News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The true cost of free-to-play games by mtgx on Saturday March 09, 2013 @11:14PM (#5350669)
I just wish free to play games were a little more balanced. It shouldn't be almost impossible to play/finish the game without buying stuff in it. I think at least 30% of the people playing it should be able to do that given they put enough effort into it. If I get a game and notice I can't even pass level 5 without paying for stuff, even after multiple tries, then I'll be uninstalling it.

The game should be balanced in such a way that people who really don't want to pay for it, can finish it, while people who are "lazier" could pay for some stuff to get them over some levels. But even then it shouldn't be like $99 for a game, except maybe for 0.1% or less of the players. For the vast majority of those who play, it shouldn't cost them more than $5-$10.

I think this way you get a game that is very popular in downloads due to it being free to try and play, and it should also make at least as much money as if costing $5-$10, but because it's free to try, and it could get addicting, and also because some players may spend tens of dollars on it, then it also has the potential to make a lot more. Just don't make it so anyone who wants to finish it must spend tens of dollars on it.

Re:The true cost of free-to-play games by mesozoic on Sunday March 10, 2013 @01:15AM (#5350936)
Why do you say it "should" be balanced this way. Is that your gut feeling? A level you have found most profitable through empirical evidence? Or some other reason?

Not an attack I'm curious as to how one arrives at the level of in app purchases. Reflecting on it myself I feel there is likely a maximal profit level that one can achieve that you should go for. Do you think differently?

Re:The true cost of free-to-play games by Symbol on Sunday March 10, 2013 @08:52PM (#5354302)
Hypothetical: if this balanced product was offered for $10 straight up, would you buy it?