6 ms·

This is one of the areas where I wish EU would punish Apple for. Their free app of the week is often so-called free games but they almost always have in-app pu

This is one of the areas where I wish EU would punish Apple for. Their free app of the week is often so-called free games but they almost always have in-app purchases that's required to take full advantage of the game.

jasonlotito 13y ago
You really want the government getting involved here? I mean, what's next? Attacking SaaS and PaaS for their "free" tiers that really don't provide you with much and you have to actually pay to actually get some real use out of it? Take some responsibility and stop asking the government to be your nanny.
- taspeotis 13y ago
  > stop asking the government to be your nanny. But then who will protect my children from things I disagree with???
  - Tohhou 13y ago
    If you have no power, no personal agency, and are a perpetual victim, then, really, the state is your best friend in divorcing yourself wholesale of personal accountability. Ban allowing people to give free samples. They only make people believe that they can get more of what they want for free. Who are they to arbitrarily define how much a "sample" is when they use the word free? It's all or nothing, folks, stop trying to con the rest of us! Ban allowing people to do charity work. If people don't want to become my personal slave, then they shouldn't have offered to open the door for me. Super simple stuff.
- danieldk 13y ago
  This is clearly a difference between the US and the EU. Most EU citizens (including me) think it is fine to regulate the market, e.g. if it is misleading. Such games are often misleading, since they are not really free. The 'Free' label is just used because people will impulse-install a free application more quickly than a paid application and in the end an addicted gamer will probably spend more through in-app purchases. I think there is a good middle ground that can be found. Instead of listing in-app purchases separately, Apple, Google, et al. could make three options: - <Price> - Free - Free with in app-purchases It would also be nice if every app store listed all the in-app purchases. Then I, as a customer, can consider beforehand whether I found the prices to be acceptable.
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    Apple already does this. I am literally looking at a game right now in the App Store and it's free and Apple makes it very clear that it offers IAPs. It even gives you a list of the Top IAPs. So, listing every IAP, it does not do. But beyond that, it gives you exactly what is being asked.
    - mikhailt 13y ago
      Except there are confusion when Apple markets it as the "Free Game of the Week". Many people thought this meant IAP was free as well. Say "Free game of the week with paid IAP still included", I don't have a problem with this.
      - jasonlotito 13y ago
        Sorry, but it tells you the cost, right on the damn screen. It's not hidden. It literally tells you the price. This is well after you've already downloaded the free app. So you have the game. You are inside, and their are prices next to it. I mean, damn. Do these same people go to a club, get in for free, and then wonder why they still have to pay for drinks? > Say "Free game of the week with paid IAP still included", I don't have a problem with this. I guarantee that using that wording, people would think that the paid IAP was included with the "Free game of the week." I mean, they are already dumb enough to see a price and ignore it.
        jbinto 13y ago
        If it's "unlock extra maps for $5" I think that's fair. If it's "125 tokens for $10", that's not really telling you the price. Video arcades used this abstraction tactic successfully. Make people convert money upfront, make the exchange rate difficult to calculate mentally, ensure that the user is left with worthless "change" so they top up again, to avoid being left with sunk costs. If every time an IAP is offered it showed prices in real $/€, people would think twice.
        13y ago
- twelvechairs 13y ago
  The same thing is common in other industries. You can't call your food pesticide-free or GM-free or gluten-free unless it really is. Is that a problem for you?
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    But outside of games just not being playable, people are talking about not having fun without the IAP. This is fairly subjective. I didn't spend a dime on Plant's vs. Zombies 2 despite it having IAP, yet somehow people suggest you "have" to spend money to have fun. No, the games are free. > You can't call your food pesticide-free or GM-free or gluten-free unless it really is. Yeah, not even the same thing.
    - mikhailt 13y ago
      > But outside of games just not being playable, people are talking about not having fun without the IAP. This is fairly subjective. I didn't spend a dime on Plant's vs. Zombies 2 despite it having IAP, yet somehow people suggest you "have" to spend money to have fun. You didn't clarify that in your original post here. If I understood this is what you meant then I would've edited my post to remove the "fun" part but rather change it with "take full advantage of". If Plaint and Zombies were advertised as a free game, you download it but it only lets you play 5 minutes before you have to pay, then that's not a free game. It's a free demo/trial. > Yeah, not even the same thing. Yes, it is in this point we're making. The people didn't make this happen, it required the intervention of the government to mandate this type of information accuracy.
      - jasonlotito 13y ago
        > "You didn't clarify that in your original post here." What? That was literally in reply to your post which I replied to. "Their free app of the week is often so-called free games but they almost always have in-app purchases that's required to actually enjoy the game." You were talking about enjoyment from the beginning. > Yes, it is in this point we're making Not sure you know what point you are making. Sorry, I'm done dealing with people who act like trolls.
- mikhailt 13y ago
