Maybe Toucharcade can set up a subforum for requesting price drops and promo codes so that those requests do not muck up the main game threads. That is a lot of valuable information in these game threads, but when they get bogged down in silly disagreements over pricing, then the forum becomes quite useless. Guy hears about an interesting game and pops into the forum to learn more about it, but all he sees are pages of arguements over pricing and the need for promo codes, then what is the point of even visiting here versus elsewhere? The only winners in such cases will be rival forums who gain more users who are sick of such fracas... iPadguessesthesesillythingshappenbecausetherehadbeennostronggamesreleasedlately
You haven't even come close to establishing that the prices are "exorbitant", though, and there are many, many people in this thread who have said they believe the IAP is absolutely fair (even without considering what percentage of the sale price is going to whom), usually while citing the licensing aspects, price comparisons with the original source material, the inability of upper-deck developers to thrive in a $1 environment, etc. In contrast, the people claiming the prices are too high are either pointing to the work of other developers using non-licensed materials, referencing completely different types of games (often ones that are failing to make a profit), or more commonly simply failing to give any solid reason for this belief other than they just don't want to pay that much. To be clear, thus far you've only established that RG are charging more than you want to pay, which is massively different to the prices being objectively "exorbitant" or unreasonable. Sorry, you seem to be under the impression that the agreement was that Rodeo would just hand over a one-off payment of a couple of dollars and GW would let them do whatever they want with their IP in perpetuity without any further interaction, financial or otherwise. License agreements like this – especially with Games Workshop, who are legendary for their oversight and QC – very rarely work that way; it would be incredibly unusual for RG not to have to pay over a portion or percentage on an ongoing basis given the potential WQ has as a moneymaking endeavour for the parties involved. Again, even if we completely disregard the above you still haven't established that the price "is an insult", only that it is more than you want to pay, and you're conflating the two concepts. The sheer number of people who have quite freely and willingly bought the game and its various bits and pieces deflates your argument somewhat. The heroes are US$2.99 each, which with Apple's cut brings RG's income down closer to a flat $2. Let's pretend for the moment that GW aren't also taking a cut: tell us again with a straight face how RG making a mere two dollars from an entirely optional extra is in any way "exorbitant" or "insulting". Don't start getting nasty just because people don't agree with you. As for the above, WQ is not Hunters; I also suggest you look at the resources involved in the production of both XCOM and WQ and stop attempting to take ludicrous and irrelevant potshots at Rodeo Games. If you want to give RG several million dollars to help close the gap in development finances, though, I'm sure we'll all be legitimately happy to raise a tankard in your honour. Ooh, for old times' sake, here's Hunters reskinned:
What a bunch of whiners for years bitching about DLCs. It's just 20 bucks for a great game and all dlcs. I wonder how you can afford your iphone if 20 bucks make you so unstable. Just play some f2p games - that's where you get robbed. Just imagine WQ as free2play title and then be gratefull.
This. This a hundred times. The sheer irony of complaining about paying for games on a 500$ device is just mind blowing. If people are struggling to pay for their games, perhaps they should not be involved in such an expensive hobby?
I see two issues here. The affordability of iPads and that of its apps. In the first case, parents frequently give iPads to their spouses, wives, children, and students. So the initial cost to the user could have been negligible. Having received their free iPads, users may then find that they need to pay for their apps, which can be expensive for someone who is not working. It is probably this group of users that primarily consist of those asking for freebies. Just clarifying that the user of an iPad might not necessarily have the means to buy apps, paradoxical as it may sound. For the rest of us, who are used to buying multiple games at $60 a pop monthly, the cost of apps is not something that is significant, in any sense of the word.
Awesome. The one who ignites the war turns tail when it gets too hot. Can we maybe just get his post deleted from the thread so we can get back to discussing the game? This thread has been fun to follow while I wait for a GC to pick up this amazing looking game, but now it has been ruined by this kid complaining he can't afford games.
