3 ms·
I've read through your blog posts, and while I agree with your "crippling" of the free version, I don't agree with how it was done. With Hearts Solo, are there
by varaon 17y ago
I've read through your blog posts, and while I agree with your "crippling" of the free version, I don't agree with how it was done.
With Hearts Solo, are there not better ways to make a trial version of a game than to randomly interrupt a match? Most trial software makes the user aware of how they will be limited - e.g. disabled features, time limits, and limitations on the number of usages.
Wouldn't having a maximum of X hours of playtime (or a similar strategy) on Solo have been more user friendly?
- allenbrunson 17y agoWell, I'm a total marketing n00b, twiddling knobs here. I knew there was a great deal of demand for the game. For example, when I briefly made Hearts Net free, it was being downloaded 3500 times per day. Then I put it back to non-free, and it was barely ticking along at 5 bucks in sales a day. I looked at things like in-app purchasing and ad networks, but that seemed like a lot of work. I was very frustrated with the experience at that point, and was just about to quit altogether. Doing even more development didn't seem like a good use of my time. So this seemed like the easiest way to stop competing with myself, with the least amount of effort. Now that I'm getting some encouraging signs, I'll probably reevaluate the situation and see if I can come up with something better.