Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Criticism of iPhone 3.0

That is not what it is about. It is so you can purchase things for the App from the App instead of having to use a web interface. It is also so you can get extras, that don't come with the App. Also, if a game comes out, is popular, the developer can add more levels for a fee, instead of creating a whole new game, that can't transfer data from the old one. I think it is a good idea, now whether or not it will be used is another thing.

TEG
 
What I think this is meant to achieve is that instead of going out of the game, then to the App store and then searching for the expansion, then back to the game. You can do it all in game.

I do not think this parallels the issue with DLC on consoles where game creators are charging money for content already on the disc.

However, can it happen? Possibly.
 
northy014 said:
Does it worry any of you guys that in the future, we (the customers) will be forced to pay for things through in-app purchasing that would previously have come with the app?

http://thephonelounge.com/?p=205
Click to expand...

No. Because last I checked I am not forced to do anything of the sort. If I do not believe I am getting value for cost, I will not buy. You have that freedom to do the same.
 
I still think it is a valid point - many smaller developers who would have just thrown these things in to make their app better and thus receive more purchases will perhaps not do so in future, and consumers will have to pay more...

(Plus, that was blog promotion, as pointed out, but I am also an active macrumors participant, and if you look at my history this is hardly the only post I've ever made...)
 
Cander said:
No. Because last I checked I am not forced to do anything of the sort. If I do not believe I am getting value for cost, I will not buy. You have that freedom to do the same.
Click to expand...

Forced was perhaps the wrong word...fair enough no-one is holding a gun to your head, but let me give an example.

Say a developer comes up with a game which involves online play against other owners of the same game. This dev might want to make extra money, and thus could charge extra for (example) better weapons, or tools, or whatever. As a result, to compete with people who have paid for better stuff, you will potentially have to buy things of your own... or else resign yourself to not having as enjoyable time playing a game which you have already paid for...
 
northy014 said:
Forced was perhaps the wrong word...fair enough no-one is holding a gun to your head, but let me give an example.

Say a developer comes up with a game which involves online play against other owners of the same game. This dev might want to make extra money, and thus could charge extra for (example) better weapons, or tools, or whatever. As a result, to compete with people who have paid for better stuff, you will potentially have to buy things of your own... or else resign yourself to not having as enjoyable time playing a game which you have already paid for...
Click to expand...

How is this different than the current business model found on PC, Xbox Live Arcade or PSN?
 
Developers could release games as free versions, and then after trying it out and you want the real deal, you could simply launch the app and upgrade it right there. Now instead of the developer having to wait for review of their final app and review of their demo, they can release the final app from within the demo.
 
TheSpaz said:
Developers could release games as free versions, and then after trying it out and you want the real deal, you could simply launch the app and upgrade it right there. Now instead of the developer having to wait for review of their final app and review of their demo, they can release the final app from within the demo.
Click to expand...

Free apps won't have in-app purchases.
 
TheSpaz said:
Really? That's a bummer. So developers will still have to have a separate app for lite versions and full versions? That's dumb.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they brought up that point during the 3.0 preview.

I guess the fear is that no free app would truly be "free" if that's the case. Apple wants users to be able to get something for free, and not be pestered the whole time to upgrade.
 
cellocello said:
Yeah, they brought up that point during the 3.0 preview.

I guess the fear is that no free app would truly be "free" if that's the case. Apple wants users to be able to get something for free, and not be pestered the whole time to upgrade.
Click to expand...

That makes sense... you don't want someone to get something that's free and then accidentally spend money inside the app thinking it's still free. That seems safe enough. I can't wait until people start complaining because they're in a game and they think they're spending virtual game money, but instead they're spending real money...haha. That's the first thing I thought of when I saw that... in some games, you earn fake money to buy stuff in the game with. I bet some people will get tricked.
 
TheSpaz said:
That makes sense... you don't want someone to get something that's free and then accidentally spend money inside the app thinking it's still free. That seems safe enough. I can't wait until people start complaining because they're in a game and they think they're spending virtual game money, but instead they're spending real money...haha. That's the first thing I thought of when I saw that... in some games, you earn fake money to buy stuff in the game with. I bet some people will get tricked.
Click to expand...

You have to put in your iTunes password just like other purchases. So I hope most, when they get the prompt to do so, will understand it is not fake. But you never know....
 
The iTunes customer base will keep everything in check. If app addons are overpriced or they are not found to be useful then customers simply will not purchase them. This will keep prices in a range that is acceptable for most iTunes patrons. We all have the power to vote with our wallets.
 
