Yeah, people tend to mix the issues too much. The baseline and most important factor is that the gameplay is being compromised so people can get paid. That being said, it isn't like these games aren't good, they just aren't as good as they could be. How can it when the real world enters fantasy? Do you like being woken from a dream where big breasts are in your face by some alarm clock?
Again i dont like IAP's like this but i can 'kinda' see why they do it. The app store is full of very very cheap games, i've been gaming for years, when i was 12 years old i used to buy 8 bit games at $12 each, now you have kids with apps costing 1 or 2 dollars and STILL they wait for price drops. Theres app with a shop where you can buy IAP's, eg a hat for your character or other stuff, even a donation button, do they make money ? Apparently not. Look at Punch Quest, that was free and hardly anyone bought an IAP from it. So the only way to 'force' people to buy IAP's are of course to do with gameplay, yeah i agree thats wrong but devs have to make money. If you and me buy games on release then hopefully there'll be less and less games with IAP's, problem is its all about money. Devs make more money with IAP's in games so they do that, i dont agree with it but from a financial point of view i can see why. Devs have tried adding donate buttons (dont work), have tried adding other ways to get revenue (buying hats and stuff), doesnt generate enough money. They release cheap games for 1 or 2 dollars, again not enough money (too many cheapskates), i can see why they add freemium sadly Imagine you own your own company, releasing games for $2 but your profits/revenue are really bad, you would go a freemium route for sure.
Oh, I know why they're doing it. I know devs should be compensated. But again, it's a separate issue from the fact that gameplay is compromised because of it. It's an undeniable truth that when all these other factors enter into the equation, the game cannot mathematically be the best it can be. One of my favorite iOS games ever, Phoenix HD, has consumable IAP. Is the game great? Yup. Was the game better before silliness was added? Absolutely. It's nothing personal against anyone being compensated, but rather how, and how much my gaming experience is being slighted in the process.
I would get the game out there for free but with a Premium unlock, plain as that. Make the money off the Freemium nonsense and leave an option for the real game. It isn't so much the existence of Freemium as much as there is no way to bypass it.
It's not true that consumable IAP that influences gameplay is the only way that works to make any kind of money. There are premium apps that do just fine without it, and as you say, most freemium apps don't do all that well either. In fact, to make money with a freemium game you will need a big advertising budget because you need millions of users, exactly the thing small indies don't have. For an example of how freemium isn't a panacea, even for a well established iOS company, see Flick Kick Football Legends. It's currently about #730 in the US top grossing games chart. Compare that to Badland, which came out months earlier, costs money upfront ($4 currently), and is at 472. It is a big mistake that people keep looking at what the top 25 games are doing and mimicking that. An indie-dev is exceedingly unlikely to end up in the top 25 anyway. If random tiny ICT companies started to hire cars to drive around the country and film every street because that's what Google does, and they're the top IT company, so surely that's important, we would think they were crazy, but somehow with iOS games many people think it is necessary to just do what the high hitters are doing without any further consideration.
But its a copycat system. Angry Birds does well, here come 1000's of clones. Temple Run does well, here we come with tons of runner clones. Devs see freemium do well and hear about all these huge figures and lists of top earning apps/revenue etc and they do the same. I'm hoping the success of AAA titles like X-Com, Baldurs Gate and KOTOR show other devs that success can be had without making them freemium.
I agree yet again. Make it more expensive, I can pay more, but in the process, leave IAP behind. I don't mind paying 4 or 5 dollars for a game as long as there isnt IAP in it.
Okay back to what I was saying in that other thread Simply having gems or multiple currencies doesn't make a game freemium. A developer can have all that in a game but if it's balanced properly, if players earn currency in a reasonable rate, etc, then the whole drive and need for IAP is gone. Gems alone are just a currency, don't get hung up on the name of it. It's the balance that matters, If you take a severely freemium game like Clash of Clans, lowered the prices, increased how much players earn and how often they earn currency, then you would never need to buy IAP because then you'd have a balanced natural progression. As for IAP, it's the nature of IAP that makes it frustrating. If a game is developed, play tested, and determined to be completed through normal play and progression, and then IAP is added later, is that still freemium or paidium, even though the IAP is unnecessary to enjoy or complete the game?
But thats the problem, many games dont seem to be balanced and you seem like you're 'forced' to buy IAP's to move ahead. I mean to be fair it also depends on the player, i could play 'game x' and be rubbish at it and then moan that i'm not getting enough coins so i scream 'freemium nightmare'. You could play the same game, just be better at it than me, get a lot of coins and then you say 'nah its balanced...' But i do agree its frustrating when someone starts with the freemium moaning when they havent actually tried the game or know how good/bad the balancing is. Overall i'm still loving iOS gaming, a huge range of games from all different types of companies. Freemium hasnt ruined it for me as many of the freemium games i wouldnt play anyway, Clash of Clans, wouldnt play either way, Candy Crush, nah. Angry Birds go i would have liked but timers/IAP's have put me off, but theres other racing games.
