We know iAds is coming. It's been mentioned as an upcoming feature. But what if iAds is a pro behaviour?
It would stop EVERYONE just releasing rubbish with ads in it for a start. It would add value to the 'Pro' version. It would mean that GS is compliant with ios4 (on a strictly 'yes' or 'no' answer, regardless of pricing - does GS support iAds - YES).
On the flip side, the non-pro members would probably bust a lung. Because they believe their games NEED iAds to succeed, amongst other reasons.
quantumsheep said: actswartz, you've got a very good point there.
We know iAds is coming. It's been mentioned as an upcoming feature. But what if iAds is a pro behaviour?
It would stop EVERYONE just releasing rubbish with ads in it for a start. It would add value to the 'Pro' version. It would mean that GS is compliant with ios4 (on a strictly 'yes' or 'no' answer, regardless of pricing - does GS support iAds - YES).
On the flip side, the non-pro members would probably bust a lung. Because they believe their games NEED iAds to succeed, amongst other reasons.
We'll see what happens!
QS
I'm all for it being pro only (please note, I am not a pro license holder).
And as a preemptive rebuttal:
The argument that you need iAds to make the money to afford the Pro license just doesn't hold any water. A fairly decent game can easily make $2,000. If you aren't making close to the amount of money you'd like to be making now, don't expect iAds to get you there.
How do you figure a fairly decent game can easily make $2,000? Do you have any statistics to back that up? I've seen a lot of feedback on this forum from folks who have made pretty great looking apps that have not made bupkis $wise.
It's easier to start out by getting customers to download an unknown as a free or Lite app, wouldn't you agree? I know I try more apps that are free before buying a paid version. Having inApp purchasing is probably the single most valuable addition for the developer, since this allows the player to make an impulse decision based on actually trying the game.
Integrally connected with this idea, iAds at least provide some revenue to offset the development cost. In addition, it is quite likely that players will use an inApp purchase to upgrade to a non-ad supported game *if they like what they are seeing* Purchasing the paid version that is not iAd supported is a motivator for those who dislike the ads.
Why should customers grow accustomed to getting free apps with no ads just because it's too hard to provide an alternate revenue stream? Why should you have to make your apps free to get them out there, when the ads could offer at least some subsidy? Right now 20% of the apps on iTunes are Free. This compares to 50% on Droid. Do we want to go down that rat hole? There is no money there.
If these features do not end up being included in the basic licensed version of GameSalad, then GameSalad becomes that much less attractive to the average developer. I am not sure there is a valid reason to provide a "Pro" version at all. Perhaps there should just be a properly priced working version that has features that developers want and need to make apps that will sell. Seriously, social networking is not a "pro" feature. Neither is support for basic iOS features like we have been requesting.
IntelligentDesigner said: How do you figure a fairly decent game can easily make $2,000? Do you have any statistics to back that up? I've seen a lot of feedback on this forum from folks who have made pretty great looking apps that have not made bupkis $wise.
No statistics, just my own opinion based off of personal experience and information I've read on these and other forums.
And I meant $2,000 over the course of the year, just to clear that up.
Much more incidental data indicates the opposite, I am afraid.
Often we see great work that does not result in commensurate payoff. That's why we need some additional programming to incorporate features that help us to build our businesses.
There shouldn't be a pro license, everything should be included in regular... If anything they could raise it to $200 and that would be that... They'd make alot more money and so would we.... (With hyperlinks adds etc.) They might not even have to raise it all... If the regular version had all the features, it would be much more appealing for developers....
I'm actually siding more with Eastbound's view on this - sorry ID!
I hardly ever download free games, only usually when they're on promotion. I download free apps, sure, but not games.
I think it's because I know what kind of games I like, and will gladly pay more than the rock-bottom $.99 price if I think I'll enjoy a game. Recent examples are Street Fighter IV, Espgaluda II, and Carcassone.
I think it's a perceived value thing as well. If something is free, I'm not invested in it at all. Which is probably why even very good games get a load of 1 star ratings...
Making your game free, to me, suggests it's not very good. It suggests it's not even worth the bottom tier of pricing. I probably don't even know if it's got iAds in it at the point of download so don't know if the developer is subsidising himself in that way.
