Yes, I don't disagree, but I really hate the nickel and diming feeling of IAPs none the less.
-
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.
iOS Gaming Thread May 2013: Another board thread, now with 4X the backlog
- Thread starter Tunesmith
- Start date
- Status
Yes, I don't disagree, but I really hate the nickel and diming feeling of IAPs none the less.
Just close the app using the home button and run the app again.
I think mobile devs should look at ways to address this sentiment. The catch-all term "IAP" has been demonized by some really poor examples. Some gamers are clearly threatened by the idea of not paying for their game in full up front, even if the IAPs add up to what's considered a full game experience at a fair price.
I mean, from the Ace Patrol thread:
There's got to be a better way to go about this outside of "go back to how it used to be!"
Ok wow, that was unexpected.
If anyone else plays this, make sure you check out both endings.
Do they need to?
The existence of IAP doesn't appear to be a problem for the vast majority of players.
And for those that are grumbling instinctively about it, many of them are finding other reasons not to game on mobile anyway ("quality", "deeper experience", "buttons").
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Yes. It needs addressing. Shoving any segment of talk about your business or the models you use to employ as "a vocal minority" is a quick way to get even people without a particular side to grow to dislike you. "Vocal minority" or "it doesn't appear to be a problem for the vast majority" is incredibly condescending and is far, far too easy to employ when you don't want to listen to opposition to the plan you're dead set on implementing, customers be damned. It may be hard to see this, but framing complaints as "grumbling" "whining" "complaining" is cathartic for you, the people who have put out the product, but it's also ignoring that a segment of your potential base is trying to tell you something. Some may be doing so immaturely, but not all. Some may be trolling, but not all.
But when a group is trying to tell you something, simply dismissing the entirety of their complaint as baseless bitching is not going to do you any favors. You're giving up on them as potential customers that you may be able to satisfy if you take the time to examine what they're saying and actually try to address it, or - almost as bad - you're letting hubris get in the way of feedback that could help keep your company solvent beyond today and tomorrow.
The IAP gaming model as we see it now is really in its infancy. It absolutely is not perfect. There is plenty of room for growth and plenty of ways that it's been a good and bad thing for the industry and the consumer. Until it's fully matured as a business model there will be a lot of changes to how it's implemented, what it's used for and how the consumer can interact with it on their end. Listen to what people are trying to tell you - and maybe your company can be the one that figures out a way to make IAP more seamlessly integrated, less intrusive and more consumer satiating.
Ahaha, brutally honest and about what I expect from Sidhe/PikPok, alas.
Er, okay. Hold up. I'm referring to people objecting about it reflexively and irrationally.
And I said "grumbling" which means something different from "whining".
Sheesh. Why jump down my throat here? I probably listen to more feedback from and engage in more discussion with gamers than just about any publisher CEO in the industry.
I'm not dismissing any feedback. And I never called it "baseless bitching".
I'm asking whether it is necessary given the scale of the "problem", especially in the face of bigger problems developers have to solve and developers have limited resources. Plus my unstated assumption that the problem will resolve itself over time as more people are exposed to the model.
I don't deny that at all.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Well, the fact that you think I'm jumping down your throat is interesting. Because I don't know you. I'm speaking in generalities. Clearly, you work for PikPok. That's nice. I have no experiences with your games at all. I promise that this has nothing to do with you, or your company. I know zero about either.
Problems that people are voicing to "you" do not get better by them being ignored, unless you believe the issue is just one of wholesale ignorance on the part of the consumer. It's not, of course. It's a new business model, but it's also a very widespread one.
Problems that people are voicing to "you" do not get better by them being ignored, unless you believe the issue is just one of wholesale ignorance on the part of the consumer. It's not, of course. It's a new business model, but it's also a very widespread one.
Are you saying that developers should cater to every market out there without reference to the particular markets they wish to target? I'm not saying that's what Mario is doing. I'm not inside his head. I mean generally, is that where you'd like things to be?
