PikPok is no stranger to making great games, in fact, you safely blindly download just about everything they've ever made or collaborated on. We expected great things from Flick Kick Football Legends, but I wasn't expecting some sort of revelation on par with the ending of The Usual Suspects of just how squarely they nailed iOS soccer games. As an American, I don't even particularly like or care about soccer but Flick Kick Football Legends changed all that. This is such a clever evolution of their previous Flick Kick football games that you simply must watch the video to see how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Flick Kick Football Legends will be available in the New Zealand App Store at 7:00 AM Eastern time, before it slowly filters through the various iTunes region and finally appearing for download in the US App Store at 11:00 PM tonight. Stay tuned for links to both download the game, as well as forum links to discuss it with members of the TouchArcade community.

  • steviebwoy

    Nice preview guys. IAPs are a massive turn-off for me though - that, and the Ads.. :

  • ste86uk

    Looks good, not keen on the ads but I usually find playing in airplane mode stops them if they are that annoying.

    Not bothered about IAP or the timer if this is free because I'd only play in doses between my other games anyway. People really should be use to IAP by now...it really didn't look necessary in the video.

    Waiting for your video on Hatch!

  • videba

    I was wondering if you can a shoot from a distance or have to follow all the pas sequences

  • Frank Hopewell-Smith

    Android at all?

  • curtisrshideler

    And today is the day that I realize that if you guys are just like "whatever" about such a good game being completely F2P, then we are all truly doomed to this model of video gaming on the go. It's so sad too. If PikPok also released a paid version of this without timers, I'd pay $5 for it. But since it's F2P WITH timers that prevent me from continually playing, I probably won't even download it. How hard is it for the developers to embrace BOTH pricing models?! I'm proof that they'd make more money by doing so.

    • http://toucharcade.com Eli Hodapp

      Unfortunately, you're in the extreme minority. I can't fault developers for wanting to keep their lights on and food on their employees' tables. :

      • mclifford82

        Where did curtis say they should not charge for it? He simply prefers another way of paying for his games, and no, he is not in the extreme minority where this is concerned. I fully understand the concept of the vocal minority, but when that's the only side I ever hear, I find it hard to believe we're in the minority at all.

        Although if you can show me instances where people are clamoring for F2P and IAP over a one-price-plays-all model, I'd gladly change my mind.

        Personally, I don't understand how a developer can really be happy making an incredibly addictive game, and then telling the player that they have to wait longer to play it, or wait at all.

      • http://toucharcade.com Eli Hodapp

        In order for free to play models to scale, you need an unlimited spending potential so "whales" can subsidize players who pay nothing. A single unlock totally prevents that, leaving you with something that's closer to shareware which is a model that doesn't work on the App Store. See the spectacular failure of Gasketball for a fabulous example of a developer delivering exactly what the core group thinks they want.

        The reason you only ever hear one side of it is because most of the 500 million people who are downloading Candy Crush don't post on TouchArcade or really any other gaming community, because they don't care. To them, games like this are fun free games that they might spend a few dollars on here and there if they like 'em. For better or for worse, that's the iOS customer pool that developers target.

        And I'm guessing developers are happy doing this because it's become nearly impossible to sustain a real studio with an office, benefits, salary, etc without a steady revenue stream. Free to play offers that, premium paid games largely do not aside from extreme and rare exceptions.

      • curtisrshideler

        If I wasn't forced to wait to play (W2P should be a new thing), I'd be willing to not only lay down $5 initially, but I'd also be more likely to buy IAP to get new player cards. But knowing that no matter how much I sink into this I will still have to wait or pay more to keep playing means I won't pay anything at all. I imagine most people who check it out wont pay or pay much before getting tired of this model and switching back to the original Flick Kick! ...which I purchased along with the IAP to unlock nations. ...and also purchased a team Flick Kick. That's why this one tastes so bitter.

        What I don't understand is why developers don't also make a paid version (still with optional IAP) for those who would pay a premium price. We used to get free and paid versions of apps a lot. Too bad they didn't do it for this one.

      • http://toucharcade.com Eli Hodapp

        You have to get down to #33 in the top grossing list to find a game that isn't "wait to play," and that's Minecraft. The fact of the matter is the vast overwhelming majority of players out there are totally embracing this mechanic.

      • curtisrshideler

        Bought that one too. And yeah, I'll be the one left behind. Guess that will allow me to catch up on all the Final Fantasy games among others.

      • curtisrshideler

        IAP can exist in both freemium and premium. So why not offer both? It would encourage more people to play the game.

        They could eventually offer a bunch of national team outfits for an IAP for each.

        But whether I or any other premium lovers buy it or not, it hit me today that I may not be playing games I would love because of this model. Just like I deleted Iron Man 3 until recently when they've gotten rid of their timers. Now, maybe I'll spend some money on that one.

