as a comprehensive resource for its subject matter, whereas TA seems to be more beloved for its Price Drop and Promo Code forums, and the weekly app release posts.

Based on your own comments regarding Com2uS in another thread, you seem to believe that developers or publishers have some obligation to keep in touch with players here, beyond simple advertising. They don't; if a developer simply wants to announce a release or sale, and leave the extent of their contact at that, that's an entirely legitimate choice that they don't need to be - and should not be - harassed about. It remains your choice, of course, whether or not to support that developer, but lashing out is a bit childish when they've clearly got their own site and forums for "customer interaction", and you're entirely capable of going there for assistance or a discussion. Contrary to the belief of some, a presence at TA isn't mandatory.

It really isn't: that's hyperbole at best, and just plain hysteria at worst.

There is not a single game out there that literally forces you to play it, let alone forces you to pay any amount of extra real-life money through IAP. Every game can be walked away from if the consumer disagrees with the content and systems presented (IAP or otherwise). If the developer doesn't make money because consumers choose not to support their decisions, the developer will need to change their methods; conversely, if they make money, consumers obviously are fine with supporting those methods, and the developer will quite rightly continue using and building on them.

You're not going to win over many (if any) developers by telling them to stop including IAP when their own stats reveal that players are willing to pay for these - and at levels enough to make them profitable, mind you. We've not seen any significant drop in quality directly related to the implementation of IAP either - and no, "The presence of IAP is a significant drop in quality!" doesn't hold water.

I'm all for optional IAP that can speed up the gameplay for lazy people while making the developer money, or solid content IAP like the expansion maps for Ticket to Ride. I won't buy consumables, and I'm not big on "mandatory" IAP (as in items/currency deliberately designed to be required to make any progress at all), largely because I'm not going to pay for it and it'll mean I skip the game in question, and also because if it's that egregious it's simply going to backfire on the developer. However, only a tiny fraction of the current IAP-containing games fall into this category, and it's not a segment of the market that's likely to grow much, if at all, unlike optional IAP.

The argument that has been frequently made on TA, that players who buy IAP are supporting an objectively "wrong" development choice - one which works in the best interest of the developer and keeps them developing, mind you - is going to get nobody anywhere. The implication that all these people who are willing to pay for IAP are too stupid to know what they're doing is harmful to iOS gaming is a gross abuse of logic, and pretentious and arrogant to boot.

No, it isn't, and simply claiming that this is some kind of objective truth doesn't strengthen your argument. Unless IAP were somehow hidden, and charged without the user's knowledge or consent, or a game were changed to include IAP to replace existing free functionality, it's not a matter of integrity. We already have many examples of games with optional IAP that have proved to be exactly that (and you've been specifically called out over your exaggeration of a couple of these), so trying to claim that these games don't exist, or that the game is necessarily harmed because of the inclusion of this IAP, is disingenuous at best.

If a developer designs an endless runner type of game, then throws in an IAP that allows a player to get $1000 instead of working towards it, that doesn't hurt the player who chose not to spend any money, and benefits the developer who sold a service for which somebody was willing to pay (which is the entire point). Some have tried to point to the impact on leaderboards as a negative; this impact might be real (albeit slight), but honestly, I find it hard to have much sympathy for those who want to financially inconvenience a developer just so that they have a better chance at a high score that nobody cares about.

Actually, almost all - honestly, probably all - are. These are video games, and entirely optional choices for a consumer. Now, there are certain development choices that I won't support (and will actively oppose), such as having ads in a paid game, or changing a paid game to free and then adding advertisements, or other IAP to restore the original functionality. That said, once again it all comes down to a very simple situation: if the developer made a miscalculation, they'll lose money, and if they didn't, they likely won't. Trying to tell a developer that they have made the wrong decision, when their data clearly shows this not to be the case, is just going to get you ignored, if not laughed at.

Right now, the worst thing that can happen to the app store isn't IAP, it's this offensive insistence that developers not be allowed to make a profit off their own work, which is all this boils down to. The iOS gaming community has basically already forced developers to release games for next to nothing, if not literally free, because gods know most will catch flak the minute they dare cross that $1 threshold; the question, then, is why are you so adamant that these people not be allowed to make any money at all?

If developers could sell their games for $7 without being subjected to endless whining and criticism, they'd do so, but quite evidently, "Just charge us $7 once instead of including IAP," is not a solution that has been working out, and it won't unless the community mindset changes (and "Charge $1 with no IAP!" can be disregarded as outright moronic). With this in mind, what else can the community come up with to help developers out? Clearly a title that is released for free and sells a single $1 IAP per customer is in a similar position to one that is released for a flat dollar, and with larger or repeated purchases on top of that, the former immediately becomes the more appealing option for developers.

 

This should pretty much end the conversation!

It's pretty much what myself and a few other been saying, but in one fully detailed post. The only thing is I hate bonuses that can be bought for multiplayer through IAP. Speeding up gameplay for runners, etc doesn't really affect me directly.