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
No. And I'm not going to play this game. "Well, are you trying to say this utterly ridiculous thing that is easy for me to debate, rather than talk about the actual points being made?" There is no way you honestly came to the conclusion in which the above is my point. I'm unsure why you two are feeling personally attacked. I'm assuming there is some drama behind one of your games, based on the post you made below mine. Again, and please understand this, this is not about Mario or Milla or PikPok. I gave my answer to "do the complaints about IAP need to be addressed." If you don't feel they need to be, fine. It's not my company to worry about, after all.
Your suggestion I'm being condescending, dismissive and arrogant on top of you putting words in my mouth led me to frame your post as jumping down my throat, yes.
I'd suggest not jumping to conclusions about my intent then.
Jayayess1190
Member
Crazy Taxi dropped to $0.99.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
I'm sorry, you're just not following along very well. I'm not putting words in your mouth or talking about your intent because I am not talking about you - Mario. Okay? For the third time. That was not at you, in specific. When people talk about games needing to do X, it is not an attack on every person who has created a game in their lives. I really thought this was clear with the "for you, the people who have put out the product" line. I likely should've put every "you" in there in quotation marks, but by now there should be no reason why you believe my point on addressing consumer complaints in regard to IAP is telling you, Mario, what to do. You might have been the artist, for all I know, and have nothing to do with the business side.
Edit: Tenses are hard.
marvelharvey
Member
Don't upgrade just yet, it's not compatible with the 5th generation iPod touch either.
toddhunter
Member
*Hugs everybody*
Ace Patrol is pretty darn good. I'm a little worried about it as a long term title unless they do some extensive updates. The focus on the planes is amazingly well done, but I am left now wanting a bit more in terms of strategic options.
Taking these ideas and applying them to a strategy game that is much broader in scope? Why I'd buy two. I've never been happier to purchase an IAP.
Ace Patrol is pretty darn good. I'm a little worried about it as a long term title unless they do some extensive updates. The focus on the planes is amazingly well done, but I am left now wanting a bit more in terms of strategic options.
Taking these ideas and applying them to a strategy game that is much broader in scope? Why I'd buy two. I've never been happier to purchase an IAP.
You'd know better than me Mario, haha. Business wise, I have no idea how much of the pie you're missing out on by not catering to this group of gamers in some way. But they're definitely there as potential customers on mobile, even if they're likely a vocal minority that's being amplified on a wholly hardcore gaming message board like NeoGAF.
Personally I have no issue judging IAPs in games on an individual basis instead of just blanket hating on the idea as a whole. That said, I'm sure there are people with iOS devices who feel differently and dismiss "free" games regardless of how the IAPs are implemented due to the negative stigma attached.
Surely there's a way to cater to this market without considering them a lost cause? Clearly the perfect answer to all of this IAP business hasn't been found.
toddhunter
Member
Yeah you certainly need to take it on a game by game base. There are just too many variables involved. One thing I will say though, as soon as I play a game and see a real life cool down timer I can pay to skip? I'm out.
I'd suggest using "they" and "them" instead of "you" consistently throughout next time then. And your explanation just means you are still labeling and making assumptions about the whole industry, not just me or my company.
So, I still object to your post.
Sorry man. I didn't mean to give that impression. I wanted to know what you are getting at. I'm not clear on that.
While we're aware of the variables, there's plenty of people out there that feel like this: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=546628
So you have a potential customer who thinks your game looks cool that's lost forever based strictly on how the business model is perceived. Clearly there's work to be done.
Has a dev ever experimented with a hybrid of paid and f2p? Offer the "full game" at a price that's fitting compared to what the average customer is spending on IAPs in the other? I'd like to think there's an undiscovered middle ground that makes everyone happy...haha.
toddhunter
Member
lol..yeah that game might be on the border of going too far
I was actually wondering this a little while back. I think the conclusion was that it hasn't been done yet...but probably will be by somebody bigger who can take the risk.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
I'd suggest that if you feel attacked, that you first take a step back and think before assuming anything negative about an aspect of an industry you belong to is a personal attack on yourself. The fact that you are insistent on feeling persecuted "not just me and my company" shows that you're not even trying to communicate. Clearly, I stumbled into a nest of issues that you've had over this previously.