        And maybe once this one stops selling they will drop the timers. An then I'll happily put some food on their tables again.

      • chommie

        This only flies on the smart device gaming scene. The F2P model would come to a grinding halt on desktop and consoles. Imagine TF2 having a timer that prohibited you from playing the game at some point... totally different demographic. The smart device gaming market is a totally new and ever changing beast. and as long as people plunk down their money to "keep" playing a game we will see F2P flourish. Keep in mind it can also go away just as quickly as it came. As in everything mobile, the user's behavior and patterns is what predicates marketplace trends.

      • rabidnz

        Gasketball was a boring, repetitive and average game with bad controls. It failed of its own accord

    • http://twitter.com/JaredTA Jared Nelson

      You act like giving them 5 dollars is some huge amount of money. The only way those sort of prices are sustainable is if you sell in the hundreds of thousands and in the millions of units. That just won't happen on the App Store anymore. For every one of you, there are at least a hundred people who wouldn't even bother clicking on this game unless it was free. The handful of people that say they are willing to pay a higher upfront cost for no f2p shenanigans are almost certainly not enough to offset the cost of basically creating and maintaining an entirely separate paid game just for them.

      Now, if you wanted to say "I'd pay $60+ for it to not be f2p" then MAYBE you might be on to something. Unfortunately, saying you'd pay 5 measly dollars for something that took several hundreds of thousands of dollars and who knows how many months or years worth of time to create is not proof that they'd make more money, rather it's proof that they made the right choice to go f2p.

      • JJE McManus

        If what you say is true then the core gamer community on mobile is nonexistent or at the very least impotent. But that's not what bothers me.
        It's the sameness of the mechanic, the placement of the ads, the unique way it implements how it will stop working. You called it in the video. You noticed when you were told it was time to look at an ad. That was intentional on the games part. It's goal is to interact with you, not the other way around. It's all well planned out.
        They are like slot machines with no payout, like millions of nameless pinball titles stuck in a bars back corner. Nobody cares about these things and singly they'll never pay the rent. But if you can build a machine that churns out snappy graphics, generic music and one gimmick every six months you have a business.
        Maybe that's why Apple keeps gaming at arms length. Everywhere you look there's another shady tout with a MBA degree and not an ounce of soul.

      • Goggles789

        You hit the nail on the head on this post. Absolutely true with the statement about "no payout." Where's the payout for these kinds of games? Why would the player want to engage in it? I'm sorry, but these pay to level up games are ridiculous. The argument that the developers need to keep their lights on is equally ridiculous. Yes, we understand that another person is making these games, and that they do this for their living and income...but come on. Give the player an incentive to play the game, if your way of life depends on such things. Honestly, besides the art style and snappy interface being great, this doesn't look like something that will pay bills in the years to come. It's just something that's been dressed up really nice, but has little depth.

      • Goggles789

        I mean, look at Angry Birds. That has been heavily inserted into the community, and will not fade from existence like this game most likely will. I'm not saying every game has to be like Angry Birds in terms of national scope and success, but it was just so inspired in terms of it's development that it's no wonder that it accrued such huge sales. On other platforms, look at Mario. He's iconic. He's fun. And he pays the bills. Why? Because people want Mario games and enjoy them quite a bit. Nintendo stays on top of that concept and they guard it like crazy, because it works. It's all about the product label, these days. Nobody is going to care about Flick Kick Football as much as they care about Sonic, or Sony, or Microsoft. It's just not a mainstay. I guess I'm writing all this because of your "pay the bills" argument. Service to others is the best way to pay the bills, and this game doesn't serve me, based on the video you folks presented.

      • http://twitter.com/JaredTA Jared Nelson

        The payout is you play a fun game. Angry Birds isn't a great comparison as it's largely an anomaly and even it came out more than four years ago, when the App Store was a vastly different place. Saying Flick Kick isn't going to achieve the same levels as Sonic and Mario isn't saying much, I don't think anybody thinks that they will or are they trying to achieve that. But the Flick Kick series HAS been a tremendous success on mobile, and has millions of downloads across its various games. That's nothing to slouch at.

        Yes, the timers and ads are a sour note on what was otherwise a very awesome game. Time will tell if those elements will ruin the experience in the long run for me, and if they do, I'll simply stop playing. I'd assume there are people who will feel the same way. If enough people do that, and the game flops because of it, then perhaps they'll reevaluate their strategy.

        However, what we're saying is that the people who "vote with their wallets" by not playing this game likely won't compare to the millions (potentially HUNDREDS of millions) of people who aren't bothered by that stuff. In that case, yes, those who stop playing this game simply because of the timers and ads won't really affect anything.