Again, on a totally personal level, I have very rarely used in-app purchasing. There are just too many games out there to play and buy at less than a dollar. The only 'game' I have purchased stuff in is the Commodore 64 emulator. And that was for complete games (a lot are free).
The App store is a nebulous beast. Things that should sell well, don't. Something someone has made in a week sells millions. Everyone has an opinion on what works and what doesn't. My opinion is, iAds will not be the saviour a lot of people are looking for. It won't even act as a supplementary income for many...
Put it this way: There are literally thousands and thousands of new games to try from folks we've never heard of before. I think it is far easier to get someone to try an unknown game that they may like if they do not have to pay first, and chalk a crapware purchase up to "I should have known better". Is is not better to have them be pleasantly surprised and then want to purchase your game in an advised manner? Sometimes there is not enough information prior to purchasing to be sure you are getting anything you'd value.
It's sad to think that some customers will only buy games that are tried and true tested and already number one sellers, because this causes them to miss out entirely on the fun of discovering a new gem before it becomes jaded.
I'd say that it is certainly in the interest of independent developers to encourage the latter behavior in any way possible, since we do not have multi million dollar ad budgets, and are looking for a break.
I looked at "Espgaluda II" on your recommendation and downloaded the Lite version for free to try it, since if I do not enjoy it, $8.99 would be a waste of money. In this case the developer has a chance to enthuse me, but would have lost all hope of any revenue if I did not pop for the full enchilada, sight unseen.
I looked at "Carcassone", which you also mentioned and since there is no free trial version to see if it were interesting to me, I passed, and the developer forever lost an opportunity. I am not inclined to throw $4.99 away for something I may not really enjoy. So I will not try it.
I think you are just wrong about your idea that making a game free suggests that it is not very good. It's more about giving customers a fair trial.
Since the appStore IS a "nebulous beast" I think it is relevant to our potential as developers to get a foothold any way that we can.
An Ad supported free version breaks down the try before buy resistance, and also encourages the customer to purchase the full priced version to get the full experience.
The examples I gave were of titles over the $.99 price threshold. These titles I am familiar with and I'm willing to pay a reasonable price for.
This does not mean I don't try other games by less well known developers. Canabalt I'd never heard of till I saw it on Touch Arcade. I believe it was $2.99. There was a free version on their website. In effect, you paid a $2.99 'iPhone tax' to have it on your phone!
Indeed, I hugely admired them for sticking to their price point when a lot of people suggested it should be priced at $.99 because 'you just touch the screen to jump'.
There is still no lite version of Canabalt. To be fair, it would be hard to do, and their game is free on their webiste to play in Flash, as I mentioned.
More recently, I bought Pix'n Love Rush. There is no lite version. There are no in-app purchases. There are no iAds involved.
I bought it because developers have several existing resources that help sell a game. Namely screenshots on iTunes (and more on their website perhaps) and YouTube videos that show the game in motion.
That is enough. Really it is. Read the description. Look at the screenshots. Watch a video.
I liked what I saw despite never having heard of the game before I saw it on Touch Arcade. I bought the game. I was not disappointed.
And if I was disappointed, I 'wasted' less than a dollar.
Look, I understand what you're saying, I really do. But if you "break down the try before buy resistance" on every app, then you're back where you started, and people will choose what they think will interest them.
I'm tired. Sorry if I'm not making much sense and/or rambling!
So you think "pro" gamesalad makes "higher quality games"? What feature is that? I thought you got no GS splash, URLs and actual support? Where is the difference that attributes to "higher quality games"?
iAds have nothing to do with the quality of the game - it is more to do with marketing. While I agree that no amount of marketing can make a bad game successful, no amount of ads can make a good game take off either.
The two things are not directly related like that.
Let's play a game: Let's say that there are 20,000 "Express" members and 5 "Pro" members. Wouldn't it make business sense for Gendai to make a really functional version of GS that had all the features we need to get our apps going, and sell it for $250 Wouldn't the $5M be better than the $2M10K?
I just tried that lite ESPGALUGA whatever version and it won't install on my device.
Now I am really glad I tried the lite instead of blowing $8.99
I think you can try a game in flash or look at a video and still not get a sense of whether you will enjoy it enough to not delete it right away. Right now I've got over 1100 apps on my iPod in folders (I try lots of things) many of them I would not have even tried if they were not available free...