And no, talking about an issue in no way insinuates that literally everybody in an industry is at fault or responsible. That doesn't even make sense.
Bottom line: You asked a question. I answered it. You don't have to like my answer, but it's also not what you think it was. I've clarified the source of the miscommunication. Object further if you'd like, but I'm not going to respond to any line of discussion that includes you thinking I was attacking you or your company.
For sure, no worries. I was a bit too aggressive there. My bad.
Of course this isn't the case. Preferring to target a specific market is necessary. But none of my posts were about choosing a demo to target, more about how to address consumer concerns. You don't have to cater to somebody to address a concern they have, but addressing a need/desire can turn that "vocal minority" into a satisfied customer. So, again, do those concerns need addressing? I believe so, given the immaturity of the business model.
Any in any event, this thread is not about me, or you or Mario. Perhaps we should make an IAP thread?
I think it's up to Apple to somehow provide clarity in the Appstore about the extent of IAP. Right now I have to do additional research to get an idea of how much of it offers actual gameplay and I usually can't be bothered to do so.
Most of the time I'll wait for IAP games to drop to free and then choose to buy some IAP or the sequel if I think the game is great to make up for that. I make a conscious effort not to get games without gameplay-related IAP while they're free, but I'd rather try them first.
My ideal model for games that aren't little timewasters is offering a free demo like The Room or Ace Patrol, the rest of the core game via one IAP and additional IAP to rip off losers through cheats & skins.
Most of the time I'll wait for IAP games to drop to free and then choose to buy some IAP or the sequel if I think the game is great to make up for that. I make a conscious effort not to get games without gameplay-related IAP while they're free, but I'd rather try them first.
My ideal model for games that aren't little timewasters is offering a free demo like The Room or Ace Patrol, the rest of the core game via one IAP and additional IAP to rip off losers through cheats & skins.
It's been done, but I can't think of many examples right now. Dark Meadow does that.
I think the main problem with this idea is it fragments the app reviews and stats, making it twice as difficult to show up in the charts. And leaderboards will be split.
My problem with IAPs are that even games that cost money up front have IAPs that are basically required to buy the whole game. A recent example for me would be Puzzle Retreat. I love the game and how the new mechanics were slowly introduced but after playing the 'Welcome' pack and going to the main level menu I was very disappointed to see only one more level pack available and the rest behind 99c pay walls. I beat every stage in the two included level packs in less than an hours and it was 99c for the game.
If I had taken the time to look at the IAPs before buying maybe I wouldn't have bought the game. Most games at that price level is that they are impulse buys. This by itself is great but as I learned quickly, the game really costs $8 or more have access to all levels/stages. That's a bummer for me, now I feel like every time I'm about to buy a game I need to look to see what it will REALLY cost me. I would have much rather had a free demo of the intro levels with an option to buy the full game for maybe $5. Demos that show me how fun the game is and offer an option to unlock the full game is fine but as others have stated: I just want a clear up front price on the complete game from the start, at the very least an option to go that route over a bunch of IAPs.
The App Store is great, the IAPs are starting to get out of hand though. It's starting to devalue the newly released games for me and I have been buying and downloading less as a result. I know I'm just one voice but to me it's important, maybe I'm just old school but I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.
If I had taken the time to look at the IAPs before buying maybe I wouldn't have bought the game. Most games at that price level is that they are impulse buys. This by itself is great but as I learned quickly, the game really costs $8 or more have access to all levels/stages. That's a bummer for me, now I feel like every time I'm about to buy a game I need to look to see what it will REALLY cost me. I would have much rather had a free demo of the intro levels with an option to buy the full game for maybe $5. Demos that show me how fun the game is and offer an option to unlock the full game is fine but as others have stated: I just want a clear up front price on the complete game from the start, at the very least an option to go that route over a bunch of IAPs.
