This is one of the most shameless and biggest in-app purchase abusing iphone game

Last week I bought a cheap Android tablet for browsing online and reading text guide for games translations and stuff like this.

I went into the market and I started to freak out, is this the thing that people claim to be killing gaming? Like, for real? The amount of garbage was unbearable.

And you haven't seen the festering shit that's on third party app stores yet!

Seriously though I'm always baffled at how can anyone, anywhere ever invest money on crap apps (because you just know there's sad clowns purchasing that stuff out there, since it's so omnipresent)
 
Literal garbage? Not sure I can take you or your arguments seriously.

We publish quality games at a fair price. Tens of millions of people think so.

The retail console model is actually broken. So, I'm not sure where you are advising sending developers next.

Hmmm are you referring to our BAFTA nominated shit free to play game, or one of our other highly rated shit free to play games?

You are doing yourself no favors by responding like this.

I see 4 dumb fallacies here.
 
this is still a very young market, and it's zig-zagged a lot in a very short time. I will defend freemium/IAP as a concept and I've seen it done well, between quality of gameplay/production and genuine player satisfaction. I've also seen it done absolutely horrendously in various regards (either it's a terrible experience that pisses off the customer, or it's not implemented properly and ends up screwing the developer, or both).

It's been a ping-pong match between devs and audience that has led to this current situation (people get used to cheap/free, all experiences are considered devalued and disposable) and there needs to be a serious amount of experimentation and fine-tuning before we reach a point where people discussing this on a board such as gaf (pretty niche, compared to the vast majority of who these games are intended for) can ever be at peace with it. That might actually never happen - and it probably is irrelevant.

long story short, the majority of audience on mobile/etc either don't want to pay for their experience or at least want the illusion that they don't have to. As a developer I feel it is my job to do what I can to "win them over" enough not only to try my game for more than 30 seconds, but feel compelled to give me something in return without feeling crappy about it.
 
So... I am assuming that the app approval process for games is merely a queue? Or are the approvers really that detached from pop culture?
 
lol. Welcome to the Iphone. Fucking people over from the beginning. Hardware, software, it doesn't matter you're just getting fucked.
 
This shit really saddens me. It would be fine if this guy was like "well it makes us a lot of money, so we keep doing it". I am okay with making a quick buck while an entire ecosystem and financial model continues to implode. But actually thinking that your F2P skinner boxes are engaging and worthwhile to people who care about video games is on another level, it is something I really can't comprehend. I guess after some point it just becomes "well I am making money, so what I am making must be great no matter what". What I am saying, I find it really fucking hard to believe that anyone who works on F2P games thinks that what they are making is good or that going F2P has actually made their game (as a video game) better.

Individual gamers not realizing their opinion doesn't speak for everyone saddens me.

I don't think our games are great because they make money. I think they are great because they are highly rated by gamers, highly rated by press, they win awards, and we get a ton of fan mail. What is you evidence our games are not great?
 
Individual gamers not realizing their opinion doesn't speak for everyone saddens me.

I don't think our games are great because they make money. I think they are great because they are highly rated by gamers, highly rated by press, they win awards, and we get a ton of fan mail. What is you evidence our games are not great?

Man, just let it go.

You think your game is great, which is fine. He thinks your game is not, which is fine.

Anyways, it's sad that such a huge copyright infringement software like this gets a free pass from Apple. Such a shameful act.
 
Individual gamers not realizing their opinion doesn't speak for everyone saddens me.

I don't think our games are great because they make money. I think they are great because they are highly rated by gamers, highly rated by press, they win awards, and we get a ton of fan mail. What is you evidence our games are not great?

Why does anyone need evidence of that? Is he suddenly not allowed to have an opinion?

I don't care how many awards "Super Monsters Ate My Condo" gets, I personally did not like the game at all.
 
What the hell were these gies thinking when they made this? Seems they are preying on children with the blatant stealing of popular Nintendo characters. This shit is shameful.
 
Why does anyone need evidence of that? Is he suddenly not allowed to have an opinion?

I have no problem with anybody disliking our games or trashing them publically.

I'm objecting to the concept that freemium games are objectively and inherently bad, which is being claimed by more than one person in the thread.

My defense of our games is merely putting forward a counter argument of "a large number of people don't agree with you".
 
My defense of our games is merely putting forward a counter argument of "a large number of people don't agree with you".

Which is hardly a defense at all.

Congratulations. You've pointed out that people disagree about stuff. What's your point?
 
Freemium games aren't objectively or inherently bad.

Look if you want to split hairs then nothing in gaming is objectively bad. Gaming is about taste/aesthetics which is always subjective no matter what people say.