First of all, Appletini has done an outstanding job at addressing this posters complaints. Earlier this summer, the high school I teach at had a faculty meeting to discuss what elective courses we would be offering the coming school year. The guidance office informed us that we would not be offering economics any longer. The reason being was that not enough students expressed an interest in it. This discussion made me think back to that. We make judgments about what we feel about iOS pricing, but we always must be mindful that these are businesses. The devs are "blatantly greedy"? It is economically impossible for a business to be greedy. That is why they exist. They don't exist to make games. They exist to make money. The games are simply a means to make money. Their goal as a business is to make as much money as they can. Some business models use sales and low prices, some business models do not. The point is always the same. The goal is to make as much money as they can. Finally, you must remember that your perceptions of what is a "triple A" title and what is not is simply your opinion. I have no interest in X-Com, so it clearly is not a triple A title to me. Consumers purchase items based on their value to them individually. There are games I wouldn't download for free. Not worth my time. Conversely, games such as Warhammer Quest, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Battle for Wesnoth are an absolute bargain to me. If you feel that Warhammer Quest is to expensive for you, the answer is simple. Don't buy it.
So ... Can someone fill me in on some of the background/history of WHQ? I never ran into the board game, but do enjoy my fair share of tabletop games. What's WHQ all about? (Just purchased the app, btw; grabbed Hunters 2 and fell in love).
Not that I disagree with your points here specifically, iPiG, but by any objective standard iOS gaming is already one of the least expensive hobbies around if you already own an Apple device. Just about any particular game you could want can be had for under $5, and more often will only cost $1 or $2; the fact that somebody might want $100 worth of games but not be able to afford them means absolutely nothing. As you mentioned earlier, people might want a BMW for $10, but demanding the manufacturer sell you one at that price would be ludicrous. A large number of people here would also freely admit (and already have) that they just buy games because they're so cheap, even if they know they'll probably never get around to playing them. iOS gaming is 100% luxury, 0% necessity. If somebody can't personally afford to buy a luxury good, the solution is to go without until they can, not start badgering the developer/manufacturer to give them that product for a discount, let alone for free. Here at TA we're seeing more and more outright demands and accusations of greed and deceit being thrown at individual developers and businesses (whose fundamental purpose is to make money, not make you happy with free games, as ARPG noted), and it really is starting to get out of hand. Perhaps there are a lot of new users (children or otherwise) being given devices and finding TA, but that's only more of a reason to provide them some perspective. Sometimes it seems like people literally believe that a developer/business is only entitled to make money on a product until they've recouped their development costs, after which they have to become a charity and give it away for free or face being labelled as "greedy". Honestly, if it wouldn't unduly tax the moderators I'd ask them to delete any post that complained about the price of a game or its IAP, or that requested/demanded a price reduction, sale, promo code, discount or freebie (unless in response to an explicit request by the actual developer). Telling a developer that their $3 game is "too expensive" and that they're being greedy isn't helpful, it's just toxic.
Heh, that's not a small request. I'd suggest rummaging through here and here for more information. WQ is basically your standard swords-and-sorcery dungeon crawler, but the links above will give you far more background than it's worth trying to type here. ^_-
Well, they are getting really heated about it and I know that people don't want to lose a debate and they can get really personal. So, I stop first. Oh! and don't stereotype people ("cause he sounds like he complaining about the price, he is a kid who cannot afford games"). Everyone are entitle to expressing their opinion. I am just suggesting a premium price model $15-$20 is more appropriate than charging $5 and have IAP. In addition, I am just questioning why would they charge extra for additonal heroes. Cut out the personal attacks and express some creative opinions about the game, etc.
I agree with the point you made about people demanding for discount of IOS games, but customers are totally entitle to ask for a bargain when they are trading with firms/ producers. This is the same as producers sticking to the price that seems reasonable to them. At the end they may meet in the middle or where the market force takes them. This is the basis of trade, neither the consumer or producer are greedy, they are just acting on their self-interest to maximise their outcome. The main point I am trying to convey is that I dislike IAP purchase and I prefer to pay a premium price for a game upfront rather than pay extra money over and over again as new updates/ heroes/ expansions pop-up.