The App Store is great, the IAPs are starting to get out of hand though. It's starting to devalue the newly released games for me and I have been buying and downloading less as a result. I know I'm just one voice but to me it's important, maybe I'm just old school but I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.
toddhunter
Member
Can we classify IAP? What do we have now:
1. No IAP
2. IAP to unlock game related items (new weapons, lives etc)
3. IAP to skip barriers (remove cool downs or save the gamer from a lengthy repetitive task).
4. IAP to unlock additional content (with the emphasis on additional, such as new maps or scenarios or modes).
5. IAP to unlock cosmetic details (costumes, skins).
For me, I draw a distinction between 2 and 3 because 2 is making you pay for something that is theoretically integrated into the balance of the game and 3 is making you pay for an artificially constructed barrier.
Anything missing from that list? An IAP that permitted you to extend your run would probably fall under #3 if there was no way to earn such abilities naturally, or #2 if you could.
Given that list, I have generally been happy with #1, #4 and #5. #2 is a difficult one because it is all about the balance of if you can achieve things with regular play. #3 is an instant turn off (and poorly implemented #2 features tend to drift into here).
It is an evolving thing. For me though the far bigger problem at the moment is games being heavily discounted like two days after release. It makes me want to never pay for a full price title and I think this has to be skewing the industries perception of what models they should be using in some way. Of course $9.99 games will not sell if everybody knows they will be $0.99 in a week.
You might want to split #2 into "permanent unlocks" and "consumables".
dreamcastmaster
Banned
Don't see an answer to this and I'm having the same problem.
Once you open the store and see the planes, click on 'Campaigns' at the top left.
Edit: misread original comment. I don't remember what the popup said, but I don't think it was obscure?
dreamcastmaster
Banned
I've done that and when I select a campaign a window pops up with the contents and only a blue tick, hit that and just goes back to the shop screen.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
I've done that and when I select a campaign a window pops up with the contents and only a blue tick, hit that and just goes back to the shop screen.
Pretty sure the blue checkmark is what you need to hit. The X is what cancels out.
regarding IAP
Pay for content = OK, extra stages, cosmetic items, clothing etc.
Pay to progress = Evil, these games are by design unbalanced to force the user to repeatedly buy items or currency to progress in the game. I cannot stand these games since it is very very very difficult to progress without buying and if I buy anything to progress it feels like I am cheating. These games always end up as examples of very very very bad game design.
Pay for content = OK, extra stages, cosmetic items, clothing etc.
Pay to progress = Evil, these games are by design unbalanced to force the user to repeatedly buy items or currency to progress in the game. I cannot stand these games since it is very very very difficult to progress without buying and if I buy anything to progress it feels like I am cheating. These games always end up as examples of very very very bad game design.
dreamcastmaster
Banned
Guess what I am hitting? and then it just goes back to the IAP select screen.
I'm trying to give them money and it's broken :/
It's good. It's an arcade style game where you have to control each claw with two fingers and pinch to grab stuff and attack the humans.
The only problem I have with it is that you need to have the ipad on a surface that it won't slide around on otherwise it's too hard to control.
I have 2 games where the achievements won't seem to pick up in game centre despite showing as done in my game (Super Hexagon and The Sandbox). Is there any way to fix this? Do I have to uninstall the game an earn the achievements again? Any way to get them to just activate as doing Super Hexagon again may be bad for my health :/
Just to play devil's advocate, is this actually bad game design or is it game design you don't like? If the game is free and that's the method the developers have chosen to gain revenue then surely it's a matter of whether you personally want to pay. It's not like it's the developer's job to provide you with free entertainment.
