1. Simon Sage's Avatar
    There was a lot of hate for in-app purchases last week when I posted about Major Mayhem, and I wanted to round up some more opinions on the matter.

    For games in particular, I get that it's uncool if some content is locked away that would have once upon a time simply been included, but if you're free to earn weapons, levels, and other unlocks both through normal gameplay or in-app purchasing, what's the harm? Does the fact that some other dude got his gun by paying a buck somehow devalue the hour or two it took for you to get it? To me, it just seems like a way of appealing to two different kinds of people: the ones that have fun earning rewards, and those that have fun by using them.

    Or is it more that it feels like a bait-and-switch - download for free, but dangle the good stuff outside of arm's reach? Is it really that much of a problem if the dev is up-front about their business model?

    I'd also be curious to hear how many of you guys actually spend cash through IAPs. Android is way less profitable to developers than iOS, and I can't help but think the negativity towards microtransactions might be part of the issue.
    07-16-2012 01:44 PM
  2. jean15paul's Avatar
    I don't purchase IAP's, so I don't want to play a game that requires them to progress. (I also don't buy many games. In the past year I've bought Assissin's Creed, NOVA 2, Modern Combat 3, Shadowgun, and Dead Space, that's all.) If I can advance and enjoy and game without IAP's than them being there doesn't bother me. I've been enjoying Major Mayhem for a couple of days now.

    What I don't like is when the need to purchase IAP's prevents me from playing or enjoying a game without them. The other issue I have is when a paid app also presents you with IAP's. That feels like a bait-n-switch.

    There seem to be 3 methods for supporting an app: ads, IAPs, or a paid app. ads and IAPs can be used together in a free app, but IMO a paid app should never have ads or IAP.

    Just my 2 cents...
    07-16-2012 02:09 PM
  3. Simon Sage's Avatar
    Definitely agreed that paid apps are getting obnoxious if they try to push IAPs. Can you give some examples of games that have made IAPs too much of a requirement for progress?
    07-16-2012 02:28 PM
  4. jean15paul's Avatar
    Hum? That's a tough one. The only thing that comes to mind is NFL 2012 by Gameloft. It's been a long time, but I think you only got to run a certain number of plays from each catagory (e.g long pass, long ring, med pass, med run, etc), and then you'd run out of play in that catagory and would have to buy more with in game credits. You earn credits from winning, but I couldn't win without a full playbook.

    There have been lots of games that I avoided because of IAP, but that's the only one that comes to mind where I couldn't even progress.
    07-17-2012 01:01 PM
  5. mulasien's Avatar
    I haven't touched many IAP games, but the few that I tried that made progress all but impossible (aside from hours of endless grinding) have been Oregon Trail (Gameloft), Plant War, and Grabatron. The last two were playable without IAP's, but the 'currency' required to really advance was given only in very tiny increments that would have required hours of grinding to get anywhere. The Oregon Trail game required IAP of 'action points' that allowed you to continue doing...pretty much anything. Not buying the IAP meant that an action point would be available in 5 minutes. I.E. after your burn your initial batch of action points from installing it, you can only do one action every 5 minutes without pony'ing up (FYI, an action point was spent when you did ANYTHING besides starting at the screen). Instant uninstall for me.

    FYI, all of the above games have been uninstalled. I had no desire to grind out for incremental rewards, and no IAP's for me, ever. That's a good way to spend $50 without even realizing it.

    I'd rather pay a buck or few up front for a quality game that gives me everything I need to complete it out of the gate over free apps that put roadblocks in your way that you have to pay to remove.
    07-18-2012 12:04 PM
  6. Ry's Avatar
    ..working in this industry-

    You're seeing IAP in games because the way games monetize now is very different than the way games monitized back in the feature phone days.

    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums
    07-18-2012 12:16 PM
  7. jean15paul's Avatar
    ..working in this industry-

    You're seeing IAP in games because the way games monetize now is very different than the way games monitized back in the feature phone days.

    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums
    Please elaborate on the changes
    07-18-2012 12:31 PM
  8. Ry's Avatar
    Please elaborate on the changes
    In the feature phone days, games could be purchased for anything between $5.99 to $9.99 on a one-time purchase. But carriers also have subscription models where you could play the game on your phone for anywhere fro $1.99 to $3.99 per month - and some games were only available as a subscription.

    A lot of people just simply forgot that they were subscribed.

    Apple's App Store really lowered the bar.

    Places like Glu struggled for a bit to adapt to that change. And if you didn't have backing from a big company like EA, you were pretty much done.

    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums
    07-18-2012 12:47 PM
  9. lerdat's Avatar
    Personally I dont think IAPs are bad if you could still make progress in the game, and as Simon Sage say you are approaching two different publics so its actually better this way because their are users who would just continue playing if they get their in game items by paying, so me personally i think theirs not harm to it.
    12-21-2014 12:45 PM
  10. livinndixie's Avatar
    I don't game. Why do I need an iap and why do apps download without permission
    03-07-2015 10:28 AM
  11. soundmaven's Avatar
    I'm an Android developer working for a software company responsible for several popular apps with millions of downloads. I've talked to Google's representatives several times during the last year and their statistics seem to indicate that IAP as a method of upgrade is already more popular than having standalone pro versions. The problem arises when you integrate the in-app billing in an app that previously had a separate pro version: how do you deal with the users that already purchased the standalone paid version? Other then that, IAP in apps is the way to go. The user doesn't have to manually delete the free version, we don't have to maintain two separate editions, which even with the "right" approach is more cumbersome.

    I absolutely agree with the above poster that paid versions should never have any ads nor IAPs. For us, if the user upgraded to Pro, he or she should have everything the app has to offer.

    As for IAPs in mobile games, I can understand why they choose this monetization approach, but I still dislike micro purchases and more keen on paying for a complete game. However, I don't play games that often, so I certainly don't represent the "average" mobile gamer, whatever this means nowadays.
    03-09-2015 10:24 AM