• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Kim Kardashian: Hollywood Projected to Make $200 Million This Year - Analyst

Okay, seeing as I have the game right here, I will try and explain why it is doing so well.. You can earn virtual money in the game doing tasks, but it is a very small amount. You are never going to earn a lot, and I guess it would take many weeks of playing to earn over $10,000 of virtual currency.

Here is an example of a virtual mansion you can buy with virtual currency

FB6dt4v.png

If you do not want to play for weeks and weeks, yout can use real money to buy virtual currency. Here is that screen.


So, mansion = close to €36 (I think that converts to $39). PEOPLE WANT VIRTUAL MANSIONS DAMMIT
 

ANDS

Banned
Continues to impress me how into other peoples shit we are in this community. If someone wants to play this game, who cares? From reviews it's actually interesting especially if you're into this culture.

As for Kim K herself - she's a celebrity now because people find her interesting. End of story.
 
You do any IAP? If not then that's pretty impressive.

Never touched them once in any game.

I am becoming a bit fascinated with these games though - downloaded Trial Frontier, Plundernauts, and this over the last month, and have tried to see how much game can be played without paying.

Trial Frontier has good gameplay, but really forces you to pay in the late game to have a chance.
Plundernauts (from the Starhawk guys) is actually a fun game. Takes a while to get going, but is fun. I never felt like the game was forcing me to pay.
Kardashian really feels like it was built to take money from impatient people. There is no gameplay there, just clicking on buttons on screen with no reward then be forced to wait hours to do it again.
 
Okay, seeing as I have the game right here, I will try and explain why it is doing so well.. You can earn virtual money in the game doing tasks, but it is a very small amount. You are never going to earn a lot, and I guess it would take many weeks of playing to earn over $10,000 of virtual currency.

Here is an example of a virtual mansion you can buy with virtual currency
So, mansion = close to €36 (I think that converts to $39). PEOPLE WANT VIRTUAL MANSIONS DAMMIT

tl;dr edition: it's the type of pay to win garbage that gives mobile games a bad rep. And again, why is this making so much money?
 

biteren

Member
Continues to impress me how into other peoples shit we are in this community. If someone wants to play this game, who cares? From reviews it's actually interesting especially if you're into this culture.

As for Kim K herself - she's a celebrity now because people find her interesting. End of story.

thats fine and understandable, but it may have some undesirable effects, im sure EA is noticing its sucess, and When EA gets involved with F2P.....well we all know how that will turn out.

just my lil concern here.
 
This shit is kind of scary. Every publisher/developer is just desperate to find a way to hook people into microtransactions, because for it works on the masses.
 
Okay, seeing as I have the game right here, I will try and explain why it is doing so well.. You can earn virtual money in the game doing tasks, but it is a very small amount. You are never going to earn a lot, and I guess it would take many weeks of playing to earn over $10,000 of virtual currency.

Here is an example of a virtual mansion you can buy with virtual currency



If you do not want to play for weeks and weeks, yout can use real money to buy virtual currency. Here is that screen.



So, mansion = close to €36 (I think that converts to $39). PEOPLE WANT VIRTUAL MANSIONS DAMMIT
They want virtual mansions because shelling 36 eur to get a huge ass virtual house is easier (while being less interesting) than trying to get it in real life :)
Oh well.. But then again I never got into sims at all so, figures..
 

AlexMogil

Member
I can't shake the feeling of anxiety towards microtransactions. I would never shake the feeling of regret that I just paid actual money to build a virtual mansion.

At the same time - we (as video game consumers) have been subject to microtransactions all our lives. Insert .25 to play is at its core a microtransaction. Insert .25 to continue is, too.
 

Teeth

Member
Continues to impress me how into other peoples shit we are in this community. If someone wants to play this game, who cares? From reviews it's actually interesting especially if you're into this culture.

It's because of the pricing model.

And the hundreds of clones just like it available (though they don't have an official Kardashian in it).

And the comparative lack of any interesting mechanics.

Yet it's very successful. There have been demonstrable cases where financially successful business plans have infected and affected what would or could have been otherwise great games in other markets (like the ones "we" apparently like). This is why "we" are into what is successful elsewhere.

Of course "we" is not "us" because each person is speaking for themselves.
 

