7 ms·

I tried Angry Birds 2 and was super impressed by the production quality and butter smooth graphics. Too bad the entire gameplay is a 100% miss: You have to wai

by 0x0 11y ago

I tried Angry Birds 2 and was super impressed by the production quality and butter smooth graphics. Too bad the entire gameplay is a 100% miss: You have to wait or pay to retry levels after a while. This goes completely against everything that defines angry birds gameplay, which for me is to instantly re-start the level if I'm not satisfied with the first bird shoot. Absolutely ruins it. I'd much rather pay $X upfront for unlimited gameplay. Now it just feels like they're trying to cheat me out of real money every 15 minutes feeding some kind of virtual slot machine. :(

zajd 11y ago
The scoring system also makes absolutely no sense and removes any incentives to pay attention to the leaderboard
ma2rten 11y ago
Forcing the player to wait (or pay if they don't want to wait) has been proven to work well over and over again by numerous games.
- bpicolo 11y ago
  Proven as a good user experience: no. Proven to suck money out of people: yes.
  - ma2rten 11y ago
    I have a number of friends who play candy crush and before that I had number of friends who play farmville. If you ask them they will say they having fun playing those games.
    - bpicolo 11y ago
      And? Do you think it would be less fun for them if microtransactions were absent? Doubt it.
      - chkuendig 11y ago
        I don't - apparently people prefer nagging screens in games subsidized by a minority of whales over games everybody has to pay to download. After all, this is how the app stores started. Nobody would have switched to Freemium if Gamers preferred the Paid Games.
        bpicolo 11y ago
        They switch because freemium gets them more money. Nothing more than a business decision. It sure doesn't mean gamers inherently prefer micro tx.
    - JoshTriplett 11y ago
      > I have a number of friends who play candy crush and before that I had number of friends who play farmville. If you ask them they will say they having fun playing those games. I know several people who smoke. If you ask them, they will say that they enjoy cigars and cigarettes.
      - cwyers 11y ago
        I mean, they probably do? Cigarettes and cigars contain nicotine, which is very pleasurable to consume. Now, yes, it also contains a ton of carcinogens and tar, but those don't actually make cigarettes not enjoyable, just not healthy.
        JoshTriplett 11y ago
        That was the joke/analogy, yes.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- kaonashi 11y ago
  Sacrificing user experience for increased revenue does seem to work in the short-term at least.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
hesdeadjim 11y ago
Unfortunately the market doesn't support selling a premium game at prices that allow anyone other than a small studio to keep the lights on. We've been in the game since the beginning so I've seen the transition from selling a game at $4.99, then $2.99, then $0.99, and finally free with IAP. Despite being very successful we didn't enjoy that trend, but instead just adapted to it. It's purely a response to the mobile consumer's spending habits and their complete unwillingness to psychologically accept the "risk" that the $5 or $2 game they bought might not be as fun as they hoped.
- icebraining 11y ago
  What about trial versions? Are they supported by the app stores already? Seems like they'd solve the psychological problem.
  - 0x0 11y ago
    In the early days of the App Store, people solved this problem by publishing two apps, a free "lite" edition and a for-pay "full" edition. Not sure why this isn't used more. Maybe because it's a hassle to migrate data (game progress, saves, etc) between apps, but I thought at least in modern iOS versions, multiple apps can share a common bundle ID prefix.
    - kedean 11y ago
      Part of the problem with that is that nobody wants to pay for the full edition, which goes back to the classic problem with demos of freeloaders who just keep playing the demo. The solution that Nintendo stumbled on is to limit the number of uses to a demo, after which the demo is no longer playable. Unfortunately, this would require absolute cooperation from the app store, be decried as a terrible practice by many, and be moot on rooted phones.
      - smt88 11y ago
        I've always been happy to pay for the full edition. Unfortunately, most phone games are absolutely terrible. I think that's why the trials fail: it's really, really hard to make a great game. It's the same problem with trying to turn any creative pursuit into a predictable business.
ChildOfChaos 11y ago
Ugh. Greedy idiots are ruining mobile gaming. There are virtually no good games anymore as they all are designed to require in app purchases, they are not designed to be great games, just to con stupid people out of money. Gaming on mobile is dead because of this, yet continues to make money due to such scams.
- sosborn 11y ago
  Is it greedy to want to keep the lights on?
  - nosuchthing 11y ago
    It's greedy to design systems that manipulate children into becoming psychologically addicted to fruitless casino games.
    - sosborn 11y ago
      That's on the parents.
      - r618 11y ago
        so you're deliberately feeding the parents fruitless casino games that manipulate children into becoming psychologically addicted, just to keep them occupied selecting from that pile of trash what is acceptable and what is not, right ?
      - nosuchthing 11y ago
        If someone were to design a booby trap and you walked into it, that would be on you. It's up to adults to contribute purposeful conscious decisions.
  - Reedx 11y ago
    One hit like Angry Birds and you can keep the lights on virtually forever. Assuming you don't get so greedy in the first place and immediately bloat the company.
dpcan 11y ago
Angry Birds 2 felt like the exact same game to me with new birds and scenery maybe. I couldn't figure out how they could pull this IAP nonsense - especially when so many other versions of their games are out there for free, most of which I haven't finished 10%. If I feel the need to sling a bird, I'm sure there are plenty of levels I haven't tried yet that I can still play for free in other versions. I couldn't wrap my brain around what their strategy might be for this new game.
tomjen3 11y ago
I too would prefer that, but games like that just don't sell. Selling mobile games are hard enough in the first place (unless you can get into the top 10) because you are forced to sell at 0.99, which barely covers your expenses, but you also have to fight all the free games out there (only so much attention is available). Essentially this is the only way to have a shot at making money in the mobile games market.

