iPad Pricing

Discussion in 'iPhone and iPad Games' started by davidmdowning42, Sep 16, 2008.

  1. davidmdowning42

    davidmdowning42 Well-Known Member

    Aug 12, 2008
    110
    0
    0
    Everywhere I look on the app store reviews, everyone b!+ches about prices. If a Game is $10.00, it should be $5.00. If it's $2, it should be $1. If it's 1$, it should be free. Even on this forum, people do it endlessly. I would have guessed most members here are gamers who play on some other platform and are aware that games for any other platforms at minimum cost 3X as much as the most expensive iPhone game. If not 5 to 7X as much.

    Can anyone who has any industry knowledge tell me why games are so cheap for the iPhone? Obviously the solid majority of them are crap that would never be released for a console, and would have similar costs for computers because they're made by indie developers for fun. But Super Monkey Ball is a solid, console worthy title and it's still only $10! How is it possible? Is that much of the price of a regular video game tied up in publishing, and distribution & commercials?

    Then Pangea, with all these really great games, starts slashing the prices of all of their titles. Why? Are they doing badly? Are they doing so well that they can afford to make them so cheap?

    All the low prices, price cuts, and incessant complaining worry me about the future of the iPhone as a gaming platform. I want real gaming titles to be reliably available for this thing. I know there are some limitations involved, but not enough to make the platform max out with Ms. Pac-Man. Will these low prices scare away big developing studios? It has at least delayed one of them:

    http://www.pocketgamer.biz/r/PG.Biz/Fishlabs+Fishlabs+News/feature.asp?c=8575

    Does anybody with any actual industry knowledge know anything about this?
     
  2. mek

    mek Well-Known Member

    supply and demand

    the app market is, huge

    just the simple penetration, from the 10 million (iphone and ipod touch users combined) consumers who can access the store/market, simply select what they want, buy it, download it, and play it instantly with easy upgrading and add on potential.

    some of the developers, like the Chopper Game, which originally sold for 7.99, sold 20,000 copies in the first month, so the developers 70% takehome income for that month was $111,860

    there are no storage costs, distribution and or marketing costs unless the developer does their own marketing, so the actual cost to develop is a lot cheaper if it were on another platform.

    the lower price points mean higher volume, so if you originally sold a game for $9.99 and sold 5,000 copies, when you dropped the price down to 4.99 you may have not made so much per copy sold, but more people bought it , like 10,000 because its the price of two cups of coffee

    so i think its just supply and demand, volume, and its a new market and the developers can play around with it a bit since it's easy to update the applications
     
  3. vandy1997

    vandy1997 Well-Known Member

    Aug 27, 2008
    291
    0
    0
    NJ
    #3 vandy1997, Sep 16, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2008
    Also, there are ZERO packaging/middleman/distribution costs (other than the flat fee to Apple that the developers know upfront), and the apps are NOT TRANSFERRABLE! Many people end up selling the games that they purchase for consoles to somebody else once they get bored of them. We cannot do this with these apps. In addition, as a result of that fact, the developers will sell many more copies of an app (while with console games, since many people resell them, there are fewer copies sold by the manufacturer). These apps should not be expensive just because you or anybody else thinks that they should be. We have to look at the difference in the markets and overall profit that these companies are making on these apps (many of them are less than 1 mb in size). Also, the companies that are porting apps are spending very little in doing so, as the apps have been created and developed. Therefore, they should not be worth as much as new and original apps. Finally, since the battery on these phones are weak, people do not spend hours playing them as they do with console games; I don't want to be paying (and will not pay) an exorbitant price for an app that I will play for one or two hours for maybe 10 times. It is not worth it to me. I think that the reasons are pretty evident.

    One more thing: Companies that make games for consoles charge way too much, and they rip people off. Let's not use the price that companies charge for console games as the given value of such a product, because it definitely is not. These are games, not cures for cancer. Let's get our priorities straight, shall we?
     
  4. davidmdowning42

    davidmdowning42 Well-Known Member

    Aug 12, 2008
    110
    0
    0
    Don't get me wrong! I am all for cheap games! I'm just amazed at how cheap they are! Up to now rather than any explanation for this newly utopic situation, I've only seen complaints. I just wanted somebody who knew what they were talking about to tell me how it was possible, so thanks! Most of what you said was what I would've guessed (though I hadn't thought about resales) but when I saw the article in the link, I got worried that it was all too good to be true.
     
  5. dlogik

    dlogik Well-Known Member

    Aug 24, 2008
    135
    0
    0
    Ouch. Knowing someone personally on the inside during the development of Too Human (which I think was advertised on this site quite extensively over the past couple weeks), I would have to disagree with your statement that companies making games for consoles charge way too much.