Danthrax

Batteries the CRISIS!
Continues to impress me how into other peoples shit we are in this community. If someone wants to play this game, who cares? From reviews it's actually interesting especially if you're into this culture.

As for Kim K herself - she's a celebrity now because people find her interesting. End of story.

What other people are interested in affects what games we get to play. That's why we're "into other people's shit."
 
This shit is kind of scary. Every publisher/developer is just desperate to find a way to hook people into microtransactions, because for it works on the masses.

Yup, and instead of spending to develop one $30m AAA game you can instead make 20 games like this and hope that 1 breaks out. If one does, then you've made your profit a AAA hit could have, if 2 of the 20 hit, you're golden.

Welcome to the future.
 

coldone

Member
In all honesty this game is no different than DS games that Nintendo/Ubisoft etc used to make. This is same core idea as Nintendo Style Savvy or Tomdachi life etc.

Just because it has Kim, lot of people are dissing it. If it had Mario and Peach.. would have gotten 9's and GAF would rave about it.
Style_Savvy_Trendsetters_%28NA%29.jpg
 

SmokyDave

Member
What other people are interested in affects what games we get to play. That's why we're "into other people's shit."
Thing is, it's considered poor form to wish for conventional systems or games to fail because they're negatively affecting the things you prefer. People get very upset. That ought to hold true for mobile games too.
 

ANDS

Banned
What other people are interested in affects what games we get to play. That's why we're "into other people's shit."

Ridiculous. What was this developer doing before Hollywood came out that prevented them from working on something "wondrous"? For all you know the success of this game will allow them to branch out into other areas. Or they can (and should if its successful) stick it out and continue to be the official developer of MicroTrans games for Kim K and her ilk. So what. Until we see a shift in the rate at which non MT games are being produced for the masses, this is just moaning for moanings sake.
 

biteren

Member
In all honesty this game is no different than DS games that Nintendo/Ubisoft etc used to make. This is same core idea as Nintendo Style Savvy or Tomdachi life etc.

Just because it has Kim, lot of people are dissing it. If it had Mario and Peach.. would have gotten 9's and GAF would rave about it.

yeah, Nintendo and Microtransactions, that'll mix well for GAF.....
 

zigg

Member
In all honesty this game is no different than DS games that Nintendo/Ubisoft etc used to make. This is same core idea as Nintendo Style Savvy or Tomdachi life etc.
I've played Style Savvy, am playing Tomodachi, have tried a few of these F2P "wait to tap things again" games, and can safely say you are wrong in this assertion. Did you make this logical leap just based on the cover art, or…?
 
Videogame crash incoming.

Many years from now we'll be talking about an underground trash dump of shopping simulators for 3DS and Kinect similar to that ET stash.
 
In all honesty this game is no different than DS games that Nintendo/Ubisoft etc used to make. This is same core idea as Nintendo Style Savvy or Tomdachi life etc.

Just because it has Kim, lot of people are dissing it. If it had Mario and Peach.. would have gotten 9's and GAF would rave about it.
Style_Savvy_Trendsetters_%28NA%29.jpg

I think people have a problem with F2P pay2win games, and thats shame because thats what gaming is going to be in the future
 

Miletius

Member
I don't think people find the subject of Kim Kardashian distasteful in this case. I mean, I don't personally like her but I feel like people are free to like what they like. Plus, if it means more people into gaming, then more power to everybody.

I think what most people find distasteful about this scenario is the potentially exploitative mechanics, which encourage you to spend a lot of money in virtual currency. I'm fine with F2P games, hell, I've even spent a fair bit of money on the ones I like. These sort of megatransactions, though, I am not okay with them.
 

Ascenion

Member
On what? Please explain it a bit if you dont mind. After personally spending time with them game myself,, I'd be interested to hear what compelled you to put cash down.
Stars. I don't like to wait, so I use the stars to buy energy to finish photo shoots and appearances faster.
 
I don't 100% know, but I bought a cheaper home with virtual currency in earned in game ($6000), so I am guessing you can do much the same things.

After buying the home, I now have the option to spend $20,000 virtual currency (€18 actual) on a virtual Humvee



This feels like a never ending downward spiral

So houses don't really do anything other than open up more opportunities to spend cash? This is why I avoid freemium games like the plague.
 
Top Bottom