No stereotyping here, was just basing it off your name. You say you are arguing about "how" to deliver the content, saying that 15-20 would be better than IAP. If it were a premium purchase that included everything they may eventually release for this game, it would more likely be a much higher price point (possibly $50+). I don't see why it matters if its IAP or one time purchase. Either way you get the same content. After reading the Ticket To Ride I got the impression from your posts that you care more about the cost factor, and less about the method of delivery.
Someone should start a thread specifically for discussion of the actual game, instead of whining about iap
Or rather a thread to discuss IAP and the pricing of this game, so that this thread can get back on topic (I have contributed and am equally as guilty). So is 40K the continuing version of Warhammer, or are they continuing to develop the fantasy side of the game as well? The boardgame looks incredible, and if I had 300$ to drop on it I would (probably will eventually).
Now that would be fantastic but we haven't heard anything yet so if there ever will be I'd bet it won't be anything soon as making a C.Y.O.A. Book/game book can't be a short thing to do. But fingers crossed Judging by what full control have said and the update note for WQ it looks like we could be getting space hulk and the WQ update pretty close together.
You forget that your post history is open to the public. I've read your posts, and you've never just been innocently negotiating a "bargain": you've always been telling the developers to lower their prices, claiming the prices they are charging are blatantly "unjustified" and "unacceptable", asking why they aren't giving additional content they had to pay to develop away for free (which is a ridiculous question), telling them you're going to wait for a sale, or begging for promo codes. Below is the entirety of a post you made in the Civil War: 1863 thread: There's absolutely nothing in that quote except pure greed on your part, suggesting the developers give you everything while they get nothing. That's not "trade", it's greed. How exactly did you expect the developers to respond to that? You've shown again and again that you have a very simplistic view of business and only ever consider things in terms of how they will benefit you, never the developer, which is why you seem confused when they won't buy into your lopsided "deals". Even when you've had the situation explained to you it seems you don't really comprehend that additional content isn't free for the developers to create, and doesn't magically just pop into existence ready to be sold. Asking a developer to give you all of their future work for free is not and will never be reasonable unless they've already said that's what they plan to do, which would make such a request redundant anyway. As your post history shows, and as Crazy Chicken correctly identified regarding the TtR thread, almost everything you post is in some way about prices being too high, so your claims about freely buying everything at full price ring very hollow. We've seen from your own posts that if a game does charge an up-front fee, you just complain that the price is too high and then wait until it goes on sale or you can get it for free. How exactly is it in a developer's best interest to change their pricing model to one that won't benefit them? It's not in the best interest of an iOS game developer to keep giving you free stuff in perpetuity when the entry fee you paid was often not high enough to cover the initial development in the first place, and certainly won't justify or cover the cost of all possible future development. Even if it did, the fundamental purpose of a business is literally to make money, not just to break even. Your request is certainly not a reasonable one to make of a developer not just making a relatively simple IAP-fuelled casual game like Jetpack Joyride. As has also been pointed out repeatedly, a lower entry price with IAP to make up the difference tends to entice far more people in than a high entry price that covers all current content, especially if the total price runs into the tens of dollars. Making two apps to cover both sides of the coin has proven to be less than efficient, and usually actively counterproductive as the developer then has to support and update two apps that are each only half as visible in the charts and stats as a single one would be (while the all-inclusive one also gets pirated). If you want to pay a "premium" initial price for every possible content update a major developer like Days of Wonder or Rodeo Games might put out, be prepared for those initial prices to be far higher than they are now. Developers wouldn't be able to justify such high all-inclusive prices for nebulous "coming soon" content, though, and it wouldn't make sense to set an all-inclusive price ridiculously low, which is why this is unlikely to happen. Unlikely, but do keep an eye out for the upcoming Lone Wolf gamebook, which promises to be interesting.
