It's not a joke, this article did more traffic than anything else we posted this week: http://toucharcade.com/2015/02/18/candy-crush-soda-saga-beginners-level-guide-levels-1-through-20/
"games people actually play (all freemium)" I'm pretty sure we have quite a few people playing games other than his "best games" freemium. # As I've pointed out, he keeps saying "everything about freemium is best, including the bad things." He's making it difficult to take seriously.
The thing is, it's an order of magnitude of difference. We can post a game review for a highly anticipated premium game and it'll get 1/10 the traffic of a news post about Simpsons Tapped Out getting an update. We've already discussed that labeling these as "best" was a mistake, and has totally derailed the thread.
That might not be a coincidence, games like COC are much better if you don't think about them too much. It's like junk food, you might enjoy it at the time, but you really don't want to think too much about what you're actually taking in.
Funny thing is, and I know I'm in the minority, those are usually the posts I don't even bother to read. Though the outrage in the comments section is always good for a laugh. But considering that freemium game posts do bring in the traffic, I'm even more impressed by the coverage you guys give to premium gaming. It really does show that TA is run by people who truly love games.
That is an interesting one. It's in no way surprising but interesting nonetheless. Tough balancing act going on there because you know, everybody gotta pay the bills. It's funny how one sees a lot of "unhappy" comments when the Candy Crush articles appear yet they do contribute to paying the bills and allow for the extensive coverage of independent or premium games. I dunno why people can't see that, just accept it and move on to the articles they want to read themselves. A bit like the freemium/iap type games comments one sees a lot of. Dunno why people can't see how freemium has the potential to open the market more and allow for the potential of a larger market for other types of games as the casual player gets a taste for something else. Getting a percentage of that player base, any percentage, would be a dream come true for a premium game and an opportunity that might not exist without freemium because a percentage of nothing is still nothing. So, you know yourself, keep doing those articles if they pay the bills and allow the other stuff. I know a whole lot of people actually who find them extraordinarily useful, Shauns recent CC one that you mentioned earlier has been mentioned favourably a whole lot since it came out. (Had to send a link on to a whole lot of people who were stuck and they were all very grateful and hopefully will be new fully fledged subscribers and then be exposed to the other stuff you guys cover.) Just as some developers (some, not all, but some) can use freemium to make other stuff or just pay the rent because ultimately we are still better off with them than without them.
It is a naive thinking, the % of players who will try a premium game after they heavily invest in a freemium game is nowhere near the % of developers who are pushed out of this business as it grows into a pro league. A freemium game is literally the most sticky game out there once you invest the days/hours/dollars into your base/character. And once you are used to fast paced, instant gratification, the showers of rewards for logging in, ability to make progress when you are not playing the game, the social elements, there is no going back to gimmicks like storyline or exploration. If you think this thread is heated, think about a development team trying to get funding for a premium game these days. Think about the debate between team members on commercial model. Think about trying to pitch to an investor to start a serious project. The tide can not be turned. Paid games simply can not compete with freemium games in production value and talent. It wasn't long ago when an indie developer like Mika can release something like Zombieville USA and hit top 3 grossing, or Rockstar releasing an old console port like GTA Vice City and do the same. I am seeing less and less of these. It is a big boy's league now, amateurs need not apply. There is less and less resources for people to make paid games. TA will have to make a choice as well. Continue to cater to the amateurs and decline, or cover the pro leagues and shine. We all love Cinderella stories, there will be indie developers who can make a living do what they like, but https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjX_6UX28Jo and there is no way you can make a better overall game when you have 1/100th the budget. Love can not bridge the resource gap between NBA and NBDL, and the gap is growing every day.
Okay, do I even need to point out how this is a joke? Or he's trying to say his opinion on games he likes is fact. And he can't win such an argument, obviously. Either way, it's not funny. (And "fast paced"? You're forgetting timers? Paywalls? And getting "showers" of rewards? You are massively exaggerating.) I tried some of these games you speak of. I went back to the games I like. You can have your freemium games, just stop trying to force them on everyone. Okay?