  WTF? Those SaaS/PaaS usually make clear what the plan cover and don't cover. If companies are intentionally gaming the system to mislead people with intent to profit from us, yes, I do want the government to get involved because nobody else will fix it. Apple's the curator and they're doing it, the app developers are doing it, so who do we have left to complain to? It's the government's responsibility to make sure companies follow the laws and not take advantage of people. I do not have a problem with IAP, I'm okay with companies trying to make money via that method. However, I do have a problem with companies saying those are free games where they aren't free and have paid requirements to keep playing the game.
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    > WTF? Those SaaS/PaaS usually make clear what the plan cover and don't cover. WTF? Those free games don't cost you a thing, too! And damn, if you don't want to pay, you don't have to. Apple tells you straight out if a game, free or otherwise, has IAP. They provide you with prices. What more do you want? > I do have a problem with companies saying those are free games where they aren't free and have paid requirements to keep playing the game. So... your problem is that you don't enjoy some free games? You think if a game isn't good enough, it shouldn't be free? That's harsh. Of all the first world problems to have, this really takes the cake.
    - mikhailt 13y ago
      > ..damn, if you don't want to pay, you don't have to. Apple tells you straight out if a game, free or otherwise, has IAP. They provide you with prices. If they're saying it's the free game of the week, people actually understood it to mean it's actually free. Several of my friends and family members got confused with this and actually thought the IAP was free as well. > So... your problem is that you don't enjoy some free games? You think if a game isn't good enough, it shouldn't be free? That's harsh. What does enjoyment have to do with anything? That wasn't the point, the point is the marketing, not the games itself. I don't have a problem with the games, I have a problem with the marketing saying they're free entirely.
- djur 13y ago
  All of us, individually, are just single people. We don't have a lot of money. We don't have a lot of clout. Apple is very big. It has a lot of people, and a lot of money, and a lot of clout. Government is the countervailing force that, collectively, weak citizens can use to push back against private power. The word isn't "nanny", it's "guardian". It's "advocate".
  - baddox 13y ago
    There's a lot of mental gymnastics going on in your comment. Both Apple and government are simply a bunch of individuals. The difference is which group contains individuals that will use violence against people to get its way regardless of the people's consent.
    - djur 13y ago
      The difference is which group derives its power from the consent of the governed, actually.
      - baddox 13y ago
        And like I implied in my last comment, a lot more of what Apple does relies on the consent of its stakeholders than what governments do. There's a tragic irony in the fact that government routinely uses supposed consent to justify violence, while Apple (as far as I know, although shady stuff might happen from time to time) actually obtains consent from its stakeholders. Apple doesn't have to go around telling everyone "It's okay that we take your money in exchange for our products, because you actively consent to the exchange," because everyone knows that's how it works. And yet government, which plainly doesn't work that way, is the one that hammers into our heads the lie that the exchange is consensual. It would be laughable, except that so many people actually get fooled.
        djur 13y ago
        The nation I'm a citizen of has a government that renews the consent of the government on a regular basis with free, fair, universal elections. I'm sorry if you don't live in such a country. The guillotine is a traditional remedy for that. Apple doesn't have to do that because we don't rely on it to safeguard our life, liberty, and property. If it disappeared tomorrow the economy would take a hit but life would go on.
- seunosewa 13y ago
  I wish Apple would self-regulate instead of waiting for the government to do this for them.
- timthorn 13y ago
  SaaS & PaaS tend to be sold B2B - we have much stronger protections for consumer sales than for commercial.
- timthorn 13y ago
  SaaS & PaaS tend to be sold B2B - we have much stronger protections for consumer sales than for commercial.
- ethangarofolo 13y ago
  Imagine the beauty of it! Before making an in-app purchase, you'd get to fill out as much paper work as you do for a mortgage. Disclosures, acknowledgement. We could make Candy Crush as exciting as opening a bank account!
ghshephard 13y ago
Are Candy Crush and PvZ 2 Free? I've been playing them for 4+ months and haven't spent a dime on them. Other than the bandwidth to download them, I would certainly consider them free.
- ZeroGravitas 13y ago
  Apparently Candy Crush actually gets harder after you pay, because you've marked yourself as a sucker by paying once.
  - diziet 13y ago
    This is something that should be pretty simple to test. Do you have any more details?
    - pja 13y ago
      I believe that it's not so much that it specifically gets hard after you've paid (although that's a neat dark pattern that I wouldn't put past some of the current crop of App game developers frankly!) but rather that after a certain point it simply gets too hard to progress without paying. So the developers draw you in with what appears to be a skill game that you can enjoy playing, and then after they've got you committed they gradually turn it into a money game by making it progressively more and more unfair. I can't remember where the article is that I read about all this though.
      - joesb 13y ago
        Except I have lots of friends who played to the last level of Candy Crush without buying any IAP. The game is not impossible to beat without IAP.
        Joeri 13y ago
        How many hours does it take to reach the last level? Doesn't that game have over 600 levels? At 10 minutes average per level we're talking about 100+ hours, which is several weeks of full-time occupation. If you have lots of friends who did that, we're talking about collectively months of FTE. If those had been paid hours, how much money would they have earned in that time? I'm not going anywhere with this, just wondering about the staggering amount of time that gets sucked into games like candy crush.

