Another gone free? Great.....*snatch* Oh, and the topic (of many views) is still surprising fresh. This has not happened time and time again? But then it seems understandable to have an outlet to voice the opinions. I really don't think it will change the way games are headed though and the consumer has a very limited say on it obviously and only through these kinds of threads or e-mailing to their support and of course spanking devs with one stars (not my kind of practice). But please, go on with the debate, an interesting read at best. But I see the direction its going. Possible a locked thread soon.
Wow, Apple gave you a refund? I guess I'm going to try it too even though I don't know if it is worth the effort for a buck. But man, this last month, I bought this game, ballistic, and lock and load, and all of them within a month went free from their premiere date. Well, I'll let you know what Apple says, but I can't see them giving everyone who bought it a refund. Maybe you got lucky being one of the first ones bringing up the issue. But we'll see...
I should be the one thanking you, Gabrien. Though somewhat blunt, you're probably the most rational, reasonable poster in this forum. I wish there were more like you instead of those who just seem to spew whatever inconsiderate thought is on their mind at a specific moment. Back to the topic.
While a worthy sentiment, you're fighting a losing battle trying to approach this with reason and logic. The "one-star" brigade are largely the same people who turn up on Metacritic handing out user scores of zero to excellent games because of some minor issue they personally have with the game or its developers, rather than anything to do with the merits of the game as a whole. It is best to ignore all the non-textual app store reviews (i.e. the star ratings), and focus on what is actually being written about the game. That way, if a review says, "I'm giving this game one star because it went free," you know you can rightfully dismiss the review as sheer idiocy, and the reviewer as sheer idiot. The surfeit of whiny manchildren around here is a large part of why most professional developers don't bother with a continued presence, if they make the mistake of coming here at all; I personally know one major developer and one independent who no longer frequent this forum specifically because of the endless close-minded and antagonistic drivel spouted by one particular poster. It is disappointing - and more than a little surprising - that so many members of the self-proclaimed hub of iOS gaming are so mindbogglingly childish and anti-developer but, for the foreseeable future, here we are.
Glad to see you abandoned those nasty things for the remainder of your post. If anything, you're coherent. "Manchildren" - see my point Gabrien?
+1 to you good sir. I agree with everything said here. Seems like quite a few people here have already blacklisted NCSoft. All you guys are really doing is forcing the dev to either: A) stop creating apps and get out of the business altogether or B) force the dev to go freemium. And judging by the quality of their apps, I really wouldn't want either to happen. And honestly Gabrien, I'm a bit surprised. You strongly oppose IAPs, yet your complaints about price changes can directly cause freemium to overtake the market. What's better, a market with premium apps that may/may not drop in price soon after release, or a completely freemium one, where no one can complain about price drops?
A wrong is a wrong, and doesn't become a right because a larger wrong exists. In any case, my only aim has been to get people to look at the complete picture. See my initial posts above: developers and consumers are equally responsible for where the app store's at and for where it's heading. What I'm against is developers being given a free pass to behave irresponsibly.
Fair enough. I definitely understand and partially agree with your feelings regarding how some devs are occasionally "abusing" pricing and stabbing early adopters in the back. But really, in the long run, wouldn't you say it would be worth it to get ripped off here and there, for the greater good of the App Store? Sure, I've lost a few bucks when purchasing an app at launch, but really, when I think about it, I at least know that I'm still "encouraging" the devs to not go freemium in the future, by showing they still have customers willing to buy their apps. And as for developers behaving irresponsibly, I reckon consumers are already, too. Just looking at the Top Grossing apps, I really find it hard to believe that it's possible to make a decent profit in the App Store if you're not A) freemium or B) a big company like Rovio. Aren't consumers also "irresponsible" for encouraging freemium trends? The fact that the majority of consumers are unwilling to buy paid apps is what fueled these rapid price drops, IMO. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that yes, price drops soon after release suck, but if our own TA community won't TOFTT every now and then, what will stop the App Store from going freemium?
Do keep in mind, in this instance the only reason the game has gone free so fast is because it already contains IAP, making the whole "would you rather..." argument entirely moot. This particular game does nothing for "making the app store a better place." Not at release, and certainly not now. If you are asking me the question purely hypothetically, then sure, duh, yeah I'll choose the lesser of two evils if I must. Aren't consumers also irresponsible for encouraging freemium trends? Of course they are! How many times do I need to reiterate that I feel both consumers and developers are responsible equally, to get that across? What will stop the app store from going freemium? You mean totally? Well, hopefully you and me. And that dev over there. Oh, and that one too. But not that one. Or this one.
For what it's worth, the IAP in this game is entirely unnecessary. It's pretty easy to unlock everything without them. I don't have any interest in arguing with anybody about it, but I do think it's important to remember that folks are trying to figure out how to make a living in an emerging market, and that it wouldn't hurt to give them the benefit of the doubt, particularly when the stakes are ninety-nine cents. Sometimes you pay for a game and it goes free, and sometimes you get a game for free that others paid for. As a consumer in the app store, I think you have to just accept that and not get too worked up one way or the other. Whatever your viewpoint on that, I think the game is fantastic and is worth a look at $1 or $0.
