Although I agree that you shouldn't base any decisions from any regular forum thread, you should take into account that Touch Arcade members have a lot of influence as to whether a game makes it into the top 100 or falls into obscurity. I've seen it happen plenty of times with the short amount of time I've been on here. So just keep that in mind. You are here for a reason afterall.
I wouldn't really say we have that much influence... it's probably more likely we're jut really good at guessing what will do well and what won't That said, if we like something enough there's a chance one of the admins will stick it on the front page. Hard to tell how much effect that has but I'd like to think it provides a good boost.
totally! yea like you guys say, we're here for a reason I just wanted to reassure people that we launched at $2.99 because we feel like it's worth it, and that's not something that's likely to change soon. In fact, it's likely to be quite the opposite; the longer it's out, the more stuff we will add, the better the game will be. We're not here to make $0.99 crapps (not that 0.99 games are junk!! I spent most of the film festival this week playing Flight Control...but then I think Flight Control is worth considerably more than 0.99) We just want to make good stuff that will keep you playing til you kill the battery. That's Job #1 at Semi Secret BUT all comments are totally appreciated and we do read and consider all of your opinions, even if we don't make sweeping changes to our business overnight!
I couldn't resist. Bought Can't wait to see what is in store for this game in the future. My suggestion is to apply for Plus+ and if that doesn't work out get Open Feint
I enjoyed the flash version of the game, but I'm not sure I can justify spending $3 on this type of game. It's a good game, but there isn't enough value to counter the cost.
So let me ask you this. How certain are you of not dropping the price any time soon? I know developers that get worried their sales aren't doing very well and immediately drop their prices and leave past buyers furious at the drastic price drop (Peggle for example). If you can guarantee in some way that won't happen & continue to improve on this game with continous updates...well then, shoot, you will win me over .
Yes you did, according to appshopper, you dropped your price on May 22nd from $1.99 to .$99 then raised it again on June 1st. Not a good way to guarantee something, especially when lying .
while the developer is here, i would like to at least say that i love the flash game. it runs smoothly, the sound design is some of the best in a flash game, and the concept is brilliant in its simplicity. however, all of my complaints on the price still stand. there are great games in the app store that i can't play for free online that offer way more content and just as much polish for a third of the price. i do want to support you for your hard work, but we're going to have to meet halfway on this one in the future. (i'm fine with either more content or a small price drop)
I don't think he was lying intentionally... looks like they had a sale to promote the update, so it's not strictly a permanent price change, they still think the app is worth the price they submitted it at.
Yeap we put it on sale for a week, but we never dropped the price permanently. We lost money on the sale, so we are not planning on repeating that strategy anytime soon! We would need a really obvious and compelling sign to even test a price drop after our wurdle experience; one week of top ten 0.99 burnout is not a plan that we are overly fond of...
Since there is a sort of informal poll going on here, I'd like to say that I will most likely never get around to buying the game at this price point. Not as a statement against the game, dev, or prices in general - just a realistic assessment. I will impulse purchase all day at 0.99 or even 1.99, but 2.99 makes me stop, think, and wait. Many a cheaper game will then grab my attention, and I will pick and choose from the higher priced ones, looking for stuff that has multiple features, is completely different from anything else, or cannot be played for free online...
Just purchased and played for a few rounds and came away amazed how easy the game worked. I like how the graphics look but do wish for some sort of background changes though. Played the web version for a bit to compare and came away feeling that the iphone version plays superior to it's web counterpart. $2.99 isn't too bad for a game that has had success on the web version, if I was to purchase a game that no one has ever played yet then I would think about it first and wait for reviews.
I'm supposed to take advice from someone who speaks like that? Don't make me laugh. & there was nothing "uncalled for" I was just stating facts. Get over it .
lol seems alot for a game of this genre...Run! looks better and probably plays better with much more obstacles to offer! Even if they dropped to 99cents, I rather stick with Run!
After having played both myself, I would say that this title is superior to both of those titles in the areas of pacing, stylistic approach, and execution. In this game, pacing is the gameplay and that was an important design decision. In that regard, I would have to disagree with your characterization that Run! "has more to it". That doesn't mean that everyone will prefer this to the aforementioned titles, but I certainly do.
Sounded uncalled for to me. You came right out and called him a liar. He'd probably either forgotten considering it was just a promotional sale (or it wasn't even him that made the price drop) or he knew it's totally beside the point, because a sale isn't permanent. You were asking if he believes in his pricing, and that app costs exactly what it did upon release so he obviously does.
No, you don't have to take my advice at all, but when you make your decision you may want to take into consideration the FACT that I'm right and you are wrong. Most people on the site would most likely agree that calling a developer a liar is not generally appreciated in a friendly forum, such as this.