Wel, maybe it is naive, but maybe it's not. I still think that the more people that are out there playing games, be it casual, premium, freemium, hardcore or whatever category one wants to choose, the greater the market potential for all types of games and players. Maybe fremium players will try out other genres, other pay models, maybe they won't but the simple fact is the greater the marketplace, the greater the number of actual people playing actual games on their phones/tablets/etc., the greater the potential for developers of all types to flourish. I like to think of it as optimism, not naivity. I'm all for all models, whatever works for each individual. I would suggest opening yourself up a bit to other options. It's all well and good the point you're making in the thread and I see plenty of validity to a lot of your points, but as much as you are commenting on others not being open or adapted to freemium, you yourself are excluding yourself from the premium option and its potential also. I'm not gonna delve too deep in to that point. It as much as you are trying to open people's minds to freemium, you yourself should not be dismissing premium to such an extent. Each model has its values for different people and surely having the App Store, mobile games, smart devices and everything associated with them is all about the choice. And just on your second paragraph, it's an area I know a hell of a lot about and it's not really all black and white. It ain't easy either but it's not as simplistic as you would think where freemium is the only option because that kind of market and that kind of game is not what every developer is after. Some halo projects are a result of freemium money and others are to promote freemium projects. It's a very complex business model and environment that this thread alone will never fully explore. Ultimately, I'm not trying to disagree with you. As I said some of your points are extremely valid but some are not. I'm not anti iap or freemium in any shape or form. I see the validity of the model. But I'm not anti premium either and I see the validity of that model also. Completely dismissing premium in the nature you have been doing is to dismiss a segment of the marketplace that is still useful. It may be niche now. But there is nothing wrong with that either. You're dismissal of premium in the nature you have been expressing it is no different to those that you're "discussing" with and their dismissal of freemium and your points. As with the marketplace itself, a middle ground has to be found rather than this "I'm right and you're wrong" principal that both sides of this discussion are haphazardly throwing around and thinking that qualifies as a reasonable counter point. The thing is, it's not. Somewhere in the middle offers the best happy medium because, as with all things, compromise is a part of all conflict resolution whether that conflict be based on freemium vs premium models or creativity vs profit margins or long campaigns vs quick play or simply other more important things.
Is America a better country than say, Sweden? Looking at all objective measurements, the impact between the two countries, their GDP, military strength and significance, absolutely! Doesn't mean many would find Sweden a much better country FOR THEM TO LIVE IN. But at the end of the day, it is a superpower vs a non-factor if we are talking about objective measurements. That is the gap between a top of the ladder freemium game vs a top of the ladder paid game. I am very aware of games that would have had zero chance in major league, doing extremely well in minor league. A couple of million dollars may be what COC makes in a day, it is still more money than most would ever see and very possible for a good paid game in its entire life cycle. I have personally recommended more than a few developers to build what they really want to play, try to appease the TA crowd if they are making a single player game, get some positive reviews and use it as a resume builder/stepping stone for bigger freemium projects. With little to no marketing budget they wouldn't be able to compete against the pros anyway. But as a whole, the tide is hard to reverse, and that's why I would love to see someone with the obvious talent of Mika, go all out and make a big budget freemium game with full social elements. He should have zero problem getting funding with his incredible track record. I can't think of a single indie anywhere near his sustained success. It would be the greatest game Mika ever made.
Mika's response: "Mika Mobiles games have a unique vitality, honesty, and sense of humor because they are born from a simple question what would be fun? It seems obvious, yet its often overlooked while developers overanalyze genres, demographics, marketing and monetization methods. These days, how to sell a game is often considered more carefully than how to make it. So instead, we ask: what would be fun to play, and what would be fun to work on? As artists and gamers, we know that only a product that is exciting to work on for months and years at a time will draw out our strongest work, and make something unique and appealing. If we make something that wed want to play, it keeps us motivated, and draws out the best from us. We firmly believe that through craftsmanship and attention to detail, our products will sell themselves. We try to make games that we would play we hope you like them too." I'm sorry to burst your bubble hitmanb but not every game developer is as obsessed with money as you seem to be.
Stop trying to lure Mika to the dark side. As far as your country comparisons go, you're way off base with that analogy. Many smaller countries have better healthcare, better income equality, better education, better infrastructure, less corrupt government, less crowded prisons, and less crime overall. Our bloated military and super-rich corporations don't make us superior. You're only measuring the bottom line with your objectivity, as you're doing with freemium gaming.
And Barry from Fireproof Games (The Room) said pretty much the same thing today: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2015/02/19/opinion-why-conventional-thinking-about-mobile-game-design-isn-t-smart-thinking.aspx I really wish I could just ignore the ridiculous things said in this thread, but it's so hard. I guess I'm really really easy to troll. But one of the points being missed is that a game like CoC has a big team of people that need to get paid, as well as a huge marketing budget. So while it looks like they're making massive profits, I highly doubt each individual developer is really raking it in like you think they are. A smaller dev team like Fireproof, Mika, ustwo -- they made a decent amount per developer. And really, all they seem to want anyway is to be able to make enough off their games to be able to continue making games that they *want* to make and not have to take a second job to feed their families.
6 million copies * $0.99-$2.99 * 70% on 3 platforms (PC, Android and iOS) over 2.5 years for a team this big is honestly not much more than their old salary for everyone except the founders. You have to factor in the rent, the utility bills, the equipment, all the costs of running a business and this is a pretty big team now. This is not an indie team anymore. http://www.fireproofgames.com/about-us And even then it required a lucky break: "Of all the bloody luck, Apple featured The Room on iTunes on release day." Obviously the founders did well, obviously freemium games they despise to make don't always turn out to be successful because the competition there is much stronger as well, obviously small businesses can pick up enough bread crumbs to stay alive against mega corporations, and the bread crumbs are still much bigger than the average paychecks of equivalent positions at corporations. A top tier premium developer will beat low tier freemium developers, but if you compare their success vs similar sized studios doing successful freemium games, it is no contest. I never said you can not make a living doing paid games, but you have to compare same tier developer in each category against each other.