Different people believe different marketing paths, I guess
I would prefer releasing apps with inApp Purchasing and iAds, because that's what I believe my customer base would prefer.
I also think that grey jumping app is showing integrity by staying at the 3rd tier. But I believe he is losing thousands of sales that might have been easily made another way.
I just tried that lite ESPGALUGA whatever version and it won't install on my device.
Now I am really glad I tried the lite instead of blowing $8.99
The very first line in the app description says:
#########:Important: ESPGALUDA II will only run on iPhone 3GS and 3rd Generation iPod touch (Late 2009, End 2009 32 GB and 64 GB). *iPhone3G, 1st Gen iPod touch, 2nd Gen iPod touch(Late 2009, End 2009 8GB) are not compatible. #########
I'm assuming you have an incompatible model ipod/iphone. If not, I have no idea why it won't install. If you *do* have an incompatible model, then you've been warned in the very first line!
Other than that, I think we can agree to disagree. (It's a fantastic game btw if you like scrolling shooters!)
Is there a flash version? on a website? Wonder if it will run on my iPad?
I wonder how someone would go about getting a refund for an app that did not install? Barring that I wonder how a developer would get around the bad press? With a lite version, who cares?
I don't think the amount of money spent on a tool has much to do with the person's ability to make something good. Especially when there are no significant differences in the tool.
You make really great games, and even if you used the $99 version they'd still be just as good.
What do you do with the URL forwarding, if I may ask?
I'd agree with Tshirt and the others saying iAds should be a Pro feature.
I'd obviously prefer to see one version of the software, containing all features, priced around $500 per year, but until that happens features like iAds really do need to stay with the pro accounts.
The pro account as it stands doesnt justify its pricepoint.... as it doesnt offer enough features above the basic package, and still has all the same problems with the engine/editor. There has to be more incentive to purchase a pro account.
I also feel its in Gendai and GameSalads interest to limit the use and availability of iAds to the userbase. As soon as its introduced in the Express package, theres going to be a huge flood of crapware being pushed out, just so people can attach adverts in the hope they'll get some quick bucks..... no matter what anyone says, thats going to happen... and slap bang on the first screen of each app is going to be the GameSalad logo.... its not going to do the products reputation any favours.
So yup... make it Pro.... so it has limited use, and will be in the hands of more responsible developers, who seem to have better judgement on how it should be used.
Chunkypixels said: I'd agree with Tshirt and the others saying iAds should be a Pro feature.
I'd obviously prefer to see one version of the software, containing all features, priced around $500 per year, but until that happens features like iAds really do need to stay with the pro accounts.
The pro account as it stands doesnt justify its pricepoint.... as it doesnt offer enough features above the basic package, and still has all the same problems with the engine/editor. There has to be more incentive to purchase a pro account.
I also feel its in Gendai and GameSalads interest to limit the use and availability of iAds to the userbase. As soon as its introduced in the Express package, theres going to be a huge flood of crapware being pushed out, just so people can attach adverts in the hope they'll get some quick bucks..... no matter what anyone says, thats going to happen... and slap bang on the first screen of each app is going to be the GameSalad logo.... its not going to do the products reputation any favours.
So yup... make it Pro.... so it has limited use, and will be in the hands of more responsible developers, who seem to have better judgement on how it should be used.
Comments
We know iAds is coming. It's been mentioned as an upcoming feature. But what if iAds is a pro behaviour?
It would stop EVERYONE just releasing rubbish with ads in it for a start.
It would add value to the 'Pro' version.
It would mean that GS is compliant with ios4 (on a strictly 'yes' or 'no' answer, regardless of pricing - does GS support iAds - YES).
On the flip side, the non-pro members would probably bust a lung. Because they believe their games NEED iAds to succeed, amongst other reasons.
We'll see what happens!
QS
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
And as a preemptive rebuttal:
The argument that you need iAds to make the money to afford the Pro license just doesn't hold any water. A fairly decent game can easily make $2,000. If you aren't making close to the amount of money you'd like to be making now, don't expect iAds to get you there.
It's easier to start out by getting customers to download an unknown as a free or Lite app, wouldn't you agree? I know I try more apps that are free before buying a paid version. Having inApp purchasing is probably the single most valuable addition for the developer, since this allows the player to make an impulse decision based on actually trying the game.
