iPad Astral: Origin (by Yangxi Zhou)

Actually you can have both. You make it free then add an IAP to remove the energy system. That way people like myself that prefer to pay for my game can do so. You are guaranteed payment.

Billy

 

If you're honest about listening to feedback you'll remove the energy system quickly before the game is forgotten.

You could release a separate free version (with energy) and appeal to both groups - but your current strategy will not be liked by either.

Please remove energy ASAP.

 

The devs can charge whatever they want for the game and can have as many energy systems and timers as they want.

I find it pathetic just how cheap some people are. If you want to play a free game, go play one.

Better yet, go sink thousands of dollars into making a game of your own, charge nothing for it and have zero IAPs too. Everything in this world should be free right? People shouldn't be allowed to profit from the fruits of their labour right?

 

Such a shame. The game looks beautiful. I was about to buy it too before i read there were timers. Haven't played it first hand but kudos and congratulations on the team that worked on it. If it does have what it claims this will be an instant hit. Hope it'll stay premium but without timers.

 

It does suck because the developer seems to be really understanding and willing to remove the price, but people on this forum react so negatively when they see IAP that they rate the game 1 star.

 

I'm going to buy the game just because of the developer's comments here in the thread.

 

I agree with this, energy may be popular in China but around here it really isn't at all, I think most of the bad feedback you've had isn't even on the game it's just that nobody expects a paid game to have energy in our countries.

Free games have energy or paid games are complete with no necessary Iap or energy.

But as said above one option is to be free with energy and the other is to be free with energy and include an Iap that removes the energy system. In all honesty I've spent money money removing energy in free games than I ever have on a game with energy, I'll never buy refills or spend money to speed things up but removing it entirely is an easy choice if you enjoy the game.

 

Man what a bunch of whiny girls on here complaining about an energy system in a 99 cent game. Get over it. If it was 5 bucks I would agree but not 1 buck. For all the hours and hard work devs put into games they are allowed to make money and try to make a living. How about somebody leave some gameplay impressions and drop the boo hood about energy. Devs I would say if your game is good make it free and keep energy and iap. Or make it 5 bucks. Or give an option in game to remove energy for a few bucks and 99 to purchase game. Now let's hear how the game is. I'm about to put down my 99 cents.

 

Get off your high horse; nobody is saying they shouldn't make money. What we're suggesting is that they shouldn't charge us for the game AND charge us to play the game (which is what energy is). Either strategy is fine, and hybrids (two versions, free with an IAP Energy remover, etc.) are great alternatives.

Personally I prefer to pay high premiums and not have limits (I don't care to be nickeled and dimed or have the gameplay mechanics driven by economic needs), others prefer IAP (I assume).

Either way, this isn't about being cheap.

 

Then put your money where your mouth is. People have a right to voice their opinion about free to play with timers vs premium with no timers. What I don't see is how those who think this to be a trivial point are not spending the $1 to play and provide constructive feedback, instead complaining about those voicing their opinions about a fair pay model. I'm going to spend the damn $1 to give this a spin. Not because I agree with their premium with timers set-up, but because those who want to trash talk others with a valid point jump into a thread to start an argument but NEVER EVER go back and actually pay towards the game. You gotta walk the walk if you're gonna talk the talk. Otherwise, go troll another thread!

 

Been playing video games a long time. I used to pay $.25 to play a game for just a few minutes, without hesitation, and those arcade games were blatantly difficult and designed with one purpose, bleed you dry of tokens as quickly as possible. Once games started charging multiple tokens to play, depending on skill level, you could easily run through $10 in an hour (twice the min wage at the time.) What we see today in the AppStore is no different, except you get a free sample before you ever have to cough up tokens.

So when I hear the whining over iap, and pay-to-win, I have to laugh, as the economics of gaming have never favored gamers as much as it does today. The problem is, especially in this community, is we were all jaded by the console/PC premium model, and unfortunately, in order to make money in the over saturated mobile market, except for a few rare exceptions, freemium is just about the only way for a dev to make money.

 

I have no issues paying for games and prefer playing premium games. What I do have an issue with is a paid game that has timers. If I am paying for a game, I don't want to have to be forced to play the game. I prefer paying once and being able to play as much or as little as I want.

 

I think you're in the wrong thread. Again, nobody is arguing against F2P or paying for games - we just made the suggestion (to a developer who claimed to be open to feedback on the topic) that they not try to "have their cake and eat it too" (both). That's literally all people were suggesting, mostly very politely - until we got trolled by people who see the feedback and scream "YOU'RE ALL JUST POOR GREEDY KIDS!".

