Im noticing this too. This is definitely spot on. You get a handful of enthusiastic fans and the devs say to themselves. Hmm maybe I can squeeze some more money out of this guy. But what they dont realize that the reason people love it is because you dont have to wade through IAP nightmare just to play the game. They are better off not fixing something isnt not broken and keeping their fans happy that way. Positive word of mouth can go a long way. The other problem is ITunes shows the top grossing chart and its encouraging developers to pursue the free to play model. Actually Im not even sure why that list is even on itunes but if you ask me it does more harm than good.
I'm the one who brought up the issue of piracy, though my original question was whether there's any realistic basis for the idea that FTPs with "pay or leave" walls can potentially exacerbate how much piracy occurs, given that IAP-cracking software is commonly used to circumvent such issues. For that particular system though, can't the FTP model be circumvented by IAP-cracking programs of some kind? I've seen it run quite rampantly in one of the games I play, but the developer was able to block what appears to be the majority of hacked savefiles because save data in the game was synced to a central server. I know that the piracy talk digresses from the original point of this discussion, but it's an offshoot issue I think that should be discussed, given that I think it's a risk associated with moving to FTP models. ------ Back on topic, reading through a few sentiments posted here and there about the view that some developers prey on "impulsive purchases and lack of control" ... this is almost starting to sound like gambling mentality. I'm not sure exactly what to make of it, but I find that quite a striking thought with regards to how developers are perceived depending on how their income model is configured. (I'm not sure this post was meant to be for or against either side, but I guess I'm bouncing around some thoughts in my head and seeing if they lead anywhere >.>)
Tying your app to a server pretty much means piracy is over. You don't need iap for that, but it seems that virtual currency or iap games are expected to talk to a server, whereas a single player "normal" game would look like over-aggressive drm which most of us hate. I think it's fine to give something for whales to spend money on. There are some crusaders who think this is immoral, but given that neither the developers nor those customers have a problem with it, they should keep their peace imo. We don't all need our hands holding. However, we won't be designing our games to catch whales. We would like to coax more than 99 cents out of every customer, and being free we hope to get a lot of those customers. If that happens we'll make a lot of money to keep our company on a sure footing, and all our customers get a deep, content filled, ever-expanding game for between one and several dollars. This seems like a win-win situation to me and hearing that this model is somehow inherently bad or unfair is just starting to get a bit old - before we've even released one!
Sounds similar to the smoking, alcohol, gambling line pushed by the people profiting off it. I think the more gamer orientated point is it shows how rubbish its actually going to be, if the system is set up to catch whales then it's going to be fairly abusive in the way it's been structured. I'm actually thinking Apple may need to start respecting international laws for gambling if developers start getting too carried away.
Isn't the appstore kind of like that now with most apps being 99 cents and all? I know developers on a whole don't like it, but for consumers, it has given us an opportunity to buy a lot of games and be happy to play them. But yeah, have noticed a trend lately with more and more developers trying to swindle large sums of inapp money from unsuspecting players, or abusing early adopters by selling games that are going to be freemium, or by switching price points 3 days after they are launched. Honestly, this whole thing is a cat and mouse games, and sure when developers try to do things like add more inapps and server based tricks, then of course, more people will pirate away. To every reaction, there is a counter reaction. 6 months ago when developers started to take advantage of early adopters, what happened? Tons of game players became non early adopters, cause they got smart and realized that prices would be going down in a couple of days or a week. So what happens to developers? Well, because there are not so many early adopters anymore, yeah, they are forced to sell at a lower price due to smaller sales than they expected. And yeah, with all this inapp and other stuff, pirating will increase, cause if there are paywalls or server side acknowledgements needed, then players will of course start pirating more. I really like the appstore the way it was like a year ago, a lot of 99 cent apps, early adopter sales, not too many freemiums and inapps. That way, buyers wouldn't want to pirate cause the games would be cheap and it would be a hassle to jailbreak and pirate games. Anyway, I am not anti developer or anything, and really a lot of this whole mess is due to people that pirate and don't pitch in a penny for the games they play. What the future of the appstore will bring? Who knows. But I hope that games stay relatively inexpensive and if inapps are used are more optional and not some fancy paywalls and such.
In an extreme case it might do. But given that I smoke, drink alcohol and occasionally gamble, just how appalling do you think I should find that? As I said, not all of us want or need our hand holding so feel free not to volunteer. Or better yet, why don't you wait for my game to come out, play it a bit for free, and then render an opinion?
The 15 minute refund window wouldn't help with apps that get nerfed through updates or pulled from the store entirely. On a different note, another idea would be to have something similar to Amazon's "Test Drive" service, which lets you try out a large number of Android apps on your PC using a server-side virtualizer. Given the fact that the data is streaming from Amazon, I wouldn't think it would be a problem to do the same w/ iOS apps on a PC.