Integrally connected with this idea, iAds at least provide some revenue to offset the development cost. In addition, it is quite likely that players will use an inApp purchase to upgrade to a non-ad supported game *if they like what they are seeing* Purchasing the paid version that is not iAd supported is a motivator for those who dislike the ads.
Why should customers grow accustomed to getting free apps with no ads just because it's too hard to provide an alternate revenue stream? Why should you have to make your apps free to get them out there, when the ads could offer at least some subsidy? Right now 20% of the apps on iTunes are Free. This compares to 50% on Droid. Do we want to go down that rat hole? There is no money there.
If these features do not end up being included in the basic licensed version of GameSalad, then GameSalad becomes that much less attractive to the average developer. I am not sure there is a valid reason to provide a "Pro" version at all. Perhaps there should just be a properly priced working version that has features that developers want and need to make apps that will sell. Seriously, social networking is not a "pro" feature. Neither is support for basic iOS features like we have been requesting.
And I meant $2,000 over the course of the year, just to clear that up.
Often we see great work that does not result in commensurate payoff. That's why we need some additional programming to incorporate features that help us to build our businesses.
Like this, if well, you like this!
I hardly ever download free games, only usually when they're on promotion. I download free apps, sure, but not games.
I think it's because I know what kind of games I like, and will gladly pay more than the rock-bottom $.99 price if I think I'll enjoy a game. Recent examples are Street Fighter IV, Espgaluda II, and Carcassone.
I think it's a perceived value thing as well. If something is free, I'm not invested in it at all. Which is probably why even very good games get a load of 1 star ratings...
Making your game free, to me, suggests it's not very good. It suggests it's not even worth the bottom tier of pricing. I probably don't even know if it's got iAds in it at the point of download so don't know if the developer is subsidising himself in that way.
Again, on a totally personal level, I have very rarely used in-app purchasing. There are just too many games out there to play and buy at less than a dollar. The only 'game' I have purchased stuff in is the Commodore 64 emulator. And that was for complete games (a lot are free).
The App store is a nebulous beast. Things that should sell well, don't. Something someone has made in a week sells millions. Everyone has an opinion on what works and what doesn't. My opinion is, iAds will not be the saviour a lot of people are looking for. It won't even act as a supplementary income for many...
Just my thoughts
QS
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
QS
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
Put it this way: There are literally thousands and thousands of new games to try from folks we've never heard of before. I think it is far easier to get someone to try an unknown game that they may like if they do not have to pay first, and chalk a crapware purchase up to "I should have known better". Is is not better to have them be pleasantly surprised and then want to purchase your game in an advised manner? Sometimes there is not enough information prior to purchasing to be sure you are getting anything you'd value.
It's sad to think that some customers will only buy games that are tried and true tested and already number one sellers, because this causes them to miss out entirely on the fun of discovering a new gem before it becomes jaded.
I'd say that it is certainly in the interest of independent developers to encourage the latter behavior in any way possible, since we do not have multi million dollar ad budgets, and are looking for a break.
I looked at "Espgaluda II" on your recommendation and downloaded the Lite version for free to try it, since if I do not enjoy it, $8.99 would be a waste of money. In this case the developer has a chance to enthuse me, but would have lost all hope of any revenue if I did not pop for the full enchilada, sight unseen.
I looked at "Carcassone", which you also mentioned and since there is no free trial version to see if it were interesting to me, I passed, and the developer forever lost an opportunity. I am not inclined to throw $4.99 away for something I may not really enjoy. So I will not try it.
I think you are just wrong about your idea that making a game free suggests that it is not very good. It's more about giving customers a fair trial.
Since the appStore IS a "nebulous beast" I think it is relevant to our potential as developers to get a foothold any way that we can.
An Ad supported free version breaks down the try before buy resistance, and also encourages the customer to purchase the full priced version to get the full experience.
Just curious...
Why would you hope that features that everybody could use would be "pro" only?
Edit:LOL Right BarkBark!
Edit: @ID, GMTA?
The examples I gave were of titles over the $.99 price threshold. These titles I am familiar with and I'm willing to pay a reasonable price for.
This does not mean I don't try other games by less well known developers. Canabalt I'd never heard of till I saw it on Touch Arcade. I believe it was $2.99. There was a free version on their website. In effect, you paid a $2.99 'iPhone tax' to have it on your phone!