But some people have an inherent problem with freemium. Especially a lot of people on GAF. They have that opinion, and merely pointing out that other people have different opinions isn't going to change anything. You're wasting breath. If you want to put forward an argument that freemium is better for reasons X, Y, Z then do so. But merely pointing out that the freemium model is popular does nothing.
 
Like (or, "don't mind"):

Paid apps with IAP (say, new levels/packs/expansions of Carcassonne/Ascension/etc)

Dislike (or, "avoid"):

Free with paid consumables, time buys, skins, cheats, brick walls

Love the addition on the App Store for showing if the app has in app purchases. Lets me take a look. If I scroll and start seeing "xxx for .99", "20 for 4.99", just don't even bother.
 
I have to ask, is there even as much excitement for iOS now versus when Angry Birds hit? Maybe the revenue being generated would make me look like I have the wrong impression (then again it could be a handful of whales versus an influx of new users) but it doesn't really seem as if there's been as much interesting and exciting outside of the occasional Swords & Sworcery-esque release.

Though I guess the real damage could be that mindshare's eroded without anything of decent value cropping up, plunging games into the same sort of zone as when the Atari 2600 crashed, but unable to climb out or truly kill itself as effectively.
Freemium games aren't objectively or inherently bad.
Freemium's specifically a derogatory term (or at least co-opted as one) for games that are meant to exploit the player base for cash, versus Free to Play. But that may be a perception thing, and probably the bigger point is that free to play isn't inherently bad, it's just how it's being used. Though personally I don't think it's a model sustainable for the industry at large.
 
Well, other games seem to still be selling really well, there IS some backlash, and despite the pessimism it does seem ultimately the 3DS is selling well even outside of Japan. I'd be more concerned about the state of AAA game, but given its homogenization it probably needs to have something of a crash to sober everyone up. Despite my post I'm not really THAT pessimistic about gaming on a whole, though I do fear that what promise iOS and Android were showing is going to be rapidly pissed away by the abuse of IAP, ESPECIALLY in the form that's hitting games that are sequels to those that were highlighting what could be done on tablets/phones.

Well, and it also seems all the best looking games are multiplatform. Walking Dead could be heralded as the best iOS game of last year, but I got that on PC and can get that on PS3/360 as well, XCOM's being ported over and is a great fit but nevertheless IS a port, and the Kickstarter games that'll be on tablets are also set for PC by far and large last I checked.

Isn't this illegal?
If we're lucky it'll end up being so thanks to them ruining the party! But I'm not too optimistic at least in the US, and I suspect at best it'd be killing the random element of IAP.
 
And I thought $4.99 was outrageous for in-game app store purchases, lol. I think $99.99 is the new limit.

Also to make it even worse they make it seem like you can't beat the game without buying a power-up. This is one of the most messed up/funny things I've seen in a while.
 
I have to ask, is there even as much excitement for iOS now versus when Angry Birds hit? Maybe the revenue being generated would make me look like I have the wrong impression (then again it could be a handful of whales versus an influx of new users) but it doesn't really seem as if there's been as much interesting and exciting outside of the occasion Swords & Sworcery release.

Though I guess the real damage could be that mindshare's eroded without anything of decent value cropping up, plunging games into the same sort of zone as when the Atari 2600, but unable to climb out or truly kill itself as effectively.

It's hard to say. Like I said earlier, we are still in a very early phase of all of this stuff. I think there can be no argument that this type of casual gaming has dramatically changed the industry and it is absolutely here to stay. If anything I think we'll see consistent burnout by those developers who cannot weather the storm/adapt with the times, and only those with the best production values and most well-implemented monetization strategies will continue to thrive, aside from the occasional fluke here and there.

At some point I strongly suspect we'll see a huge convergence between what is considered console/PC (or "dedicated") gaming as a platform and mobile devices and at that stage it will be a huge change. I don't think it's unusual to suspect companies like MS are doing their best to facilitate that coming day, given their movements the last couple of years. I guess we will see after their press event exactly how far it's going to be pushed at the beginning of the coming generation, and hopefully give a little more insight to what lies past that.
 
MTMBStudios said:
what about nuclear bombs

What about them?


Look if you want to split hairs then nothing in gaming is objectively bad. Gaming is about taste/aesthetics which is always subjective no matter what people say.

But some people have an inherent problem with freemium. Especially a lot of people on GAF. They have that opinion, and merely pointing out that other people have different opinions isn't going to change anything. You're wasting breath. If you want to put forward an argument that freemium is better for reasons X, Y, Z then do so.

Sure. I'm glad you asked.

Freemium as a business model is (currently) much more sustainable and viable for mobile given the real business challenge of discovery. It helps solve discovery because freemium lowers the barrier to entry for gamers, allowing quality games to be surfaced to a larger audience via engaged players who try the game. Quality games can more easily find a voice via freemium.

