3 ms·

I'm working on a game data project and one of the things I'm trying to figure out how to track is exactly this difference. How can you tell whether a game with

by jlees 13y ago

I'm working on a game data project and one of the things I'm trying to figure out how to track is exactly this difference. How can you tell whether a game with IAPs has "good" IAPs -- and the critical path of the game remains free -- or "bad" IAPs, paywalls/gating/pay-to-win? Also, how do you decide whether a content gate is a "bad" IAP or a "good" one? I'm coming at it from a value-for-money angle at the moment, but I've learnt that people's definitions of "value" vary wildly. Some folks are more than happy to boast about completing Candy Crush without giving a cent to the developer.

eps 13y ago
It's simple. IAP of extendable resources is a sham. IAP of shortcuts and powerups is a sham. IAP of extra game levels, something that extends existing game universe without changing the rules (and that also maps onto a non-trivial work on developer's end) is NOT a sham. Easy-peasy.
- KVFinn 13y ago
  Agree 100%. I would add that IAP that are have no effect on gameplay (skins, announcer packs, etc) are not a sham.
- ANTSANTS 13y ago
  This jibes pretty well with me, in regards to most games. However, where do games like EVE Online fit in, where (IIRC) a month's subscription is an item in the game world that you can pay real money for and trade with others (who are using their in-game wealth to pay for their game subscription)? Technically it does confer advantages to people with cash to spare (who can bypass normal progression through trade), but the way it links the in-game economy to the real world and the fact that it's an organic, player-driven process and not some "pay2win shop" makes it seem more legitimate to me. I've never actually played the game, so I don't know how well it works for them, but it's always seemed like an interesting idea to me, and EVE has a lot of hardcore fans that don't seem bothered by it.
- jlees 13y ago
  So, if I can IAP to get an extra 5 moves in a puzzle game, or infinitely replay the same level and get stuck, never playing the game again, that's a sham? What about currencies/powerups that I can either get via IAP vs social obligation? I'd rather pay than bug my friends. (Of course, one argument is that none of these mechanics should exist in the first place. But they do.)
lmm 13y ago
My guideline would be that any IAP you can repeat is a bad IAP. If you're buying a consumable that's obviously bad; if you're buying a completely different additional game that's obviously ok. In between there's a spectrum; an expansion that requires its own development is mostly ok, pay to level up is mostly bad even if there's a cap on how many times you can do it. And so on.

by jlees 13y ago

eps 13y ago

It's simple. IAP of extendable resources is a sham. IAP of shortcuts and powerups is a sham. IAP of extra game levels, something that extends existing game universe without changing the rules (and that also maps onto a non-trivial work on developer's end) is NOT a sham. Easy-peasy.

KVFinn 13y ago
Agree 100%. I would add that IAP that are have no effect on gameplay (skins, announcer packs, etc) are not a sham.
ANTSANTS 13y ago
This jibes pretty well with me, in regards to most games. However, where do games like EVE Online fit in, where (IIRC) a month's subscription is an item in the game world that you can pay real money for and trade with others (who are using their in-game wealth to pay for their game subscription)? Technically it does confer advantages to people with cash to spare (who can bypass normal progression through trade), but the way it links the in-game economy to the real world and the fact that it's an organic, player-driven process and not some "pay2win shop" makes it seem more legitimate to me. I've never actually played the game, so I don't know how well it works for them, but it's always seemed like an interesting idea to me, and EVE has a lot of hardcore fans that don't seem bothered by it.
jlees 13y ago
So, if I can IAP to get an extra 5 moves in a puzzle game, or infinitely replay the same level and get stuck, never playing the game again, that's a sham? What about currencies/powerups that I can either get via IAP vs social obligation? I'd rather pay than bug my friends. (Of course, one argument is that none of these mechanics should exist in the first place. But they do.)

lmm 13y ago

My guideline would be that any IAP you can repeat is a bad IAP. If you're buying a consumable that's obviously bad; if you're buying a completely different additional game that's obviously ok. In between there's a spectrum; an expansion that requires its own development is mostly ok, pay to level up is mostly bad even if there's a cap on how many times you can do it. And so on.