The games are being destroyed by IAP to please 1.5% of players.

The article below plus some search finally give me a light what is really happening. Don't matter if a lot of people hate all this crap, there is a few one that like and they are guiding the industry. Because money is what pay the bills on the end. In some years, good games will become underground developed by some crazy guys moved by passion, like Toady One (Dwarf Fortress).

http://www.hardcoredroid.com/introduction-to-the-death-of-video-games-part-ii/
"...what they tell us without a doubt is that pay to win mobile developers are gearing their games towards that 1.5 % , a group of folks who have money to burn and who fully embrace IAP-heavy games."
"...99% of gamers rejected IAPs on mobile and it didn’t matter, which is why IAPS are so dangerous"

--

http://venturebeat.com/2014/02/26/o...-50-percent-of-all-in-game-revenue-exclusive/
"...there are a lot of people who have become accustomed to paying nothing at all for their mobile games."

 

All this IAP's destroy games is ridiculous. Without this the 99% of players who do not all will not pay for a game, will not have any game to play, or will be peppered with ads. You get what you pay for in the end, no matter what model is used.

 

Have you read?

 

Market speaks, people would rather have free games with optional microtransations than an upfront cost.

 

Yes, and its related too. It is like the wales pay the game for others play for free.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/02/26/o...-50-percent-of-all-in-game-revenue-exclusive/
"...there are a lot of people who have become accustomed to paying nothing at all for their mobile games."

 

Yes this and the 100 or so other articles that slate any model that deviates from the standard buy your game upfront, everything is included. I don't see how this can be called the "Death of Video Games". Newer models of payment allows for more people to actually play the game, and then the wealthy pay the toll. I don't see a problem with that.

 

That's a nice bit of generalisation right there. Tell you what, if you make a good game, and have it cost €10 I'll buy it. And I bet thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of people like me will too.

Ten pounds or euros is nothing. But mobile devs don't. I don't know why. Instead they use IAP that's going to pilfer our contacts and searches and metadata to sell granny's or the love interest's phone number, even if they might have a secret phone number, to the highest bidder. So, I don't buy mobile games. It's mostly for this reason. But it's also partly because most mobile phone games I've seen are IAP crap that I don't want on my phone.

Make less crap, put a price tag on it, and I'll buy. I'm sure many like me will too.

 

be the change you want to see in the world. make good games. sell them at an up-front price. encourage others to do so as well. otherwise it's just a complaint.

 

The problem is 98.5% won't pay for games and free is the only way to even get downloads unless you have established brand or specific niche

 

GTA V sold for 1 billion dollars in its first day.

Figure out a way to get a piece of that. Don't be the person that rifle through handbags and pockets for change just because you can. It is not gamers problems if you adopt models of revenue that are harmful, and it's not gamers problems if they deselect those models outright.

 

GTA is an established brand, with successful prequels, specific niche, and millions to spend per second on advertising. Not even remotely comparable to 99% of developers.

 

That wasn't your argument. You said that nobody paid for games, except for 1.5 per cent. That is clearly wrong, as Rockstar has shown with GTA V. There's LOTS of money in games.

The phone game devs problems isn't that there's not money in games. Their problem is that they've chosen business models that a vast majority of gamers, both core ones and casual ones, want no part of. That is your problem. That problem is not solved by going further and further into a model which is exceptionally exploitative and dangerous.

Edit:
Also, please consider this. The latest ECJ ruling about Google doesn't just apply to Google. It applies to anyone who processes personal data. The ECJ has, indirectly, made all phone devs responsible for what personal data is processed by your games.

The fines if a game dev is found to be in breach of those is eye-watering.

 

You are correct it is a generalisation, but as a most developers are hoping to appeal to a "general market" of casual gamers, especially on mobile, it is a relevant statement. Saxi Is correct in his statement, not many people would pay for a game from an indie developer without big marketing budgets. Of course there are a few special cases where someone strikes lucky, but people win the lottery too.

Its also ironic that you statement about IAP's pilfering contacts and meta searches, is itself a generalisation. Only I can give you market data to backup my comments.

 

GTA is a console/pc game from a major manufacturer. Of course it sells. They also have an advertising budge that is 1000x the annual income of 99% of Unity developers.

Games sell, I am really only referring to mobile, which is what the discussion was about. Same thing applies here, big names will sell games on any platform, regardless of the market.