    Considering teams, yes, TEAMS, working together over a span of multiple years on ONE GAME ALONE need to be paid accordingly, not to mention other expenses such as equipment, office space, licensing if using another developer's engine, and add to that the amount spent on marketing and promotion of the game itself, it's a hefty price compared to someone whipping up an iPhone app/game in their mother's basement.

    And take movies for example. The budget is say $150,000,000. This includes cast, crew, production, marketing, etc. The "majority" of these movies recoup their costs and 9 times out of 10 surpass their costs quite easily by a) theatre tickets b) Pay-Per-View sales c) DVD and other medium sales d) TV reruns.

    If a game tanks, it tanks. There's no other way to recoup their costs besides initial sales and "Classics" sales.

    /end rant :)

    As far as iPhone apps/games are concerned, I'd gladly pay whatever for a game if "I" feel it's worth it, just as everyone else does, it's completely subjective. If John Carmack's rumored iPhone game in the works is stellar and iD decides it's going to be the first $19.99 iPhone game, I'll be the first to click on it!

    I'm totally with mek on this one...supply and demand. If an iPhone developer sees that the initial buzz and sales of their $9.99 app/game is done, they may decide to drop it to $4.99...well then now they have a whole new bunch of buyers who were on the fence and will jump at $4.99.
     
  6. arn

    arn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Apr 19, 2008
    2,444
    18
    38
    I very much disagree with this. For a product like a game (not food, not medicine), the only thing that determines "too much" is the price people are willing to pay. I think devs should charge as much as they can. If they aren't, they are leaving money on the table.

    As for the original poster, the reason people are complaining is that they can. I remember hearing a Mac developer say that pricing is tricky and you can't go by customer response. In that you if you pick $15, someone will always come to you and say, oh, "if it was only $10, I'd buy it." If you drop to $10, then someone else will say "oh if it was only $5, I'd buy it."

    That being said, I think the iPhone market is settling out it's own prices. The pricing model is so fluid that it can be changed at any time and there are a lot of independent developers who are willing to cut prices.

    As a result, for the iPhone a $10 game has ended up on the high end... but if people want really high quality games then they are going to have to be willing to pay $10 or even more. In order to attract big budget original games, companies are going to have to be able to make up the difference.

    There's a reason that there are 10,000 puzzles games on the market and that's because they are relatively cheap to make.

    arn
     
  7. vandy1997

    vandy1997 Well-Known Member

    Aug 27, 2008
    291
    0
    0
    NJ
    Yes, when I say that companies charge too much for console games, that is solely my opinion. There are people who may think that $50 or $60 for a game is an adequate price - I don't. So I wait for the price to be cut in half, and then I buy the game. As I said before, I won't die if I decide not to buy the game right away. With respect to the number of people who work on a game (and the time and effort involved), I sometimes believe that less is more. Sometimes the number of people and number of years involved in creating a game is a waste. There are quite a few games that are utter garbage even though tons of time and money were spent on them (and movies as well, by the way). That doesn't mean that people should spend $50 or $60 to purchase crappy games.

    Of course supply and demand are the major factors in determining the price, and of course developers should try to charge as much as the market is willing to pay. However, sometimes that strategy will not be the most lucrative in the long run. If purchasers figure out that developers will cut the price within a short period of time (and, with the case of the iPhone apps, they have), those purchasers will wait to purchase, and the developer will stand to lose more money than if he/she had charged a lower price to begin with. In addition, if developers wait too long to cut prices, another "next best app" may come along, and purchasers may decide to purchase that app instead, leaving the developer with a great app that fewer purchasers are willing to purchase. I respect developers, and I understand that this is a difficult business.

    I am not a big gamer, but I like to play some games. For nostalgic reasons, I purchased Pac-Man and Frogger when they first came out for $10 each, and I don't even have either of those apps on my phone! I played each game two or three times. After that experience, I decided not to buy games at such a high price (or what I deem to be a high price). And, it seems like many other people have done the same, as developers are cutting prices left and right. And I am confident that they are still making a profit. I am not saying that ALL of them are making a profit, but many of them are doing so. arn, the problem with developers charging as much as they can is that they can become perceived as being greedy, and that will not help their pocket in the long run. Also, as has been seen with iPhone apps, if prices are perceived to be too high, hackers will hack those apps, and developers will end up losing a lot of possible revenues due to the fact that the apps are being distributed for free. I support developers and will continue to do so; I just hope that prices on apps don't become excessive because it will be a lose-lose situation.

    Also, I wish that these companies would quit it with the $0.99 baloney. If an app costs $10, say that it costs $10 and not $9.99! Most iPhone users are not morons and won't be swayed into buying something because it's $0.01 cheaper (or I hope not). These pricing schemes are totally moronic. I know that it's Apple's policy, but I think that it's truly idiotic.
     