jasonlotito 13y ago

You really want the government getting involved here? I mean, what's next? Attacking SaaS and PaaS for their "free" tiers that really don't provide you with much and you have to actually pay to actually get some real use out of it? Take some responsibility and stop asking the government to be your nanny.

taspeotis 13y ago
> stop asking the government to be your nanny. But then who will protect my children from things I disagree with???
- Tohhou 13y ago
  If you have no power, no personal agency, and are a perpetual victim, then, really, the state is your best friend in divorcing yourself wholesale of personal accountability. Ban allowing people to give free samples. They only make people believe that they can get more of what they want for free. Who are they to arbitrarily define how much a "sample" is when they use the word free? It's all or nothing, folks, stop trying to con the rest of us! Ban allowing people to do charity work. If people don't want to become my personal slave, then they shouldn't have offered to open the door for me. Super simple stuff.
danieldk 13y ago
This is clearly a difference between the US and the EU. Most EU citizens (including me) think it is fine to regulate the market, e.g. if it is misleading. Such games are often misleading, since they are not really free. The 'Free' label is just used because people will impulse-install a free application more quickly than a paid application and in the end an addicted gamer will probably spend more through in-app purchases. I think there is a good middle ground that can be found. Instead of listing in-app purchases separately, Apple, Google, et al. could make three options: - <Price> - Free - Free with in app-purchases It would also be nice if every app store listed all the in-app purchases. Then I, as a customer, can consider beforehand whether I found the prices to be acceptable.
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  Apple already does this. I am literally looking at a game right now in the App Store and it's free and Apple makes it very clear that it offers IAPs. It even gives you a list of the Top IAPs. So, listing every IAP, it does not do. But beyond that, it gives you exactly what is being asked.
  - mikhailt 13y ago
    Except there are confusion when Apple markets it as the "Free Game of the Week". Many people thought this meant IAP was free as well. Say "Free game of the week with paid IAP still included", I don't have a problem with this.
    - jasonlotito 13y ago
      Sorry, but it tells you the cost, right on the damn screen. It's not hidden. It literally tells you the price. This is well after you've already downloaded the free app. So you have the game. You are inside, and their are prices next to it. I mean, damn. Do these same people go to a club, get in for free, and then wonder why they still have to pay for drinks? > Say "Free game of the week with paid IAP still included", I don't have a problem with this. I guarantee that using that wording, people would think that the paid IAP was included with the "Free game of the week." I mean, they are already dumb enough to see a price and ignore it.
      - jbinto 13y ago
        If it's "unlock extra maps for $5" I think that's fair. If it's "125 tokens for $10", that's not really telling you the price. Video arcades used this abstraction tactic successfully. Make people convert money upfront, make the exchange rate difficult to calculate mentally, ensure that the user is left with worthless "change" so they top up again, to avoid being left with sunk costs. If every time an IAP is offered it showed prices in real $/€, people would think twice.
        13y ago
twelvechairs 13y ago
The same thing is common in other industries. You can't call your food pesticide-free or GM-free or gluten-free unless it really is. Is that a problem for you?
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  But outside of games just not being playable, people are talking about not having fun without the IAP. This is fairly subjective. I didn't spend a dime on Plant's vs. Zombies 2 despite it having IAP, yet somehow people suggest you "have" to spend money to have fun. No, the games are free. > You can't call your food pesticide-free or GM-free or gluten-free unless it really is. Yeah, not even the same thing.
  - mikhailt 13y ago
    > But outside of games just not being playable, people are talking about not having fun without the IAP. This is fairly subjective. I didn't spend a dime on Plant's vs. Zombies 2 despite it having IAP, yet somehow people suggest you "have" to spend money to have fun. You didn't clarify that in your original post here. If I understood this is what you meant then I would've edited my post to remove the "fun" part but rather change it with "take full advantage of". If Plaint and Zombies were advertised as a free game, you download it but it only lets you play 5 minutes before you have to pay, then that's not a free game. It's a free demo/trial. > Yeah, not even the same thing. Yes, it is in this point we're making. The people didn't make this happen, it required the intervention of the government to mandate this type of information accuracy.
    - jasonlotito 13y ago