Oh dear. I'm afraid you're country comparison has really just proven that you're not exactly looking at the whole thing objectively. You're position is equally as intractable and subjective as the anti freemium stance. Pity really because you had some valid points and while I enjoy both freemium and premium games, you seem to have missed the ultimate point with your focus on the financial aspects and using that as your yardstick, people enjoy freemium games also and that's one of the primary reasons why they have enjoyed financial success. People have been happy to buy in them because they have been happy playing them. Simple case of satisfaction and reward. They enjoy premium as well but freemium simply reaches higher numbers of downloads, hence the higher returns. Assuming of course that the game is enjoyable to begin with. I'm honestly a bit lost at this stage to try and figure out what you're ultimate motivation is behind the thread because you're intractability and subjectiveness is very evident and is doing the freemium subject matter a bit of a disservice at this stage. You're stance is really no different to the intractable nature of the anti freemium crowd, a stance I don't particularly share either. I'm personally very happy in the middle ground and purely judging a game on the one key factor that influences me, i.e. whether it be enjoyable or not, as opposed to its payment model or structure and am happy to support, play and yes pay for iap or a premium price if I believe it will offer me a level of enjoyment in return. I believe that to a relatively healthy position to take and perhaps that is a position both the pro and anti freemium/premium lobbies should consider above all else. There is a strong case of the pot calling the kettle black on both sides of the discussion here and really all its going to do is endlessly circulate and ultimately do a great disservice to each payment model. Sorry but any discussion of that nature with no sense of tractability or compromise by either party is really not a discussion worth having. Best of luck to all involved and don't forget, it really doesn't matter all that much anyway as long as you're just true to your own beliefs and accept that others are equally as entitled to be true to their own.
Like Eli said, the big issue here is that words like "best" have been used by the OP which has everybody upset and frustrated. I do think there is a really interesting discussion around freemium there if we can attempt to ignore the "best" comments. I am not a huge fan of freemium and I tried my best to avoid it for years. At some point I decided that completely ignoring and wishing away an entire pay model could lead to me missing out on some fun experiences. I'm still partial to premium games, but I'm not completely closed off to freemium now and I'll give some games a run for a bit to see if they catch on for me. Monster Strike has been a big winner for me. I'll also say that I feel like many on here have a hard time escaping the bubble that gaming communities like Toucharcade provide. If your exposure to iOS gaming is TA and the forums, it's easy to understand why would think that developers are leaving money on table by avoiding freemium or offering premium unlocks vs IAP (premium unlocks seem to be about the worst option from a financial perspective). You have to keep in mind that TA is only a small fraction of the total mobile gaming audience, and while premium may be king here, it's not outside of here or other "core" gaming communities. Freemium is not going anywhere and wishing it away isn't going to help. I would love for this to be a big bubble that bursts and we return to the App Store of 4-5 years ago, but that isn't going to happen. Games as service (which is what freemium really is in most cases) is a trend you are seeing all across the gaming industry. The costs are just far too high to rely on week one sales for your return on investment like you have with the traditional premium model. Premium games will always exist as there are customers who want them and developers who will provide those experiences, but the big money in mobile will continue to be in freemium. My whole point of this? Despite the OP shoving how freemium games are "best" down our throats, I think that freemium is a valid discussion topic here and it always frustrates me to see people want to shut it down. Not talking about it won't make it go away. Oh and one comment on the Clash of Clans discussion. I played it some and didn't care for it, but I'll add to some of the comments that if you mock the idea that CoC can be a hardcore and in depth game, then you haven't see anything regarding the gameplay at high levels. I have a few personal friends who play CoC religiously and they put as much time into the game as serious MOBA or FPS players I know. On top of that, I understand their financial investment is pretty minimal. The game isn't for me, but it is a good sign that eventhough we've seen a shift to freemium, the opportunity for more core experiences does exist. Something new and different that isn't CoC or Candy Crush will come out and maybe it will provide the type of core experience that many of us on TA would enjoy.
^Great post Like you say freemium isnt going anywhere. Just like this person is posting rubbish about 'best freemium games are better than paid ones...' the people who also dismiss EVERY freemium game are just as bad. With SO many games out there i'm still very happy with iOS gaming, i dont want all games to go freemium and i still think 'we're' partly to blame. The people who want 20 opinions before splashing out on a dollar, or someone who waits 2 months for a game to drop in price to one dollar. Or promo code beggers. To me all those people have helped made freemium popular for devs. But again i could never buy a game all year and i've got a differenet game to play every day for 3 years at least ! If anything with me buying less (as theres so many freemium ones) its given me time to play the games i've been buying every week (I dont like to wait for my backlog to disappear as i want the dev to get full price when i buy the app)