        It's just the world that we live in now. I think there is enough variety on the App Store that gamers like you can find plenty of fun stuff to play, but it's naive to think that every game will cater to the "hardcore" or whatever you want to call it gaming audience.

      • JJE McManus

        I have to disagree. The payoff is getting a small subset of users to pony up cash. Whether you enjoy this game or not is not really the point
        It's clearly proven that people will pay for flashing lights and a snappy line of patter. I may not like it but I understand it is a fact.
        PikPok may be in the upper echelon of FTP companies but in the long run it's still shovelware.
        This game will run its life in a month. After that it's no longer an exploitable commodity. There will be another one right behind it. Fun or not fun isn't the goal. The the target is coercing users to pay again and again.

      • curtisrshideler

        So they should make a free and paid version. And that's $5 less they'd get. I can't imagine everyone else has just accepted continually paying to play a game. I won't be converting, even if I have to start developing my own!

      • http://twitter.com/JaredTA Jared Nelson

        It's possible a paid and free version could work, but most evidence points otherwise. I think where you're wrong is in assuming they just "should" do it, because you want that and why not? There are a ton of factors to consider, it's not so cut and dry.

        Also, I don't think everyone has accepted continually paying to play, the vast majority just don't mind waiting or playing a game a few times throughout the day.

      • Jazzpha

        I used to kvetch about having to wait through timers to play some of the games I enjoy, but once the job I'm working kicked into high gear I realized I didn't have the time to sink hours into gaming, and having a breaking point there to force me to stop playing was a welcome deterrent.

        Of course, I also have poor impulse control and such, so take my own personal experience with as many grains of salt as you want.

      • Goggles789

        Considering the amount of time going into a game's development, even 60 bucks isn't a huge amount of money. The gamble on game development is the hope that tons of people get their hands on your stuff. The movie industry has it figured out. Movies take years to film, have huge numbers of staffing, and ginormous budgets. You will never see a "free to watch" movie style marketing system. And in the end, a movie costs 11-15 bucks a viewing. 20 bucks for a DVD, then it's over. Game developing is a huge gamble, and the risk vs. rewards don't always match up. If you want to make tons of money in the games industry, something would have to be massively inspired and carry such a wide appeal that it becomes an undeniable household name. This game is a small scale game. Sorry, but not everyone is into soccer. If they need something to desperately pay household expenses, why not increase scope. I just think that there's more to this than we all think. I'm not claiming to have answers, but I have questions. Why do developers feel the need to insert a funnel into our wallets through f2p games? As soon as I see f2p, I no longer have faith in that developer for the reason that I know they aren't trying to entertain me, they are trying to grab my cash. Sorry, I don't bite on this one!

      • curtisrshideler

        Exactly. Thank God movies and videos are f2p or else I'd be out of a job. I'd be willing to look at ads in a f2p game if I didn't have to wait on huge timers. But, no matter what we do, thousands of preteens with shiny new iPod touches are dictating the mobile gaming model. And I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one not willing to accept it or like it.

      • http://twitter.com/JaredTA Jared Nelson

        I don't know if the movie industry is the best example, they are in serious trouble right now. I predict a massive change in that industry in the near future.

      • Boony Tuesday

        Actually, movie ticket sales are fine. Ticket sales are in the billions, slightly lower than last year, but the slightly higher than 2011 (with a higher revenue than 2011). Revenue has doubled since the mid-90's. The industry is in flux, but not "serious trouble." Close to the same amount of people are still going to the movies as they always have.

      • heresandypandy

        I agree with the sentiment of the comment.. But... "Not everyone is into soccer"? I bet there's more people worldwide into soccer than there is people who are into video games, so that's a bit of a nonsensical statement. This has nothing to do with scope and everything to do with poor implementation. EA sure don't have a problem making money from soccer given that FIFA is one of the most profitable gaming franchises in the entire history of games...

  • mclifford82

    Looks like a really entertaining game. Did you guys read through the dialog between matches? Hilarious stuff. "Looks like you dropped your pen." "I'm not falling for that again, Nigel."

  • curtisrshideler

    And on a side note, great video guys. Love watching these every week. Just bummed that one of my favorite developers decided to make it the way they did. Following that whole Fantasy Manager model.

  • Illuminerdy

    I am a gamer who likes to talk all day about business models and play armchair CEO someone just kill me now.

  • lanights

    I can care less about the timer, as I have so many other games to occupy my time while waiting for stamina to refill. Wouldn't mind a small charge though to remove the ad.

  • mr_bez

    Is "slow clap" a positive thing in the States? It's a pretty sarcastic and derisory thing in the UK, which makes that headline rather confusing.

  • the fish

    Instead of complaining about things we won't change: has anyone played the second league yet? I just can't score there. Played five matches, four draws one loss. I feel it's very hard to get the ball past the defenders. Does anyone have some advise?