iPad how about two "free" sections in the app store?

Discussion in 'iPhone and iPad Games' started by Jaytee, Feb 18, 2009.

  1. Jaytee

    Jaytee Well-Known Member

    Jan 13, 2009
    68
    0
    0
    Alright, so I definitely agree that something needs to be done to protect high-end apps in the app store (and no, i don't really think a premium $20 section is the best way to do this), but i'd like to see the opposite happen as well.
    I think there needs to be two "free" sections in the app store. Onne would be for full, real applications and the other would be for demos.
    it annoys me to no end that the top rankings are always just a list of "lite" games and whatnot. it makes it damn near impossible to find the real gems of the free itouch realm: things like jellycar, intercepting force, starlink (anyone played this? really great game), etc. in general, i don't bother with demos, except when they essentially function as full games (ishoot lite, fish tycoon lite), but i love tiny little free games. just can't ever find them.
     
  2. ponyboy

    ponyboy Well-Known Member

    Feb 10, 2009
    82
    0
    0
    I agree re the "free apps" and "free trials" sections but I also agree with a premium games section for the same reason--to make it easier to find them.
     
  3. Mr. Charley

    Mr. Charley Well-Known Member

    Sep 6, 2008
    2,575
    2
    38
    I wouldn't classify both ishoot lite and fish tycoon lite as full games. If they were the full games, they wouldn't be lite versions. :)
    They still do limit you in one way or another (weapon options in ishoot, number of tanks or something in fish tycoon), but I understand your thought.
    Don't think Apple cares too much about the free stuff, that's not where they make their money. They want you to find the "gems" (which are the expensive apps), and that's where they are going to focus their resources
     
  4. jordancoolj

    jordancoolj Well-Known Member

    Jan 1, 2009
    129
    0
    0
    i think its a good idea, but i am interested to see how the 19.99 section will turn out, if there is one (im not sure if it has been given the go ahead by apple)
     
  5. different

    different Well-Known Member

    Aug 8, 2008
    535
    0
    0
    A better way to 'protect' premium priced apps would be to have the top 100 lists sorted by price of unit as well of volume. For instance, one $0.99 app would have to sell 10 copies to have the same rank as 1 copy sold of a $9.99 app. Sorting just by volume is driving prices down.
     
  6. gigidey

    gigidey Well-Known Member

    Nov 9, 2008
    223
    0
    0
    I think this is a great idea, it always annoys me when I try to look for good free apps in the top 25, only to find Lite apps making almost half of the list.
     
  7. BrettArchibald

    BrettArchibald Well-Known Member

    Jul 17, 2008
    1,400
    0
    36
    Self-employed interactive designer.
    Formerly Zimbabwe - now England.
    So what you want are full games, you want them for free, and you want them to be easy for you to find...?
    Gee, not asking for much there, are you... :rolleyes:

    I can appreciate that it annoys you to no end that the list is full of "lites" or "demos", but remember that it's the public who place them at the top of this list by downloading them and rating them — the public gets what the public wants.
     
  8. Gotty

    Gotty Well-Known Member

    Nov 15, 2008
    52
    0
    0
    UK
    I was thinking exactly the same thing yesterday, a free lite section and a lite free section.
     
  9. GreenLightJerky

    GreenLightJerky Well-Known Member

    Oct 27, 2008
    505
    0
    0
    Senior support engineer, jerky guru
    California
    I think that Lite Apps (demo's) should be a link of the main applications page and should not have any effect on Rankings. Free apps should be that. Demos should be demos and paid apps should be paid apps!
     
  10. sam the lion

    sam the lion Well-Known Member

    Jan 12, 2009
    1,455
    0
    0
    Italy
    quite hard indeed!
     
  11. CommanderData

    CommanderData Well-Known Member

    You sir, win the prize! This is exactly what Apple needs to do. Weighting the number of sales based on app price would fix most of the problems with the store. No need for a premium store, no need for a lite section. I'd even suggest a small 1 to 5% bias toward higher priced apps, so that the 99 cent junk settles a bit lower in the list.
     
  12. Spartan12103

    Spartan12103 Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2009
    568
    0
    0
    USA
    The point is to see which app has sold the most, not which ones make the most money. It makes sense that cheaper apps are at the top of the list ecause those honestly are the most popular.

    And I also agree that a "free game section" and a "demo section" would be good.
     
  13. different

    different Well-Known Member

    Aug 8, 2008
    535
    0
    0
    And why are they the most popular? Because they are cheap. Cheap cheap. People think 'oh well it's only a buck' and buy it. Developers know this and so many apps are 'sale priced' for only a buck.

    What we need from a top list is not just how cheap something is but how much value you get from it. You get more value from a 10 dollar game than a 1 dollar game, and therefore probably a better game as well (although there's exceptions, such as Tiki Towers). I do not believe for one second that people buy a 99 cent game because it's good, they buy it because of the price.

    Changing the top lists is the only way to restore balance to the app store ecosystem. Developers cannot afford to set their prices at 99 cents forever.
     
  14. yourofl10

    yourofl10 Well-Known Member

    Dec 11, 2008
    4,176
    1
    0
    There used to be a new apps setion it was the newest free apps release of that day so far or something like that. But apple removed that i was ticked off let me tell you cause most of my apps r free apps
     
  15. blue ox

    blue ox Well-Known Member

    Sep 18, 2008
    458
    0
    0
    I would like to see a Top 100 list at every price point.
     
  16. yourofl10

    yourofl10 Well-Known Member

    Dec 11, 2008
    4,176
    1
    0
    that would be cool
     
  17. CommanderData

    CommanderData Well-Known Member

    But the suggestion does not show which app made the most money, in different's example they made the same amount of money

    Right now it's a vicious circle. The only real way for a developer to get noticed (barring being featured by Apple) is to price themselves so low that people will buy on impulse, therefore increasing their rank, which then causes more people to buy... it's a feedback loop.

    The problem is you can't make a decent application and sell for 99 cents expecting to recoup your dev costs. It's a recipe for bankruptcy and until something is done not many will try to make a truly decent game for the iPhone. Mathematically weighting number of sales based on price of the app is a very simple way to fix the problem. I'm surprised that they haven't done it already.
     
  18. MetaNick

    MetaNick Well-Known Member

    That's not really an ideal solution either because it now makes it unfair to lower priced games. What would be fair is to weight the whole thing. As I suggested in the developer forum, the top lists should be sorted by some weighted equation like:

    Rank = (DownloadWeight * Downloads) + (RevenueWeight * Revenue) + (RatingWeight * AverageRating)

    This way you can try to even out the whole playing field so that all games have equal chance of getting high on the list by making it so that there isn't just one aspect that gets them up there.
     
  19. smokin okin

    smokin okin Well-Known Member

    Nov 28, 2008
    169
    0
    0
    exactly, good point
     
  20. smokin okin

    smokin okin Well-Known Member

    Nov 28, 2008
    169
    0
    0
    what? not at all, you are completely wrong, nobody has exactly the same views, and these would all be biased by the majority
     

Share This Page