Star Command (Game Dev Story meets Star Trek)

[wuzmaname]

Originally Posted by jpcoombs

@Dip

We haven't committed to anything, and the game at its core is still a typical premium game. You get all the content, all the galaxies to explore, all the ship types and all of the aliens, rooms (except Dr. Leach's Lab) that everyone else gets.

This is far from bait and switch. As a gamer, I don't resent Valve for introducing the DLC medium into Team Fortress 2, and that is literally one of my favorite games ever. I don't care if people pay for hats, and Valve is utterly fantastic with offering just free content - new weapons, new maps, new everything all the time. I bought the game when it came out, and as they have introduced those elements I haven't grown to resent the new culture. I understand it. And more than anything, they encapsulate "Games as a Service". Which brings us to the real point.

Games are changing. You can't just release a game, people play it, and it's over. The entire industry has changed in the last 3 years, and gamers expect elongated experiences. I play Red Dead Redemption, and they release DLC that I can take advantage of to extend the game. I don't feel slighted, and people that may not have embraced the game like myself don't really care about the content.

We emulate Valve. They are our favorite company, and we really love everything they do - from steam, to their quality over quantity "policy", their fair treatment of customers and the introduction of hats into Team Fortress 2. They think about things and make sure it's done right. Which is what we will do.

We merely asked what everyone thinks of Freemium vs. Premium. But please acknowledge that isn't quite as simple as "Release a premium game and be done with it" cause thats not the culture anymore. Games need to have much longer legs these days to keep the audiences attention. Yes, you need a quality game to begin with, but even that isn't enough these days. And in particular on the mobile market. There is a ton of shovel ware to get around and on top of that you have to compete with Chillingo, Rovio and the other big companies owning the top 10 on the charts. That is a difficult market to penetrate (cue trolls), so it begets us to ask the people who are really enthusiastic about our game what their opinions are.

We are also releasing onto a market where 72% of sales are through In App Purchases. I know you want us to, but that's something we can't just ignore.



Revenue is something we are taking into account. We don't want to own an island and build a private army - we just want to make more games. We want to make expansion packs, sequels and new games for everyone to play and be able to make a living. And we believe that making a really great game will lead to that success. However, we have to be cognizant of the current market.

All of that said, the system we are considering would be something like Hats in Team Fortress 2. Any bonus that you pay for will be purely aesthetic - space dogs, new uniforms, alien skulls and almost every single one of them will be in the game for you to find naturally. But, again like TF2, some items will be more rare and difficult to find. WoW does a similar model if you think about it, and you don't hear people complaining. You have to pay a monthly fee and they continue to release new content. It's not as micro, but really your paying for the ability to search for rare items and explore new areas etc.

Food for thought, and love to hear everyone's feedback.

TL;DR Probably premium, with IAP. Think hats in TF2

This might help with the conversation - i did recall reading something like this and finally found it about 20 pages back.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by squarezero

I think the point is that once you put in a store, it is criminally easy to design the game to prod (read "force") people to use it. There are very few cases where IAPs feel truly optional, no matter the assurances from developers.

Maybe I've been exceptionally lucky, but I've played lots of games with completely unobtrusive (and totally optional) IAP. I've enjoyed hours of experiences with those games without ever giving the IAP a first thought, let alone a second thought.

Originally Posted by squarezero

IAP also works against the kind of immersion that many of us are looking for in games (especially something like Star Command).

Really? You're looking at "pixel-art" styled graphics on your phone and a virtual button that leads you to the option of spending $0.99 is going to pull you out of the experience? God forbid somebody sends you a text message!

[GeekyDad]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Talk about 'easy answers'- what an empty, unexplained response. How is it not a real solution? They're going to include an in-game store in which you can purchase items that you would otherwise earn through gameplay. Would you rather earn those items through gameplay than buy them? Don't go to the store. Seems to me about as simple and "real" a solution as I could possibly imagine.

Personally, I have no real difficulty ignoring stores that I don't want to shop at, but what, to you, would constitute a "real" solution here?

Here you go, since you only quoted one line of my response in an attempt to misrepresent what I said:

Originally Posted by GeekyDad

I love easy answers. They offer no real solution while simultaneously creating the illusion that people are idiots for having concerns or opinions.

Personally, I think IAP is going to cheapen the perception of this product without achieving the goal the developers are after: presumably mass appeal. If you feel like what you're offering folks is worth more than what you think you can price the game at, consider spacing the project out into two separate games to release a few weeks/months apart from each other.

'Tis your game, but I'm pretty sure you're not on TA to get your head pat. I'm thinking you want honest feedback from potential customers. This game seems like something that would appeal to the savvy iOS gamer, not necessarily the casual iOS crowd. Whatever the reason (and let's just blame Glu to keep things simple), most folks loathe the idea of IAP on principle alone. Trying to change perception with "just don't click on the store" isn't going to do squat for a game's sales. It's as simple as dollars and cents.