      > "You didn't clarify that in your original post here." What? That was literally in reply to your post which I replied to. "Their free app of the week is often so-called free games but they almost always have in-app purchases that's required to actually enjoy the game." You were talking about enjoyment from the beginning. > Yes, it is in this point we're making Not sure you know what point you are making. Sorry, I'm done dealing with people who act like trolls.
mikhailt 13y ago
WTF? Those SaaS/PaaS usually make clear what the plan cover and don't cover. If companies are intentionally gaming the system to mislead people with intent to profit from us, yes, I do want the government to get involved because nobody else will fix it. Apple's the curator and they're doing it, the app developers are doing it, so who do we have left to complain to? It's the government's responsibility to make sure companies follow the laws and not take advantage of people. I do not have a problem with IAP, I'm okay with companies trying to make money via that method. However, I do have a problem with companies saying those are free games where they aren't free and have paid requirements to keep playing the game.
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  > WTF? Those SaaS/PaaS usually make clear what the plan cover and don't cover. WTF? Those free games don't cost you a thing, too! And damn, if you don't want to pay, you don't have to. Apple tells you straight out if a game, free or otherwise, has IAP. They provide you with prices. What more do you want? > I do have a problem with companies saying those are free games where they aren't free and have paid requirements to keep playing the game. So... your problem is that you don't enjoy some free games? You think if a game isn't good enough, it shouldn't be free? That's harsh. Of all the first world problems to have, this really takes the cake.
  - mikhailt 13y ago
    > ..damn, if you don't want to pay, you don't have to. Apple tells you straight out if a game, free or otherwise, has IAP. They provide you with prices. If they're saying it's the free game of the week, people actually understood it to mean it's actually free. Several of my friends and family members got confused with this and actually thought the IAP was free as well. > So... your problem is that you don't enjoy some free games? You think if a game isn't good enough, it shouldn't be free? That's harsh. What does enjoyment have to do with anything? That wasn't the point, the point is the marketing, not the games itself. I don't have a problem with the games, I have a problem with the marketing saying they're free entirely.
djur 13y ago
All of us, individually, are just single people. We don't have a lot of money. We don't have a lot of clout. Apple is very big. It has a lot of people, and a lot of money, and a lot of clout. Government is the countervailing force that, collectively, weak citizens can use to push back against private power. The word isn't "nanny", it's "guardian". It's "advocate".
- baddox 13y ago
  There's a lot of mental gymnastics going on in your comment. Both Apple and government are simply a bunch of individuals. The difference is which group contains individuals that will use violence against people to get its way regardless of the people's consent.
  - djur 13y ago
    The difference is which group derives its power from the consent of the governed, actually.
    - baddox 13y ago
      And like I implied in my last comment, a lot more of what Apple does relies on the consent of its stakeholders than what governments do. There's a tragic irony in the fact that government routinely uses supposed consent to justify violence, while Apple (as far as I know, although shady stuff might happen from time to time) actually obtains consent from its stakeholders. Apple doesn't have to go around telling everyone "It's okay that we take your money in exchange for our products, because you actively consent to the exchange," because everyone knows that's how it works. And yet government, which plainly doesn't work that way, is the one that hammers into our heads the lie that the exchange is consensual. It would be laughable, except that so many people actually get fooled.
      - djur 13y ago
        The nation I'm a citizen of has a government that renews the consent of the government on a regular basis with free, fair, universal elections. I'm sorry if you don't live in such a country. The guillotine is a traditional remedy for that. Apple doesn't have to do that because we don't rely on it to safeguard our life, liberty, and property. If it disappeared tomorrow the economy would take a hit but life would go on.
seunosewa 13y ago
I wish Apple would self-regulate instead of waiting for the government to do this for them.
timthorn 13y ago
SaaS & PaaS tend to be sold B2B - we have much stronger protections for consumer sales than for commercial.
timthorn 13y ago
SaaS & PaaS tend to be sold B2B - we have much stronger protections for consumer sales than for commercial.
ethangarofolo 13y ago
Imagine the beauty of it! Before making an in-app purchase, you'd get to fill out as much paper work as you do for a mortgage. Disclosures, acknowledgement. We could make Candy Crush as exciting as opening a bank account!