But there are numerous games that are paid and have IAP, yet don't seem to force the player to purchase them. Tiny Thief has IAP for hints; really unless you absolutely stumped, you're not going to even consider hints and just play the game normally. Starborn Anarkist practically buries the player in money and parts yet includes two currency packs. Castle Doombad includes packs for coins and currency, but they're unnecessary due to how the game rewards the player and the overall progression. There are others I could list too Are those games paidium due to the mere presence of IAP?
I agree that ANY game that is paid and has IAPs is paidmium. You have to remember that outside if TA, a lot of more casual gamers especially, often may not realize IAPs are optional. And while I'm somewhat torn about games that have them even though they may not be needed, I sometimes -- and this is NOT always the case -- think devs put them there in hopes that those not knowing things can be unlocked through gameplay actually do buy them with blinders on. For instance, games that have IAPs that say "unlock all levels". We know that many times that just means unlock all levels early. But others that aren't so savy may not know that. A lot of devs really need to clarify their IAPs better. And then there's games where you don't need them, but they still shove them right in your face between levels. Again, many devs are good about not doing these types of things but there's probably more devs that do seem to make it purposely vague and get IAP buyers. The other thing is that once an IAP system is in place, it's already there to be abused. All it takes is is raising in-game currency prices (which sometimes can be done without even an update). And we've seen devs we once thought were respectable do this so it can happen regardless of how high of a pedistal we put a game dev on. IAPs will never stop me from getting a game I really want unless I hear they are really bad (again this IS part of game impressions). But I absolutely would prefer just paying more and have an app be completely IAP free.
If tons more people would shell out appropriate cash for apps and also piracy wouldn't be an issue, there wouldn't be a need to discuss IAP. Again. And again. And again.
So by your guys version of the definition then even a game like Heroes and Castles would be considered paidmium since you can buy crystals which basically have no effect on gameplay. When I think of freemium it's not necessarily a free game but a free game with an intentional pay wall that you will pretty much have to pay to get around. The same goes for paidmium. It's an app that you pay for that intentionally has a paywall in place to make you pay to progress any further. Not sure that there is a "real" definition of these words but that's my take on it.
I got to agree with Fangbone on this one. I think you guys just cramming all paid and free games under these single umbrella terms without considering the differences between them On one hand, you have free to play and premium. Beat Leap and Deadly Bullet would be prime examples of free to play. Badland and Hoplite are premium. I'd say Foursaken's games are premium too, and a bunch of other games even though they have IAP Then you have freemium and paidium. These games, your options are to grind for some extreme, near impossible amount to succeed or be forced to spend on IAP, consumables, etc. That's the difference. That's the huge difference. You never have to spend a cent on Tiny Thief beyond the initial price if you don't want to. You never have to buy currency in Starborn. You don't have to purchase anything to progress in Doombad or unlock everything in Block Fortress or buy coins in Granny Smith, etc., etc. to progress. In all those games, you don't have to spend anything more than you paid to experience those games to the fullest. There are no paywalls. You guys don't believe that? Do you really believe that all those games are paidium, that you need to buy IAP to progress? That's the freemium part that gave paidium its name; that paidium games have paywalls that require you to purchase IAP to overcome, not that they simply have some form of IAP
So if say the original FFVII had only come out for the first time today with IAP for gil without modifying the drop rate of anything, would you stay away? What about doing the same for red orbs in Devil May Cry for the PS2? Toss in a doubler too which you don't need but is right there available for anyone. You unlock faster but if you play bad, it's still bye bye especially in DMD mode. Item use also wrecks your score. There are free and paid games designed like these but it seems a number of people visiting TA are too damaged by bad games with greedy IAP to bother with decent games that have fair IAP, be it free or paid. That same mindset also warrants any game with IAP as grindy even if you can compare the inflow of currency with older console titles.
Paidmium and Freemium are slang terms with no standard definition, at least none that I know of. What's important to me is recognizing that when real money has any ability to enter and alter the gameplay then the optimal gaming experience is not and cannot be achieved. Of course dual currencies and pay walls and timers are worse than the IAP cheats for Tiny Thief. Is Tiny Thief a bad game? Nope, it's a great game. Is it optimal? Nope. At the end of the day if you can settle for a less optimal experience--and by 'you' I include myself, because I do the same--then that's all that matters. I like plenty of games that include these silly tactics to try and get more money out of my pocket. Do I respect them as being as good as a truly untainted, Premium experience with zero IAP that offers me complete immersion? Not for a second. All the economics of the AppStore aren't going to change this universal concept.