Seems pretty clear, and elaborate, to me. Feel free to read it aloud, so that it makes more sense to you.

[BigDrahma]

Originally Posted by wuzmaname

This might help with the conversation - i did recall reading something like this and finally found it about 20 pages back.

Good pull; I'd forgotten about that that. Hats, levels? That's "good" IAP (imho). Consumables? Not so good.

Ok, I'll at least wait and see; they have my money anyway, so I guess I'm in for a penny, in for a pound anyway.

[Doctorossi]

[QUOTE=GeekyDad;2255901]in an attempt to misrepresent what I said:

Which pair of cheeks did you pull that out of?

Originally Posted by GeekyDad

Seems pretty clear, and elaborate, to me.

You clearly indicate that you think the mere presence of IAP will "cheapen" the perception of the game, but you don't explain your reasoning for that belief and you don't explain how the resulting product of the IAP's inclusion (a lowered app price) would fail to broaden the audience scope of the game, as you claim it would.

Beyond that, your comment fails to answer my question. What's wrong with ignoring a virtual button that you know doesn't interest you? I do it with apps all the time and, to date, it has worked flawlessly for me.

Originally Posted by GeekyDad

Feel free to read it aloud, so that it makes more sense to you.

"I love easy answers. They offer no real solution while simultaneously creating the illusion that people are idiots for having concerns or opinions."

[kcur]

I honestly don't care if this game has IAP if it is implemented well, although I doubt I would buy any.

[justincoombs21]

The feedback and opinions are well read. Thanks for the good feedback.

It is a contentious issue - and we realize this- and for good reason. Certain games are guilty of absolutely egregious IAP ideas. The entire idea of unlocking content that the player should have gotten in the first place annoys us- to say the least. It really does.

Valve did indeed do it well with TF2 - not only did they add a lot of content to the game (and incentivize an entire marketplace and industry to create new objects) but they also made the long-term players have some status. And as an avid player I have more items than I know what to do with - it is great. They also made the game free. God Valve is the bomb.

We are not Valve- we are 3 guys but we aren't stupid either. We understand games and what the some of these non-Valve game companies are doing to rip players off.

It is admittedly daunting when the top 50 grossing games are 95% 'free' apps. It would be easy to follow that model - but we aren't going to.

We have to support ourselves - and we are optimistic that we will accomplish this - WITHOUT being assholes and following so many of the other companies that use games to simply make money. Star Command isn't something we take so lightly and simply.

We will be content with recouping our losses and even more so funding another game - and that is our goal - nothing more and nothing less.

So you have our promise we are not in this for the money - we are more looking at the new developments in the games marketplace that are changing at a ��������ing insane pace - but we are trying to derive a model for our own game that doesn't suck.

IAP have a rightly-deserved bad-name and so we will absolutely take a lot of time to find out our exact approach (if any) to it.

Rest assured we are not here to get rich - we just want to keep making games that don't suck - and Star Command - which has been under development now for almost 2 years will ��������ing kick ass. It will steal your soul but not your wallet - rest assured of that.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by GeekyDad

Here you go, since you only quoted one line of my response in an attempt to misrepresent what I said:

I only quoted one line of your response in an attempt at brevity and to maintain relevance to my point.

Originally Posted by GeekyDad

Seems pretty clear, and elaborate, to me.

You give no explanation of the failing of my solution other than a vague and unsupported claim that the inclusion of IAP will "cheapen" the perception of the game and a vague and unsupported claim that the stated benefit of the inclusion (a lower price for the app) would fail to increase the game's audience reach.

Originally Posted by GeekyDad

Feel free to read it aloud, so that it makes more sense to you.

Can we discuss this issue without the abuse, please?

[squarezero]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Maybe I've been exceptionally lucky, but I've played lots of games with completely unobtrusive (and totally optional) IAP. I've enjoyed hours of experiences with those games without ever giving the IAP a first thought, let alone a second thought.

Yes you are extremely lucky. And special.

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Really? You're looking at "pixel-art" styled graphics on your phone and a virtual button that leads you to the option of spending $0.99 is going to pull you out of the experience? God forbid somebody sends you a text message!

Yes, it would. And I'm an old fart who rarely gets text messages.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by justincoombs21

IAP have a rightly-deserved bad-name

This is one reason I actually hope that you do incorporate some IAP. IAP does not deserve a bad reputation- bad IAP does. You guys seem like just the kind of developer that could help rescue what is just another tool/business model from a blind and excessive backlash. Please implement IAP in a fair, reasonable and unobtrusive way and help show this industry the right way to do it.