Also, we get it - you're old. I am too, I also spent my youth in arcades. That model definitely sucked for gamers for the same reasons F2P does now. Not because it was designed to take all your money ($60 premium games definitely achieve that goal too), but because of the fact that it needs to take bits of your money -over time- absolutely influences the game design, which is pretty much always a bad thing from a gaming standpoint. P2W only matters in multiplayer, solid game design is a factor in every game.

My favorite example is Plants vs. Zombies 1 vs 2. PvZ-1 = Premium. When I play that game I know when I'm doing well (and feel good about it), I know when I'm not (and strive to improve). This is why many of us game, and that game is clearly balanced for -fun- with no economic bias.

PvZ-2 = F2P. When the going gets rough, is it because my strategies suck and I need to improve them, or because they want more money? If I do well is it because they're just trying to hook me in in order to change the curve (for economics) later? Who knows... Clearly I could just drop $50 and beat the game - but oddly that would ruin it for me. Ironically I'm compelled to not spend money (and I never did) only because I want to ensure a challenge.

Thus PvZ-1 is one of my all time favorite [mobile, possibly any] games for many reasons, which I purchased on something like 4 platforms, while PvZ2 was a complete mess that I never gave a dime - not because I didn't want to support them, but because I didn't want to screw up my own experience.

 

Have played a few runs, and it's a fun game for the most part. I definitely don't appreciate the timers, as that will limit long play sessions. I have a bigger issue though, which is with the enemies.

Tapping on any portion of a screen in a lane-switching endless runner doesn't feel natural. Secondly, there's no differentiation in the enemies' looks (so far), yet some enemies take 2 hits to take down whereas others only take 1 hit. Maybe add a health bar above the enemies, or make them a different color so we'll know how many hits it will take. Right now, I'm stuck on an early stage because I keep trying to hit the enemy but instead inadvertently swipe my character into a barrier, or I hit the enemy once and miss the 2nd time. In these instances, it's just frustrating. Please add a virtual attack button. It will make lane swiping - whilst dealing with enemies who also need to be attacked - much easier.

Otherwise, still waiting for the "you're so cheap you won't spend a dollar" people to do just that....and post some impressions and constructive feedback.

P.S. The dev offered me a promo code, but after seeing their intent on making this game something the players will like by posting on this thread (and the fact they offered up a code), I supported them....regardless of whether I agree with timers in a paid game or not.

 

Ok so I spent about a half hour with it. It's a clean simplistic looking runner. Good frame rate A bit of pop up in the distance. Nothing too bad. The swipe controls feel a bit delayed causing unnecessary deaths. The tap attacks also feel a bit imprecise All though It seemed like less of an issue the more I played it probably should be addressed so it's more crispy precise. Looks like 3 different worlds(environments) to explore. You can unlock characters to run with you and help you. A couple interesting game mechanics like punching to hover and jump boosts. Upgrades and items to purchase. Then energy system give you quite a lot of play time and seems to charge 1 energy point every minute. I love runners and have all the best ones. I like my runners to have crispy controls and lots of characters and scenery changes. This one with a couple updates has potential. In this one you collect three stars in every level. No endless mode. I would give a runner like agent dash and pitfall and temple run oz a 10. This I would give a 5 in its current state. Not bad. Not great. But I feel if I invest more time I would raise that score. I don't like energy in my runners especially after paying for the game. But it's only a buck and energy system lets you get some play time.

 

There is a lot of love in this forum. And a bit of frustration. I don't think any developer wants to see people arguing over the negatives of their game. But this situation seems to get a lot of us stirred up. So on that note I post my thoughts.

The game looks beautiful. But one way the Dev could have avoided having all of us hardcore gamers tear it apart is simply to Make it Free or Make 2 Versions. When I see a pretty game like this and it's free I know to expect an Energy System. Unless there are IAP's that clearly say $4.99 to remove Ads etc. But $1.00 is not a lot of money. So I don't think the Dev expected people to get as mad about the energy system. Now if it is Free then most of us would likely avoid it. And the cheap gamers would download it and likely Love it.

I truly prefer the 2 version option though. Where you can buy the Paid and enjoy no Ads and No Energy. And the others can get it Free and Pay and they Play.

 

My advice for this game is get rid of the timers and raise the price. I would gladly pay more then .99 for a great premium runner. They just don't exist. If you want to add some IAP make them mostly cosmetic (upgrades, characters, levels etc) I don't play games that have energy timers at all. That's just me I find them very annoying. And the list of free to play i enjoy is pretty short. I just get more from premium gaming experiences.

 

I'm sorry you got so butthurt so easily and that you suffer from martyr syndrome.

Money talks, BS walks. If I showed you my purchase history you'd laugh, like most people, and then remind me that the money I've spent on iOS gaming I could have put together a nice down payment on another house.

I always put my money where my mouth is, because I enjoy iOS gaming, not because I feel that spending ONE dollar is going to prove a point for anyone.