I say follow the Rolando 1 selling model. Offer a full version for 4-5 bucks straight up. Then offer a free version that allows you to play 1-3 levels FREE. After that, to purchase levels 1-10, you pay a buck, 2-20, another buck, 3-30 another buck, and so on. This way, people can get a taste of the game for free (you wouldn't believe how many people are not even willing to pay a buck) and then if they like it, they'll buy some more levels
The problem with having two versions of a game with the same content is that it splits the sales. In most instances, that would be fine, but in the bizarre alternate reality that is the iTunes store, it drops the game's rank and thus the game's visibility. It can make the difference between sinking or swimming in a market crammed with nearly 40 new games a day. - Rob
Good point, RagManX. We've already changed the description a couple times, but I'll try to push Chillingo to make it even more clear. I just wanted to point out that on the PC, it's perfectly legit to share a paid copy on your PC and laptop. If you purchased Cogs through Steam, you should be able to just login with your Steam username on the other machine and Cogs will automatically get copied over. If you purchased from one of the other portals, you can use the DRM-free installer on any machine you own. But thanks for your business! - Rob
The only thing that worries me about the current pricing model is the question of wether or not it is compatible with downloadable user created levels. The current pricing scheme makes user created level sharing illogical. Why would people pay for harder level packs when there is a theoretically infinite amount of free user created levels?
Unfortunately, the iPhone version doesn't [yet] support user-designed levels. I'd love to include that in the future, but there are some additional technical hurdles to overcome before that can happen. But even if we supported user mods right now, there's a certain level of quality that players can expect from the Lazy 8 puzzles that can't be guaranteed with user-generated content. Don't get me wrong -- there are some great mods for the PC version shaping up on the Lazy 8 forums and I strongly encourage users to create and share their own content. But puzzle design is hard and it takes some time to get it right.
obviously, paying as you go doesn't work for every game, but when it's possible, I much prefer this method. I buy a lot of games, and because there are always new ones coming out, I find that if the game isn't extremely engrossing, I move quickly on to something else. As a result, I will purchase a new game at a dollar or two without thinking twice, but anything over that, I need a lite version before I'll consider it, unless I'm certain I'll play it extensively. So for me, I like the pay as you go model, because it allows me to pay only for what I'll play. With puzzles in particular, I think it works well because it allows the customer to stop buying if the puzzles become too difficult, without feeling like they wasted money on something they can't finish. As for some people's complaints about losing the dlc, redownloading the dlc if the game gets deleted, is free, like the game itself. Also, when changing devices, I created a backup and restored my new device with it, which saved all of my dlc content in my games, so that really shouldn't be an issue ether. Granted, there are "wrong" ways to do dlc, and inevitably, some developers will try to exploit the system to take advantage of the customer, but I think the cogs developers did it right, and I hope that when feasible, other developers will follow their example.
I can't really choose any of the poll options the way they are worded, but what I would have liked to see was the first 10 levels offered for free as a sort of "lite" version. Otherwise I like the idea of the DLC in this case, because I was able to test the game out on the cheap and realize I didn't much care for it. It could be that after the first 10 levels the game got a lot better but I felt the first 10 were far too short and easy and not the way I would choose to spend my appstore dollar. Therefore I didn't get any of the DLC...so it's good for me that I didn't spend $5 for a game I didn't like that much (sorry) but I still wasn't real happy about spending even $1 on it. (Not to say it was a terrible rip-off or anything, just didn't meet my expectation.) Some other things to think about though with the DLC is that it might limit a lot of potential customers. People see the pricing model and, if it's a turnoff for them that's automatically lost sales...some people (like me) play the first 10 levels and decide they don't want any more, and that's lost sales as well...people don't have wi-fi readily accessible and that's lost sales...people are jailbroken and can't download DLC and that's lost sales...it just seems like a lot of potentially lost sales to me. On the other hand, if the game had been $5 to start, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have spent that initial $1, so that could be a sales gain. I guess I am closest to the third poll option about the game being too expensive, even though I very much disagree with the premise that $5 is too much for many iPhone games--I've got some games I would pay 4 times that amount for. But I'd say my choice would be the first ten levels for free, and then the DLC after that. That would have been best for me, as I see it, although perhaps not best for you, on the business end. But I still would say that if you had the first 10 levels available as a "lite," well, price the rest of the game however you want, imo, because then people can decide if it's worth it to them. I guess obviously you can't price every level pack at $1.25 to make up for the first level and bring it to $5 total, but I wouldn't mind that at all, really. Edit: Yeah, I can't choose any of those poll options.