by 0x0 11y ago

zajd 11y ago

The scoring system also makes absolutely no sense and removes any incentives to pay attention to the leaderboard

ma2rten 11y ago

Forcing the player to wait (or pay if they don't want to wait) has been proven to work well over and over again by numerous games.

bpicolo 11y ago
Proven as a good user experience: no. Proven to suck money out of people: yes.
- ma2rten 11y ago
  I have a number of friends who play candy crush and before that I had number of friends who play farmville. If you ask them they will say they having fun playing those games.
  - bpicolo 11y ago
    And? Do you think it would be less fun for them if microtransactions were absent? Doubt it.
    - chkuendig 11y ago
      I don't - apparently people prefer nagging screens in games subsidized by a minority of whales over games everybody has to pay to download. After all, this is how the app stores started. Nobody would have switched to Freemium if Gamers preferred the Paid Games.
      - bpicolo 11y ago
        They switch because freemium gets them more money. Nothing more than a business decision. It sure doesn't mean gamers inherently prefer micro tx.
  - JoshTriplett 11y ago
    > I have a number of friends who play candy crush and before that I had number of friends who play farmville. If you ask them they will say they having fun playing those games. I know several people who smoke. If you ask them, they will say that they enjoy cigars and cigarettes.
    - cwyers 11y ago
      I mean, they probably do? Cigarettes and cigars contain nicotine, which is very pleasurable to consume. Now, yes, it also contains a ton of carcinogens and tar, but those don't actually make cigarettes not enjoyable, just not healthy.
      - JoshTriplett 11y ago
        That was the joke/analogy, yes.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
kaonashi 11y ago
Sacrificing user experience for increased revenue does seem to work in the short-term at least.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

hesdeadjim 11y ago

Unfortunately the market doesn't support selling a premium game at prices that allow anyone other than a small studio to keep the lights on. We've been in the game since the beginning so I've seen the transition from selling a game at $4.99, then $2.99, then $0.99, and finally free with IAP. Despite being very successful we didn't enjoy that trend, but instead just adapted to it. It's purely a response to the mobile consumer's spending habits and their complete unwillingness to psychologically accept the "risk" that the $5 or $2 game they bought might not be as fun as they hoped.

icebraining 11y ago
What about trial versions? Are they supported by the app stores already? Seems like they'd solve the psychological problem.
- 0x0 11y ago
  In the early days of the App Store, people solved this problem by publishing two apps, a free "lite" edition and a for-pay "full" edition. Not sure why this isn't used more. Maybe because it's a hassle to migrate data (game progress, saves, etc) between apps, but I thought at least in modern iOS versions, multiple apps can share a common bundle ID prefix.
  - kedean 11y ago
    Part of the problem with that is that nobody wants to pay for the full edition, which goes back to the classic problem with demos of freeloaders who just keep playing the demo. The solution that Nintendo stumbled on is to limit the number of uses to a demo, after which the demo is no longer playable. Unfortunately, this would require absolute cooperation from the app store, be decried as a terrible practice by many, and be moot on rooted phones.
    - smt88 11y ago
      I've always been happy to pay for the full edition. Unfortunately, most phone games are absolutely terrible. I think that's why the trials fail: it's really, really hard to make a great game. It's the same problem with trying to turn any creative pursuit into a predictable business.

ChildOfChaos 11y ago

Ugh. Greedy idiots are ruining mobile gaming. There are virtually no good games anymore as they all are designed to require in app purchases, they are not designed to be great games, just to con stupid people out of money. Gaming on mobile is dead because of this, yet continues to make money due to such scams.

sosborn 11y ago
Is it greedy to want to keep the lights on?
- nosuchthing 11y ago
  It's greedy to design systems that manipulate children into becoming psychologically addicted to fruitless casino games.
  - sosborn 11y ago
    That's on the parents.
    - r618 11y ago
      so you're deliberately feeding the parents fruitless casino games that manipulate children into becoming psychologically addicted, just to keep them occupied selecting from that pile of trash what is acceptable and what is not, right ?
    - nosuchthing 11y ago
      If someone were to design a booby trap and you walked into it, that would be on you. It's up to adults to contribute purposeful conscious decisions.
- Reedx 11y ago
  One hit like Angry Birds and you can keep the lights on virtually forever. Assuming you don't get so greedy in the first place and immediately bloat the company.

dpcan 11y ago

Angry Birds 2 felt like the exact same game to me with new birds and scenery maybe. I couldn't figure out how they could pull this IAP nonsense - especially when so many other versions of their games are out there for free, most of which I haven't finished 10%. If I feel the need to sling a bird, I'm sure there are plenty of levels I haven't tried yet that I can still play for free in other versions. I couldn't wrap my brain around what their strategy might be for this new game.

tomjen3 11y ago

I too would prefer that, but games like that just don't sell. Selling mobile games are hard enough in the first place (unless you can get into the top 10) because you are forced to sell at 0.99, which barely covers your expenses, but you also have to fight all the free games out there (only so much attention is available). Essentially this is the only way to have a shot at making money in the mobile games market.