It is well accepted most phone users will buy $1,000 phones, but won't buy $.99 apps. There is a small percentage (roughly 3%) that will. Paid apps without brand/marketing won't even get downloaded. 98% of apps/games are now free on the App Store for a reason. Users feel entitled to apps for free and very few appreciate developers work and will pay. IAP is really the only way to make money on the app store these days unless you have brand, niche, marketing or incredibly lucky.

 

We try. Our premium game is now without IAP. There is some nice iniciatives from sites like harcore android and honestandroidgames.com, some youtube casters like total biscuit talk about it a lot.

We are old generation. Everyone could be a good player, but what wins now, is the money

 

I won't ever release a pay to win type of game. I'd rather charge a small amount upfront and then have a donation system, where people can donate to support development costs if they like the game enough and want to see future updates. That way, I'm motivated to make the game as great as I possibly can so that people really enjoy and appreciate it and want to support it.

 

Not all IAP is pay to win.
And not all pay to win is bad.

You want to develop for three types of gamers

Those that are good
Those that have time
Those that have money

IAP isn't bad, some developers abuse it, but just because there is IAP doesn't mean you have to buy it. If the game is not fun without it, don't play it.

 

So, read again the article. The problem are the few ones ( < 2%) that pay heavy in paid to win IAP, and this is completely changing the industry.

 

It is not a mobile problem anymore, because this model is already coming hard for pc and consoles.

 

So what if <2% are funding the rest. If the 98% did not like it they would not play it or, assuming its on the Play or IOS store it would get a majority of its reviews as a 1*. But they do not.

 

Yes, it is all a conspiracy from the old generation. Everybody loves pay to win iap. sorry.

 

I actually didn't read the article, I was just responding to the post. But I assume they are referring to Whales, and they typically spend $50 - $2,000+ on games like Clash of Clans.

 

I've seen IAP done well, but it is rare. It does make me feel part of the "old generation" because 99.9% of the time I hate it.

What I don't like is not crappy games with IAP, because it is obvious it is crappy and you can just delete it. The problem is when you like a game that is based on IAP and it sucks you in and you don't know how long or how much it will milk you for, in this case you'd rather have paid a static upfront fee so you can play as much as you want without worrying.

 

Yep, "Only 0.15 percent of mobile gamers account for 50 percent of all in-game"

http://venturebeat.com/2014/02/26/o...-50-percent-of-all-in-game-revenue-exclusive/

 

Then the same will happen to PC and console gaming as has happened with mobile gaming. Gamers will shrug and not pay; or pirate the games. The solution lies not with the gamers. The solution lies with the devs. If they become greedy and basically cheat money off the gamers, then they'll be punished by the market.

 

I think different.

As a gamer I play what I want, nice games with absolutely no pay to win.

As a developer, I need to dev what people pay for, if the only guys that pay want pay to win games, which are my options?

Ads? What is ads if not a money from another developer like me trying to get some cash to continue its work.

PS: I am too negative today, I think that I need some beer

 

No it won't. PC/Console gaming has been around for decades, and it has grown dramatically.
Smart Phone owners don't respect apps on mobile phones and there is a stigma where they feel they should be free.

They are not the same, and never will be. Mobile is a different market and needs to be treated as such.

 

No. Watch the first 5 minutes. "Welcome to the new age..."

Xbox One microtransactions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpx4R9SY98o

 

Yes, they have micro transactions, but you will not find 98% of console games free. There has always been microtransactions (in the form of DLC in PC gaming). But almost all the games are paid up front and some (small percent) have some form of microtransactions. Totally different market, and no way they will become the same.

 

So get a bunch of guys together. Form a developer association. Contact places like GOG and Steam. Ask them to open up for mobile gaming. Yeah, you won't sell to carrier locked phone operators, but there's plenty of unlocked and rooted phones out there. Some of them probably like to play games. Make games without ads and IAP for GOG and Steam. You also won't attract everyone - but that was never so anyway.

Release them there. Be transparent. Be honest. If you are, I'm sure you can get away from this bad, terrible, and exploitative model that destroys the reputation of mobile games. Make a difference.

Sure it will take time, but devs have ridden the coat-tails of the iap and ad-model devil for so long that it's no wonder that the perception among the potential users is to stay away from it.

 

GOG and Steam would not participate in an illegal jailbroken market.

 

I don't quite understand the problem it seems simple. People don't like pay to win, people don't play said games, said games go away. They are still here though.