PoitNarf said:
The iTunes customer base will keep everything in check. If app addons are overpriced or they are not found to be useful then customers simply will not purchase them. This will keep prices in a range that is acceptable for most iTunes patrons. We all have the power to vote with our wallets.
Click to expand...

True... if people aren't buying... the developer has no choice but to make it free or cheaper. Also, customers can give the app bad reviews and that's not what a developer wants either.
 
The big thing they're still missing are trial apps. If "free" could upgrade in place, they could be trials. Instead, you'll need to delete the "free" and download the "paid" version.

Of course, separating "free" from "upgradeable" apps, allows Apple to claim double the app for their ads.
 
kdarling said:
The big thing they're still missing are trial apps. If "free" could upgrade in place, they could be trials. Instead, you'll need to delete the "free" and download the "paid" version.

Of course, separating "free" from "upgradeable" apps, allows Apple to claim double the app for their ads.
Click to expand...

That was one big thing I was hoping would happen in the iPhone 3.0 press conference. Not having trials seems to be a huge mistake to me, especially as we already know how by releasing a 'lite' version, developers (and thus apple) can drive huge quantities more sales.

Allowing trial apps wouldn't be a problem for Apple, and has the potential to make way more money. But then, maybe they've got a good reason for it.
 
northy014 said:
Does it worry any of you guys that in the future, we (the customers) will be forced to pay for things through in-app purchasing that would previously have come with the app?

http://thephonelounge.com/?p=205
Click to expand...

Well... as a developer I immediately thought about the possibility of allowing donations this way.

To be honest, if only 2% of users would donate $1 or more, it would allow me to offer the application I am currently developing for free.

I am confident enough in my software to allow users to pay what they feel it is worth.

But... Apple only allows this for paid apps... so I have to charge at least .99 for it.

I'm not sure if they will allow a donate button in a free app to hit a Paypal link though... my guess is no.

Back to your question.. most developers will (or t least I hope will) be honest enough to figure out a fair price, then allow certain features to be bought at a subset of that price so that all sub-features when purchased do not exceed that fair price.

Figure out what features make sense as "configurable" and able to be purchased separately, reduce the fair price by that amount, and put it on sale.

Of course, someone will attempt and probably succeed at nickle and diming users... but that will get them a very bad rep at the least... and hopefully Apple will kick them from the store as they have a reputation to uphold as well.
 
I think the "99 cents" scenario could make for some interesting possibilities.

I mean, most games are in the 4.99 range - why not sell it for .99, but with only (in the example of racing games), 2 cars and 2 tracks. Then sell car and track packs at 99 cents a pop. Four "extra" purchases would get you back up to the original full price of 4.99.

It could work. Some people will never spend more than 99 cents for a games, and some people have no problem spending 5 bucks. Apple's model allows Devs to sell their game to both these audiences.
 
northy014 said:
That was one big thing I was hoping would happen in the iPhone 3.0 press conference. Not having trials seems to be a huge mistake to me, especially as we already know how by releasing a 'lite' version, developers (and thus apple) can drive huge quantities more sales.

Allowing trial apps wouldn't be a problem for Apple, and has the potential to make way more money. But then, maybe they've got a good reason for it.
Click to expand...

They probably don't have a GOOD reason for it, at least from our perspective, but they're a business and they're probably trying to figure out how to make the most money. It would be nice if all apps had 24 hour free trials, but then I thought it might open up the possibility of hacks that allow people to just keep them without paying. What I DON'T want to see is exactly one of the examples from demo, where the guys is playing a FPS and has to buy the rocket launcher in-game. That's just plain bad for a lot of reasons.
 
i think we will find in app commerce to help us more than it hurts us. i dont see many developers trying to take advantage of it by charging for ridiculous things.(like buying a rocket launcher in livefire)
 
TheSpaz said:
Really? That's a bummer. So developers will still have to have a separate app for lite versions and full versions? That's dumb.
Click to expand...

This is true and I think it's shortsighted and unfortunate. I understand the message Apple is trying to send (ie no hidden fees), but it produces an inconvenience for the end-user. For example, the Kindle App. Everyone wishes we could be able to purchase Kindle books right within the app. However, as long as this app is free, we will never be able to. Amazon will have to raise the price to $0.99 in order to have in-app purchases. What should we now have to pay extra money to have a very convenient feature? I guess Amazon could refund the money with your first book purchase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back