Indeed, I hugely admired them for sticking to their price point when a lot of people suggested it should be priced at $.99 because 'you just touch the screen to jump'.
There is still no lite version of Canabalt. To be fair, it would be hard to do, and their game is free on their webiste to play in Flash, as I mentioned.
More recently, I bought Pix'n Love Rush. There is no lite version. There are no in-app purchases. There are no iAds involved.
I bought it because developers have several existing resources that help sell a game. Namely screenshots on iTunes (and more on their website perhaps) and YouTube videos that show the game in motion.
That is enough. Really it is. Read the description. Look at the screenshots. Watch a video.
I liked what I saw despite never having heard of the game before I saw it on Touch Arcade. I bought the game. I was not disappointed.
And if I was disappointed, I 'wasted' less than a dollar.
Look, I understand what you're saying, I really do. But if you "break down the try before buy resistance" on every app, then you're back where you started, and people will choose what they think will interest them.
I'm tired. Sorry if I'm not making much sense and/or rambling!
QS
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
So you think "pro" gamesalad makes "higher quality games"? What feature is that? I thought you got no GS splash, URLs and actual support? Where is the difference that attributes to "higher quality games"?
iAds have nothing to do with the quality of the game - it is more to do with marketing. While I agree that no amount of marketing can make a bad game successful, no amount of ads can make a good game take off either.
The two things are not directly related like that.
Let's play a game: Let's say that there are 20,000 "Express" members and 5 "Pro" members. Wouldn't it make business sense for Gendai to make a really functional version of GS that had all the features we need to get our apps going, and sell it for $250 Wouldn't the $5M be better than the $2M10K?
Might that not make everyone happier?
I just tried that lite ESPGALUGA whatever version and it won't install on my device.
Now I am really glad I tried the lite instead of blowing $8.99
I think you can try a game in flash or look at a video and still not get a sense of whether you will enjoy it enough to not delete it right away. Right now I've got over 1100 apps on my iPod in folders (I try lots of things) many of them I would not have even tried if they were not available free...
Different people believe different marketing paths, I guess
I would prefer releasing apps with inApp Purchasing and iAds, because that's what I believe my customer base would prefer.
I also think that grey jumping app is showing integrity by staying at the 3rd tier. But I believe he is losing thousands of sales that might have been easily made another way.
Same Mountain, different Roads!
Cheers!
#########:Important: ESPGALUDA II will only run on iPhone 3GS and 3rd Generation iPod touch
(Late 2009, End 2009 32 GB and 64 GB). *iPhone3G, 1st Gen iPod touch,
2nd Gen iPod touch(Late 2009, End 2009 8GB) are not compatible.
#########
I'm assuming you have an incompatible model ipod/iphone. If not, I have no idea why it won't install. If you *do* have an incompatible model, then you've been warned in the very first line!
Other than that, I think we can agree to disagree. (It's a fantastic game btw if you like scrolling shooters!)
QS
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
I wonder how someone would go about getting a refund for an app that did not install? Barring that I wonder how a developer would get around the bad press? With a lite version, who cares?
I agree we should *pause* on this subject QS!
I don't think the amount of money spent on a tool has much to do with the person's ability to make something good. Especially when there are no significant differences in the tool.
You make really great games, and even if you used the $99 version they'd still be just as good.
What do you do with the URL forwarding, if I may ask?
I'd obviously prefer to see one version of the software, containing all features, priced around $500 per year, but until that happens features like iAds really do need to stay with the pro accounts.
The pro account as it stands doesnt justify its pricepoint.... as it doesnt offer enough features above the basic package, and still has all the same problems with the engine/editor. There has to be more incentive to purchase a pro account.
I also feel its in Gendai and GameSalads interest to limit the use and availability of iAds to the userbase. As soon as its introduced in the Express package, theres going to be a huge flood of crapware being pushed out, just so people can attach adverts in the hope they'll get some quick bucks..... no matter what anyone says, thats going to happen... and slap bang on the first screen of each app is going to be the GameSalad logo.... its not going to do the products reputation any favours.
So yup... make it Pro.... so it has limited use, and will be in the hands of more responsible developers, who seem to have better judgement on how it should be used.
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io
Dr. Sam Beckett never returned home...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Quantum_Sheep
Web: https://quantumsheep.itch.io