But freemium can also be a driver of quality. A freemium title is currently considered less risky given you have more predictable returns at the bottom end given download/revenue ranges of free games are much easier to predict than revenue ranges on paid games. Adopting a freemium model allows for more confidence which means a larger budget and longer development timeframes can be invested, which helps the chances of ultimately producing a fundamentally better product.

Freemium games also lend themselves better to the software as a service model given the way they are structured, which more easily allows for new features and content being added over time creating a richer and deeper experience. Alternatively, this approach also allows for more experimentation, allowing for smaller and more innovative games to be created, tested in the marketplace and then built out if they are shown to have promise. Paid games typically find this much harder as expectations are higher up front and they generally need to be self contained and "complete" from the outset.

Hope that helps.
 
And I thought $4.99 was outrageous for in-game app store purchases, lol. I think $99.99 is the new limit.

Also to make it even worse they make it seem like you can't beat the game without buying a power-up. This is one of the most messed up/funny things I've seen in a while.
They're making a very compelling case for quality control. For all the crap people gave Nintendo I'm sure the likes of Gingerbread Man seemed like a polished AAA blockbuster in comparison to this garbage. And it possibly highlights where the real lines should be drawn, versus the crap Sony and (to a lesser degree?) Microsoft pulled over the last several years.
It's hard to say. Like I said earlier, we are still in a very early phase of all of this stuff. I think there can be no argument that this type of casual gaming has dramatically changed the industry and it is absolutely here to stay. If anything I think we'll see consistent burnout by those developers who cannot weather the storm/adapt with the times, and only those with the best production values and most well-implemented monetization strategies will continue to thrive, aside from the occasional fluke here and there.

At some point I strongly suspect we'll see a huge convergence between what is considered console/PC (or "dedicated") gaming as a platform and mobile devices and at that stage it will be a huge change. I don't think it's unusual to suspect companies like MS are doing their best to facilitate that coming day, given their movements the last couple of years. I guess we will see after their press event exactly how far it's going to be pushed at the beginning of the coming generation, and hopefully give a little more insight to what lies past that.
Hm. I'd have no idea if that's even a good thing or a bad thing. I do think AAA as it is is unsustainable, we're seeing a lot of proof of that right now, but anything else is more of a mystery. I'm guessing we're at a point where everything's in two extremes, and are being shown that with a few exceptions neither extreme is working in the long term.
 
What about them?




Sure. I'm glad you asked.

Freemium as a business model is (currently) much more sustainable and viable for mobile given the real business challenge of discovery. It helps solve discovery because freemium lowers the barrier to entry for gamers, allowing quality games to be surfaced to a larger audience via engaged players who try the game. Quality games can more easily find a voice via freemium.

But freemium can also be a driver of quality. A freemium title is currently considered less risky given you have more predictable returns at the bottom end given download/revenue ranges of free games are much easier to predict than revenue ranges on paid games. Adopting a freemium model allows for more confidence which means a larger budget and longer development timeframes can be invested, which helps the chances of ultimately producing a fundamentally better product.

Couldn't Freemium also just drive the most inoffensive, simple, lowest common denominator stuff like Angry Birds to the top?
 
I am not a fan of iOS gaming in general but i cannot even begin to believe what i just saw.


Ha Ha


The dinosaur did not even fall in the opening, just walked right over an invisible step.

Ha Ha


In-App purchases are the worst.
 
LOL, this game is utterly shameless hahaha. At least the spirit of Riccitiello ($1 to reload!) lives on.

I was totally going to lash out against IAPs, but I just remembered I've played and enjoyed some games that have them and it is as if they were not there. Puzzle Craft, for example. I wonder how that game did with them, because they really are not needed at all, they are just there if you don't actually want to spend time playing the game.
 
Couldn't Freemium also just drive the most inoffensive, simple, lowest common denominator stuff like Angry Birds to the top?

Like any form of media, mass market entertainment will always be the most visible.

But that doesn't undermine the benefits I outlined above for all.

If you want to go really art house or super niche, it wouldn't be the best commercial model. But by definition such products would only be targeting a small audience anyway.
 
I'D LIKE TO SEE SMOKEY DAVE DEFEND *THIS*!
I'd rather not, though I am in favour of the 'wild west' App Store. Reminds me of the C64 days.

Really though, threads like this are like pointing to DS shovelware and suggesting it invalidates all portable gaming. Not a premise that's really worth engaging.
 
I don't get it, why would anyone pay $99 to buy a stupid little sprite character?, it doesn't make sense to me and people think this is going to destroy console gaming?.
 
Top Bottom