 

It is simple, but is not what is happening in the realty, like you can read in the papers.

 

Thats just not true. I always release a IAP version and a Paid version of my games and if I only had the paid version income I'd be out of business.
A paid version of my games get me <10 sales per day at $0.99 to $3.99 depending on the game. The free versions get me about 1000 downloads per day of which 50+ buy the IAP stuff, Plus the advertising actually make it possible to keep developing games.

 

It's a known fact that once gamers get a whiff that a game is pay to win, they usually uninstall it.

F2P can be done correctly, the most important rule as a developer is to "Let the players enjoy your game without forcing them to make an IAP".

You either embrace the model or get left in the dust. Some developers are still doing very well with upfront pricing. Do what works best for your game. IAP is harder to get right, but if done well it can provide a good balance of enjoyment for the player, and put money in your pocket.

Some excellent examples of well designed F2P games...

Hungry Shark Evolution
Chefs Diner: Food Rush

Download these games, and play them, and see what good IAP design is about.

 

It is not illegal to root your android or iphone.

http://fsfe.org/freesoftware/legal/flashingdevices.en.html

 

That's not my problem.

It's bad that you're in a sector that has a reputation that I and other gamers like me don't even bother trying to find games which are good and which I can pay for, but I didn't make it so. Devs selected a business model which created this perception.

The gamers are not to blame if they never download anything. Why should they?

 

It is not our problem that YOU don't like the direction Devs are going in. If its working for Devs why should we change it.

 

It isn't working for devs though. You only think it is because you only hear of the success stories while ignoring that F2P as a system is routinely failing for even major developers.

 

It is not complete true. There is a lot of these games, Clash of clan is a excellent example of it.

I don't think you got the point. It is not that f2p or iap are a problem. They can be honest model for the end user. But "Only 0.15 percent of mobile gamers account for 50 percent of all in-game", these whales that heavy pay to win are changing the industry.

 

It is a problem when I need to decide between enter on this madness to hunt the whales in a paid to win model or not be able to fund my games.

 

I don't think you got my point. If F2P is done correctly, and developers keep it as an honest model, it is irrelevant how much the whales are spending. Whales will be whales.

 

Ok, fair enough. And it's not the dev's problem if you don't like F2P.

Only 1.5% of people are supporting everything? Well I guess those are the actual customers, then. The fact that there are a lot more people who will play for free but not pay for things is interesting, but they aren't the actual market, they're just the bystanders.

But if we didn't use IAP, all those bystanders would become the market, and grow it hugely, right? Well ... it seems that arkon (and numerous others) are trying that, and most people don't.

I'm just not seeing what the 'call to action' is here - make more pay-up-front games? People are still doing that, and I'm sure that if that model becomes more successful than F2P it will be rapidly re-adopted. Buy more pay-up-front games? Sure, if enough people did that it could turn the market around. I'm not holding my breath though - even most people who say they "would" pay for games don't in practice.

 

One could argue that IAP/microtransactions isn't so much a change in the industry, but returning to it's roots.

 

If you want to make free games, make free games. If you want to make games with IAP, then do so. If you choose to make games with an up front cost, be my guest...but for the love of sanity, don't complain when others do the same. You are at the mercy of your market and your customer. If you do not have the maturity to accept that then you are in the wrong business/hobby. Stop lamenting and make the games you want to play. If you are very lucky, other people might want to play them too.

 

This is not entirely true, Clash of Clans is obviously pay to win 30 seconds into the game, anyone with any brain can see that. Yet it makes $4M/day. So there are people that enjoy pay to win. But not all IAP is pay to win, and not all pay to win is bad.

 

Actually it is illegal in many countries including the US. It was legal for a short time when they said it isn't illegal specifically, and then they ruled on it and said it is illegal as it falls under circumventing DRM.

 

The end users are the problem, not the devs. The end users showed they don't want to pay money for games/apps and they feel entitled to them for free. IAP was a response to make some way to make it work. Some devs have taken this further and really gouged, but the general direction is a result of cheap end users with their $1,000 phones and refusal to pay for apps.

 

Seems to me that every time someone says something like "so and so will be the death of such and such" they really mean "I don't like the way things are changing and am afraid of change!". Been playing video games literally since there have been video games and I can say beyond a doubt that things have never been better for gamers!

 

DING DING we have a winner!