Hi, First off, an apology, I am not very familiar with Cogs. Now, having said that, if you have a price structure you feel comfortable with and is fair to your customers, stick with it. Too many games and apps race their way to $.99 and this has been a very bad thing for developers and, in the end, for customers. The DLC allows a customer to decide on how much they want to invest in a particular game, not a bad idea. From what I have seen of your game, the price structure looks quite fair. David
That's good feedback, medianotzu. The most common response to the PC game is that it's way too hard. We smoothed out the learning curve a bit for the iPhone version, so it did shorten the amount of time it takes to finish the first 10 puzzles. Each puzzle pack after that takes considerably longer to finish. The record time for getting every achievement is 5 hours with 10 being more typical. Maybe the first 10 puzzles just give an incorrect impression of the game's difficulty. - Rob
Fast & Cheap: The Future of Mobile Games? It's fascinating for me to see more than 16% currently saying that $5 is too much to pay for an iPhone game. Cogs took five years to develop. The PC version took the grand prize at the Indie Game Challenge this year (and two smaller prizes for Achievement in Game Play and Achievement in Art Direction). It has 10 hours of content for a typical user. And it has the same puzzles as the PC version, which costs twice as much. I'm not saying this to boast and I don't want it to appears as a complaint. I simply want to reflect on the market realities and the implications for where we're heading. If consumers who pay $80 a month for their data plans won't pay $5 for a game with 10 hours of content, the result is clear: iPhone games can't have big budgets because they can't make enough revenue to pay for the development costs. Game quality will be the casualty in the price war. If consumers want better games, they're going to have to be willing to pay for them. The widespread mentality has emerged that a game on a mobile device can't possibly be worth as much as the same game on a desktop PC or a console. I suspect that this idea is subconsciously driven by the size of the physical device, regardless of its capabilities. Maybe I'm completely wrong and I'm over-analyzing a market that's simply driven by supply and demand, just like any other market. But I am honestly concerned about the future of quality games on mobile platforms.
Why not offer both options? You could offer one version with 10 puzzles for $1 and another with all 50 puzzles for $5. You may have been getting some complaints about your current pricing model, but you'd also definitely get complaints if you switched (expect a few "They're forcing us to pay for puzzles we'll never be able to beat" reviews) - there's no pleasing everyone, and the closest you'll get is by giving people a choice. Personally, I prefer to buy puzzles as I go, mainly because it's more flexible and I never feel I'm paying for something I'll never use, but I'm not all that bothered either way. Regardless, I think the in-app purchase system is worth keeping, if just so that you can sell additional level packs in future. It'll allow you to extend the lifetime of your game, and give you a way to keep some money coming in without having to develop a whole new game, which IMO is a good situation for both you and your customers. I disagree with people saying that $5 is too much. An equivalent puzzle game for the DS would set you back around $30, and doesn't offer much more for the money.
you are forgetting a large portion of the market is ipod touches, or people that have limited plans. I grandfathered into a plan and only pay 42 dollars for unlimited everything, I would be more likely to pay the full 5 dollars for the game, the people that have 80 dollar plans will nickel and dime purchases. the only issue with the pricing to me is, for a dollar you sold us the tutorial. the tutorial was plenty to know if I liked it or not, however I don't think that part should have costed anything.
Yeah, you should probably also have a "lite" version for free with only 2 or 3 levels included, which could be upgraded through in-app purchases.
Well then maybe you need some compreehenshunz. I agree with PixelWrangler. But I also disagree with him. I agree with his view on the mentality on mobile games, but I think that people are really just bitching because they didn't read the app description and find out that you only get 10 puzzles for $0.99. I'm super cereal;
People telling you the price is too high probably are not your group of customers anyway. You should feel not too impressed by those people. There is always someone who wants everything for free and is unable to honor other peoples work. But 50 percent of the voters do not like the DLC model. This should be more interesting. And I do not understand you do not really listen. Most people felt angry by learning they had to pay for the tutorial. A tutorial is normally the contents of a light version and should be free. A tutorial is nothing to pay for! Should have been the first 20 levels instead of 10. But... many people would not have bought more. So the problem is the DLC system anyhow. This game is a great product. A real premium product. The best puzzler in App Store. It is wort five dollars. It should have been offered for five dollars. Someone who is not willing to pay those five dollars will not buy more than the first levelpack anyway, I guess. There is a target group. The group you should have been interested in. The wantitforfree people are of no interest. But in the end you made the things more complicated for your target group. DLC looks sneaky. many people do not like the DLC model. If 50 percent of the possible target group says no to a special pricing model - it means it is a no go for a company to continue this way.
Not really. I've only said that about this, COD, Canabalt, Plants vs Zombies... Oh wait. I see what you mean.