  8. dlogik

    dlogik Well-Known Member

    Aug 24, 2008
    135
    0
    0
    This is the exact reason why "Lite" and "Free" versions have been so rampant in the store. If people enjoy the lite/free versions, then they're going to fork over to play the rest of the game (which I have done on a few occasions already).

    Developers know that with the iPhone platform as it stands now, people can't preview or even read reviews of a game for themselves until it actually hits the store thus determining if the $9.99 (or whatever price) tag is worth it. Yeah, there's YouTube previews, but half the time those are shite anyway.

    As far as the apps being hacked and distributed for free, it would be intersting to know the ratio of legit to jailbroken iphones in order to actually install them to begin with.

    I must admit, this makes for great conversation! We're completely in it's infancy, and can only imagine the possibilities of this platform and where developers are willing to take it (and invest in it). Will Apple open things up a bit for developer previews and whatnot where we see games being reviewed in the March edition of "iPhone Gaming" magazine before their May release date? Only time will tell I suppose.

    dlogik
     
  9. mavis

    mavis Well-Known Member

    Not me. Looking at the $270 I've spent so far in the App Store, those purchases are now worth less than $200, due to price cuts. And when I went through my Mobile Applications folder last night and deleted 650MB of outdated apps, I realized that I've been paying through the nose to be a beta tester. Some of my games have had SEVEN releases already. SEVEN, in less than two months. That's just asinine.

    I don't want to pay to beta test anymore. Developers regularly release incomplete, WIP games because they know how easy it is to release updates. And paying launch day prices (for these incomplete apps) is just silly, because time and time again we see app prices getting slashed within days or weeks.

    As has been said, it's all about what people are willing to pay. I know that most mobile phone games/apps cost under $5, and I know that iPod games also cost about $5 or less. Why should I pay more, when my iPhone is just that - a phone and an iPod? I realize that Apple is trying to position the iPhone as more of a mobile computer now, but it still lacks the RAM and the battery life to be much more than a souped-up phone, IMO. So, paying $10 for an incomplete, beta version, mobile phone/iPod application whose price will be slashed in a few weeks anyway sounds pretty stupid to me.

    But that's just my opinion.
     
  10. dudehuge

    dudehuge Well-Known Member

    Sep 7, 2008
    293
    0
    0
    #10 dudehuge, Sep 17, 2008
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2008
    The pricing schemes are by tier. Meaning! Apple has a sort of table where in when you submit your paid app you choose a "Tier" the devs can't randomly type a price of $1.33.

    Example.

    Tier----Customer Price----Net Commision
    1-------$0.99---------------$0.70
    2-------$1.99---------------$1.40
    3-------$2.99---------------$2.10
    85------$999.99------------$700.00

    They know that iPhone users are not morons. It just looks better at $9.99 than $10, that's marketing 101. You said it yourself you're not a moron so you should know the difference. Stop whining LOL this pricing strategy has been done for ages.
     
  11. Sorry to burst your bubble... But we aren't. When even simple games take, optimistically, $20,000.00 to make selling them for a $0.70, $1.40, or even a $2.10 gross takes many sales to even break even. And there are very few developers who can afford the kind of advertising campaign behind houses like EA that will generate enough interest to make something like Spore a best seller.

    Most of them are not making a profit. Which means you are going to keep seeing more and more worthless applications in the store until developers can scrape a living out of the aggregate profits.

    Is it greedy to be one of the few to charge $3 for something that looks and works better than than what a large number of other people are charging $6 for?

    That's the least of Apple's idiotic policies. If that where their worse offense I would be one happy developer. Consider the fact that developers get almost zero information to base things like pricing on. The we are essentially at the mercy of an abandoned review system. The required web site links are useless in the AppStore because users can't click to go to those web sites. And all the other problems we can't even talk about because Apple thinks unilateral contracts are their right because it's their iPhone/iPod.
     
  12. dudehuge

    dudehuge Well-Known Member

    Sep 7, 2008
    293
    0
    0
    I agree with grafik.

    Vandy1997, don't expect you know anything and everything based on knowledge you pulled out of your ass.
     
  13. vandy1997

    vandy1997 Well-Known Member

    Aug 27, 2008
    291
    0
    0
    NJ
    First of all, I'm not trying to insult anybody. I am just providing my opinion. Some people may agree with me; some may not. Since I'm not insulting anybody, I should be treated with respect as well. For your information, I own three businesses, and I have an MBA and a law degree. I am a corporate attorney, and I have been an investment banker. Therefore, I have a bit of experience regarding the business world. And I know quite a bit about how to maximize profit. So please don't tell me that I am pulling anything out of anywhere. The demand for these products is elastic; therefore, a price change will result in a high swing in the amount of purchasers. Since you guys and gals seem to know everything, I will just go along my merry way. I will still comment when I deem fit to do so. Thank you all for the dialogue. Just please do not insult me. I would appreciate that.