Antiques can maintain or increase in value if you are an educated consumer. So can console and even (non-single lincense) PC games.
I know how this forum works, but thanks. Actually, the incentive to pirate for me wouldn't be to get **** for free, rather it would be the ability to install the "definitive" app version for games that have been loaded up with ads or iaps during updates. The next time a dev says people who have a game installed (currently) are fine I'll flip. Again. Then again, I'm not actually talking about piracy so much as having more control overy digital purchases. If Apple required REAL changelogs to be included in update descriptions, it wouldn't be AS much of a problem. Frankly I'm sick of Apple. They make sure the appstore is censored; that no apps which can run an executable file from outside iTunes are allowed, but they allow all sorts of behavior which often, IMO, disregards the legitimate rights of consumers. Devs are breaking their side of licencing agreements every day.
To a degree nearly every game I play I wait for sales on and get free or at most 99 cents (very rare exceptions I pay $2 for, even rarer that I drop $5 for a good ipad game) but I think I have a good reason, and who knows a lot of us 'cheapskates' who wait for sales might do it for the same reason. I never play the freakin things. If I go through my purchases I bet I have no less than 50 games that I spent $1 on that I have never played, some I have never even seen the plash screen on. I dont brag on opening day that 'hey! this game looks good, Im going to put it on my appshopper watch list!' but the fact is thats what I do. Again not because I am cheap but because paying more than a dollar or two for a game I might never play is just too much. I have an ever growing backlog and it seems to only be getting ever larger and I am never catching up. This isnt a disrespect to the developer, its just the reality of living with too many games and not enough time. I would LOVE a premium app store with games priced at $5 or $10 dollars as the minimum price point and only QUALITY games listed. I would love to spend $5 on a game and get to enjoy it than 5x$1 on 5 games that I will probably never play. but thats just me
Why do you think everything's about you and your game? I couldn't care less what you do, but don't go playing budget politician on a topic that is of a bit more importance than yourself and not expect challenges to your statements. Your only answer seems to be to tell people to go away in an around about way and then you're back talking about your next game. As for hand holding, if you don't like being challenged and want to resort to being predictable, more power to you. The statement was in regards to yours sounding exactly like those who profit, not sure how that reflected on a consumer level.
A bit of an exaggeration. I spent 3000k on a watch in the year 2000. Something tells me 3 grand is still worth a bit. At least the watch is now worth 5k.
Basic gammar. You quoted me and responded to it. I guess it's because you're presenting your own opinions as solid facts in a manner that's meant to be representing "the people". And they're just not, on both counts. I at least have some data to call on where you are just saying "it should work like this because I want it to". I am thinking of becoming one of those who profits, that's been my open stance from post #1. You are reacting badly because you started making sweeping statements and I called you on it. I made a perfectly reasonable counter suggestion that you look at something before moaning about it, and you try to turn that around like I did something wrong. That's all I need to say on that front.
When you started trotting out the old cliches about pirates doing no harm, I did have you pegged as one. But I'm amazed you admitted to being a thief in public. I'm afraid anything else you have to say on this subject has just gone down the toilet.
No, I'm presenting my opinions as... my opinions. I'm not sure what people I'm meant to be representing, I've not once mentioned anyone else, unlike yourself, in an attempt to back up anything I say. You haven't called me on anything? You've snorted a couple of times but I don't recall being corrected on anything. Your counter wasn't reasonable due to the fact you were barking up the wrong tree, the only person who mentioned your game was you, why on earth would I want to try it if I wasn't even talking about it? To be honest I think you're a little self orientated and you can't handle perspectives that differ from your own, you take it all a little too personally. Widen your perspective and you might not get so easily offended, it's a mere debate where everyone has valid input.
Sorry, I just can't be bothered playing he said she said just to prove I was right on a point that nobody else cares about. I've said my piece as someone with some data and hard facts to call on and it's clear we don't agree. I will continue to collect my own data and opinions by talking to developers and watching the industry news. http://www.gamesindustry.biz is a good place to see how many developers are moving to ftp to actually monetise their hard work. Lets just both sit back and see what happends over the next year or so.
I'm sorry, what? I was going to explain a few basics to you but I suggest you go back and read your post, then the quoted one and then your reply. If you're still having problems after that let me know and I'll simplify the process for you.
Fair enough, good luck to you. Just don't presume you're the only one who does analytics, just my perspective is not about figures but rather value. Value for the developer, the consumer and the medium. I'm not sure what ill see over the next year but I don't see how it would change what I think.