ghshephard 13y ago

Are Candy Crush and PvZ 2 Free? I've been playing them for 4+ months and haven't spent a dime on them. Other than the bandwidth to download them, I would certainly consider them free.

ZeroGravitas 13y ago
Apparently Candy Crush actually gets harder after you pay, because you've marked yourself as a sucker by paying once.
- diziet 13y ago
  This is something that should be pretty simple to test. Do you have any more details?
  - pja 13y ago
    I believe that it's not so much that it specifically gets hard after you've paid (although that's a neat dark pattern that I wouldn't put past some of the current crop of App game developers frankly!) but rather that after a certain point it simply gets too hard to progress without paying. So the developers draw you in with what appears to be a skill game that you can enjoy playing, and then after they've got you committed they gradually turn it into a money game by making it progressively more and more unfair. I can't remember where the article is that I read about all this though.
    - joesb 13y ago
      Except I have lots of friends who played to the last level of Candy Crush without buying any IAP. The game is not impossible to beat without IAP.
      - Joeri 13y ago
        How many hours does it take to reach the last level? Doesn't that game have over 600 levels? At 10 minutes average per level we're talking about 100+ hours, which is several weeks of full-time occupation. If you have lots of friends who did that, we're talking about collectively months of FTE. If those had been paid hours, how much money would they have earned in that time? I'm not going anywhere with this, just wondering about the staggering amount of time that gets sucked into games like candy crush.