     
  14. mavis

    mavis Well-Known Member

    Agreed, the insults are unnecessary! Anyway, it's nice to see people sharing their opinions, which is the whole point of the boards anyway. ;)
     
  15. dlogik

    dlogik Well-Known Member

    Aug 24, 2008
    135
    0
    0
    Aye, seconded! Vandy has brought up a lot of good points, certainly nothing based on knowledge he's pulled out of his ass...we definitely don't want to end up like some of the discussions on the macrumors forums (wink @ arn) hehe.
     
  16. Little White Bear Studios

    Little White Bear Studios Well-Known Member

    Aug 27, 2008
    2,572
    0
    0
    Okay, I think there may be a misconception here about the motivations of the developers where price drops and updates are concerned. Developers are doing updates for three reasons only: bug/performance fixes, strongly requested features, and visibility.

    Bugs: Yes, we shouldn't deliver with bugs. But frankly, unless you're shipping a "Hello World" app, nobody can ever catch every bug, especially when a good portion of them are Apple's own issues. It'd be nice if every developer had a fleet of testers, but they don't. That will get better, now that we have ad-hoc builds to give to beta testers. Yes, there are a lot of crappy developers out there, who rush releases out, without testing. I'm hoping that decreases in the future.

    Strongly requested features: We want you to be happy customers. If there is a lot of demand for something that makes sense for the game, and is cost effective, we usually listen.

    Visibility: This is actually the number one reason we do updates. Have you seen the games category lately? Have you scrolled past 50 icons in the last month? Neither does anybody else. So unless you're updating 1-4 times a month, you generally don't exist on the phone. I'd wager that all but the top 200 games are selling less than 20 copies a day worldwide.

    Now, about the price drops. This goes back to visibility. If you're in the Top 50 on the phone, you make a good living. Anything less, don't quit your day job. If you're not even in the Top 100 games, it might be costing you more to develop, than you're pulling in. It's in our best interest to be visible on the phone. If that means dropping the price to be more attractive to new buyers, so be it. If you're a $10 app, and you're sitting at #99, you probably cost too much. Lowering the price is not meant to stick it to the previous buyers. It's all about survival. Buyers are getting free updates forever, for a really cheap game. We understand it sucks to buy something yesterday, and today the price drops. But trust us, we didn't want to do it.
     
  17. moopf

    moopf Well-Known Member

    Sep 16, 2008
    224
    0
    0
    This is the part that really worries me in this discussion as it could end up tarring all developers, but especially the small independent ones like myself, with the same brush. Bugs are part and parcel of developing, they're positively unavoidable to some degree, but that's no excuse for releasing something that simply isn't ready for release and I've seen a lot of that happen so far in the app store. I've been surprised at some of what I've seen, and definitely that it's managed to get past Apple's approval system.

    Releasing umpteem updates a month to fix bugs that most likely should have been picked up before release isn't acceptable to me either. There's also the fact that developers are releasing updates frequently, many with just small minor changes, in order to gain extra visibility as well and that's an issue that Apple need to get a grip on for the good of all the developers in the app store. Personally I think that Apple should more rigorously enforce their own update frequency guidelines.
     
  18. Little White Bear Studios

    Little White Bear Studios Well-Known Member

    Aug 27, 2008
    2,572
    0
    0
    I think the update problem will more or less fix itself if Apple puts a Top 25 list in each category, as well as some sub-categories in the games section. Take away the motivation to update so much, and the store will be much friendlier for the users.
     
  19. moopf

    moopf Well-Known Member

    Sep 16, 2008
    224
    0
    0
    Oh yes, I think you're right as well but, in the meantime as Apple is likely to move slower than we'd want to on changes to the look and organisation of the app store, they really do need to enforce their own guidelines in a more firm way. What's happening now is an old trick that's been used on a myriad of other sites over the years and is, effectively, "gaming" the way the app store works to maintain visibility. If everybody started doing this then the whole thing just becomes a mess that's no good for consumers or developers.
     
  20. Little White Bear Studios

    Little White Bear Studios Well-Known Member

    Aug 27, 2008
    2,572
    0
    0
    I agree. The more people who update once a week, the more the updates mean less and less for visibility. The more updates, the slower the review process gets. I'm perfectly fine with being limited to 1-2 updates a month max, with the option for one emergency bug fix update, where the problem and solution can be demonstrated as being a real issue.

    Personally, I think they're waiting for the 1,000 mark on the games category to start the restructure. They'll look like the big hero, with over 1,000 games, and an "amazing" new way to organize them for the new "gaming" iPod touch. You watch....shake to pick ten random 4+ star apps.
     

Share This Page