Well, how about in other instances? Say an app (without IAP) is going free purely for the sake of getting exposure. Is that okay? And I guess while we're on the topic of going free, when is it "acceptable" for apps to drop in price? 1 week after release? A month? 2 months? Honestly people are going to complain about price drops all the time. I've seen countless people going "darn, I just bought this app three days before this sale. next time I'll just wait", even if the app was released, say over a year ago. So I hate to get into a "you 'started' it" type of argument, but did consumers' greed initiate the current price drop/freemium stuff we're seeing now, or was it the devs that were the one that "started" it? What came first, the freemium/price-drop or the non-willing consumer? Both consumer and developer are equally responsible, sure, but I can't see how it's fair to ask the devs to fix this mess if they weren't the ones that initiated the current trends in the first place. And really, what's the point? We can beseech devs to change their ways, but the majority of consumers still aren't going to do their part. There's enough stingy people in this world to ensure that the App Store will always have freemium - and if that's where profits are to be made, what's stopping devs from going over? Nothing, absolutely nothing. We have to clean up our act first, and then maybe, just maybe the devs will follow suit.
@nfong: If an app without IAP went free hours after release I'd have zero issues with it. Zilch. Zip. Why, I think, is self evident. As for the rest of your post, I'm sorry, I'm not going to repeat myself a third (or is it fourth now?) time. Perhaps I am just doing a woeful job at explaining myself clearly. Even if so, let's just leave it at that.
Oh, it's absolutely customer greed first: you can see prime examples of that in this very thread (see: people throwing tantrums, and demanding refunds for a $1 game based on the outright lie that the developer was indulging in "dishonest behaviour"), and just browsing the TA forums will provide the rest of the evidence you need. The real issue, though, is the fact that certain parties keep trying to make the argument about how IAP is a harmful thing because somehow IAP is bad by definition, which is nonsense. The vast majority of app makers aren't rolling in cash, and we've had numerous reports from the makers of ostensibly popular games in which they've stated that they're making far less than you'd think. If an app developer can't make a profit with a one-off $1 entry fee, and isn't able to make sales with a price higher than $1 because of spoiled iOS gamers who won't accept that, you're certainly not being at all reasonable by making the fantastically arrogant claim that they're also not allowed to try to make money by selling the app for $1 and adding entirely optional in-game purchases that would further support them financially. The people in this camp are actively trying to harm app developers; there is simply no other way of looking at that mindset. What mess, though? The claim that IAP is inherently "wrong" by its very nature, or that the app store is "ruined" by its presence is a woefully flawed argument based on absolutely nothing but personal opinion, yet people keep allowing themselves to be sucked into accepting and responding to this premise if it is a fact. It's not, and this particular line of argument honestly shouldn't even be entertained. If you don't want to support IAP, don't pay for it; if it becomes clear that the majority won't pay for it, the model will decline in popularity. If people do want to pay for it, you have absolutely no right to tell them they can't, and the oft-repeated claims along the lines of "people who pay for IAP are too stupid to know better, and are responsible for ruining iOS gaming" only serve to make the people spouting such rubbish look like ignorant, petty thugs. We have now reached the point where the anti-IAP folks aren't even able to articulate why "IAP is bad", other than just saying it is, and occasionally making nebulous, unsubstantiated claims about it ruining the app store/iOS gaming environment, all the while conveniently leaving themselves and their own actions out of the equation.
This, to me, shows that you've barely played the game (if at all) and yet you're making assumptions and generalizations that I personally would attribute to Trinity - who are actively doing what you claim with every game they release. This game is not pushing the IAP, it's not required, necessary, or even obvious. Just because it's there doesn't give you an excuse to bemoan the "state of the App Store". Who pissed in your cornflakes this morning? The thing is - the majority don't pay for any IAP in games. The user base is so large though, that the small fraction that does is enough to give them astronomical profits.
Geezus. This thread is still being filled with pointless arguments and silly name calling? Dang. Look at it this way, when you put a dollar into a vending machine, sometimes you end up recieving two snacks, and sometimes the machine ends up eating your dollar. It's no different from the app store.
Yeah, well, at least it is providing all of us with entertainment for tonight. Don't know exactly how this has become a developer vs consumer war thread, but it is interesting to hear a lot of different opinions about so many different things. Interesting to say the least, I find that many points from all sides are valid, and this game, unfortunately seems to be a lightning rod because of its small window about 3 weeks going free after release. Kind of feel a little sorry to this game and developer in a way since it's more of a global issue, and I like the game, it is fun. I do have one question though for some of you, I will post a new post for that next. Cheers. As Rodney King would have said to all of us, Can't we all get along?.? May he rest in peace.
My question is this: If a developer has a freemium game that has inapps, is it ethical for them to release the game for a fee let's say a dollar, and then 3 days later, make it freemium? This would be done to intentionally kind of screw over early adopters knowing they would buy the game, but knowing all the time that the game would be freemium in 3 days? This would maximize potential revenue for a game but it sure would leave a sour mouth for a lot of early adopters. I really think this will happen soon. It'll be interesting the contraversy if this was to happen, and could be proven. Anyone have any thoughts? Peace all...