If the game is designed around being difficult/time consuming and encouraging you to pay to make it more manageable then how is that different for paying for a more manageable game from the start? Would you say that feeding quarters into Metal Slug X at the arcade because you keep dying is bad game design? Imagine that it was free to start but if you died you had to throw in a quarter to continue, would that change things?
toddhunter
Member
Fair points. I think the main difference is as always in the balance. Arcade games tend to be pretty linear in that they guzzle more coins as the game progresses. But as they get harder so too does your skill to stay alive. Even if the balance is off, they will tend to follow a mostly predictable curve so that they keep you playing and paying consistently. In theory at least the next time you come to the arcade you should get further and play longer for less.
With an ios game, all bets can be off about how much IAPs are actually needed and you may not have any idea about it until you sink quite a bit of time into it.
To use a quite notorious example, take the My Little Pony game (yes I have a daughter). After playing for a long time, she came to me and showed me a mission where you needed 70 gems or whatever to get a pony. Gems of course can be purchased via IAP or you could spend a year (not exaggeration) collecting them by chance. Now if you do purchase those 70 gems? Well you can play for a bit more until you hit the next mission that requires something like 250 of them (as I understand it to actually complete the game requires thousands). It doesn't matter how good you are at the game by this point, the only thing you can do is wait a massive amount of time or pay up, there is no skill factor involved.
Now that game is free, so where does that leave us? You can't really complain about the initial purchase, but you can certainly complain about the continuing ramping up of the hidden IAPs required to realistically complete it. Above all else though, you can't get the time back, and that is what is really valuable with so many other games to play.
That isn't to say all games get it wrong, but I hope it demonstrates at least the fundamental consideration. If there was full disclosure up front, you might have less people getting sucked in, but you might also not piss off a heck of a lot of people.
Dynamite Shikoku
Congratulations, you really deserve it!
I don't really care much about IAPs, but putting them in kids games where you really need to pay to progress is pretty low
BradleyLove
Member
I've paid for IAP in GreatBigWarGame to add new multiplayer maps. DLC if you will. No problem with that.
Any IAP that "helps" with progress, be that removing a grind or removing timers gets an instant delete from me.
I'll pay for content any day of the week. I refuse to pay to progress.
Any IAP that "helps" with progress, be that removing a grind or removing timers gets an instant delete from me.
I'll pay for content any day of the week. I refuse to pay to progress.
bigwinnerx
Member
Noticed After Burner Climax is on sale for .99 this morning. Was on sale for a couple days back in March, but down again.
BradleyLove
Member
Biggest WTF ever with Ace Pilots...
I have no pilots available. Two are POWs, one injured and one is needing repairs to their plane.
I can't continue. Not unless I buy an IAP to "heal" shit. This is, of course, after me already buying the campaign IAP. I'm literally locked out of the content I've already paid for.
So pay to progress or start again. This is such bullshit.
This constant IAP bullshit will kill iOS gaming before long.
Edit: OK, so a "skip mission" button has appeared. So whilst I can still "progress", I miss out on content I've paid for. Still complete bullshit.
I have no pilots available. Two are POWs, one injured and one is needing repairs to their plane.
I can't continue. Not unless I buy an IAP to "heal" shit. This is, of course, after me already buying the campaign IAP. I'm literally locked out of the content I've already paid for.
So pay to progress or start again. This is such bullshit.
This constant IAP bullshit will kill iOS gaming before long.
Edit: OK, so a "skip mission" button has appeared. So whilst I can still "progress", I miss out on content I've paid for. Still complete bullshit.
That's rough. Really disappointed by the medical IAPs.
Is XCOM supposed to be a direct port, sans IAPs?
Minsc
Gold Member
In the old days, we called this losing the game. All your units defeated you need to start over.
But seriously, it sounds like you made some errors, lost your forces and are now upset there's not a retry button? I don't know, reading the TA forums it does sound like you can just start the next mission with no pilots, skip it (failing it) and eventually your pilots will be back for duty?
- Status