App Pricing Annoyances

[Ursadorable]

I don't disgrudge people making money on 'apps'. Far from it.. however what really grinds my gears are developers charge for the app AND have in app purchases for said app.

Make up your bloody mind. Either a) your app is completely free, b) it's free with in-app purchases, or c) a one-time charge.

Charging for an app, then trying to milk people for more money afterwards is cheap and disrespectful.

As a customer, I only download apps that are either completely free, or have a one-time charge. I refuse to download anything that tries to milk me for more money afterwards.

 

[peakman]

I totally agree with you, and I've chosen one-time charge for my App, which I'd preferred for my own purchase too: Paid once and worry free after.

 

[WordsmithMR]

It really varies from app to app. I'd much rather pay for an add on after paying for an app, than having them stop updating the one app and making a brand new app altogether (i.e. Tweetbot). If it seems like it's a significant add on, I'd gladly support them and not feel entitled and think it should've been included in a free update.

 

[eventailapp]

For me this largely depends on what the In App Purchases are. If they are consumables then I kind of agree that the application should be free. However, imagine a painting application that costs some money (let's say $5) and which then offers more more tools/functionalities as in app purchase for $5.

This is actually a very valid pricing because:
- You can make your application cheaper from the start, rather than paying $10, people can separate their purchase into $5 and $5, maybe for many people then additional features are not useful.
- You remove people who only use free applications from your customer base.
- You kind of get some benefit of upgrade pricing which does not exist in the App Store.

The second point might be controversial but it depends on what you seek. Having lots of customers is cool and fine, but if you are a small shop or alone then it will require to dedicate a lot of your time for support. In general paying customers are more invested in your application than people who got it for free.

 

[Ursadorable]

imagine a painting application that costs some money (let's say $5) and which then offers more more tools/functionalities as in app purchase for $5.

I'll agree, something that adds substantial increase in functionality warrants such a pricing model.

Where I disagree is something like say Bad Piggies, where you buy the game.. and then they offer to sell you hints.

From your example I would buy the full release over subscribing to a model that lets me buy features incrementally.

 

[peakman]

Oh, yes, that's correct too!

I just always have those in-App purchase game in mind so forgetting about all these functional Apps with not-so-frequent but substantial updated.

They absolutely deserved another pay for their hard work!

 

[TheIntruder]

I generally dislike IAPs. If an app is good, I have no problems paying full price up front.

But if it's something like additional "pro" functionality, or an expansion pack, I'm OK with it.

What I hate, and will never purchase, are the micropayment-style bits where it's necessary to pony up to maintain any sort of progress, like coins, lives, and such.

BUying an app, and then finding additional IAPs, or ads, is the worst.

I'll never forgive EA for buying Real Racing's developer, and ruining the game. But, being the rotten company they are, the writing was on the wall, and it was no surprise when it came about.

 

[eventailapp]

It would be interesting to compare an average spending of a youth back in the 80's - 90's in an arcade and now on a phone with IAPs. I'd wagger that they could get quite close. But yeah, generally I do not like consumables.