There isn't gonna be a lite version for this game. Why? Because the full version is a lite version. Play this game for 1 minute and you've seen all that the game has to offer. How is someone gonna make a lite version outta that? it would have to be 10 seconds long.
It's funny how this forum's admins faint at the first sign of a mildly rude word, but think nothing of posting idiotic, facetious drivel like this.
In the way I already suggested. Limit it to 1000m or so. Then people get a feel of how it plays, but want the full version so they can actually achieve a proper score, since scoring points is the game's sole aim.
Haven't played this yet, but sounds great. 2 things: - gameplay reminds me of Slotz: you get a fantastic device with touch screen that allows swiping, drawing, tapping, accelerometer, but you can make a GREAT game by just pressing the screen with one finger! - price: the reason so many devs sell at $0.99 is FEAR. FEAR of missing out on sales, FEAR of people choosing another game instead. I hope one day devs will be limited to sell their app at $0.99 for no more than a few days a year. No game worth buying can be worth a measly $0.99.
seriously McGee, hodapp is right. playing it with a mouse doesnt really make the iphone version epically different.
Have you ANYTHING to back that seemingly-random assertion up with? As far as I can gather the large bulk of successful iPod games are 99c games. There are a small handful that have done very well at higher prices, but they're very much the exception to the rule. Or in other words, context, which is what we're talking about.
I honestly don't know how to better describe the differences in controls. The iPhone game plays identical to the flash version. The only difference is your finger touches the screen instead of a mouse.
Yes it does. One is a binary method with clear tactile feedback. One isn't. The heat-sensitive nature of the iPod screen inherently makes precision difficult (because you don't actually have to touch the screen at all to trigger inputs), and precision is extremely necessary in Canabalt once you get past about 4000m.
My iPhone scores are pretty much the same as my web scores, for what it's worth, so I don't think there's much difference, if any, to the controls in practical terms.
Ah. My best score is a little over 2000m, on the web and the iPhone, so I've not got experience up there.
There is absolutely nothing you haven't seen before as far as gameplay, what makes the game shine is the sounds, effects and the way it's all presented to you. The gameplay is fun because of all the other cool aspects of the game, but it's shallow.
This game is precise, tapping is responsive, given that it's the only one thing to do in the game, I'm glad they got that down right.
What criteria are you using to define success? You make it sound like the obvious thing for every developer to do is just price all apps at 99 cents and watch the money roll in.
Doesn't sound like a good idea. A game would last a bunch of seconds. This would generate a high number of bad ratings (lots of people do not know the difference between lite and free games) that would likely harm the full version.
Is this a trick question? They also have to make a good game, and market it in a non-retarded way. The number of apps on the Store that can't even be bothered to orientate their screenshots correctly blows my mind.
Interesting angle, but I don't see it. Who reads the reviews/ratings of Lite versions? If I want to know what something's like and it has a free version, I download that and judge for myself. That's kinda the whole point of Lite versions.
No, not a trick question at all. Are you using entry into the top 100 paid apps? or top 100 grossing apps? If I recall correctly, both of those paint a different picture for titles priced at $0.99. If an app doesn't break into the top 100 paid apps AND is priced at $0.99, I don't think you could call it successful in any sense of the word. At least not from what I've seen or heard. However, there are several apps that aren't in the top 100 paid apps, but since they are priced at a higher price point, are still earning a decent amount of money (based on their inclusion in the top 100 grossing apps). Success is a relative word, but I was just curious how you define it.
I don't know. You see canabalt something with 50 1-star votes, you might not be tempted to even try it out (I'm talking about generic users who are not on these forums and do not look for reviews). I've seen more than once devs complaining about the bad ratings of the lites "not having enough content", so I believe that the point might not be totally wrong.
The controls are identical to the flash version at www.canabalt.com which is to say not quite as good as the version at www.adamatomic.com/canabalt My scores still pretty much match with what I get on either version though so yeah... I'd say the controls issue doesn't exist. And I find the difficulty based on speed... not distance. Hitting boxes is not always a bad thing.
