Outrageous In-App purchases? Unethical? Will you do it when GS get this feature?

design219

So, another "Food Fight" game is out, this one has added the "™" symbol to it's name.

That doesn't bother me, my "Food Fight!" game is completely free so I'm not losing anything. But, this "company" has 2 free iPhone games, and each game has VERY expensive In-App purchases.

As a parent with 2 kids who have iDevices, I hate this. It seem predatory and sneaky as all get out. I've locked out in-app purchases on my kids devices, but I'll bet most people don't.

The purchases in these games are not enhancements to the app, like adding functionality, but just more "currency" for use in the game... so you might feel the need to purchase again and again. The purchases start at $4.99, and on one game go up to $99.99.

Am I off base, or does this seem wrong to anyone? I know in-app purchasing is coming to GS, so has anyone thought about how you will use it?

TheHoogler

I think IAP are fine for two purposes (other than opening full game):

Buying something that you could have achieved for free: In an RPG I'm making, I'm hoping to utilize IAP for currency purposes. They could have played through the game and earned the money, but the money will allow them to buy a better weapon, etc., so they can progress faster. This does not deprive the user who does not do IAP any aspect of the game. This is just like Angry Birds Mighty Eagle.

Buying novelty items that don't affect game: I have an upcoming game that features a "hero". The game is in grayscale, and is supposed to be a work of art (the graphics are going to be awesome). Anyways, I am thinking of offering users the chance to buy the "hero" a different look. The original weapon is a katana, but maybe the user would like looking at a claymore. So for .99 they can buy the claymore. It doesn't add anything except to the visuals of the game. I should stress that the game will make obvious that it is a novelty item with no ingame benefit other than adding to the visual appeal.

The predatory nature of IAP lies in the quickness of the IAP. If Apple follows through on making users reenter password when making an IAP, this should stop accidental button pressing and children from making unwanted purchases.

I don't find uses like these predatory, as long as there is no deception. As a parent, you did exactly what you needed to do in blocking IAP.

I'm a fan of the free market (which maybe exists in the Apple store - not going to get into Institutional Economics - read Veblen!), so I think that offering anything for sale in an open and honest setting is fine. I know a lot of people here shun market practices for the sake of gaming integrity, but really, if you want to make a living building games, you will need to utilize the tools that allow us to do that. I think by being honest, I can maintain the integrity of the game. Like a band who offers both a studio and live album, they are offering two different experiences.

design219

@TheHoogler, your prices sound very reasonable, and sounds like you have a good plan for using in-app purchasing.

I agree about the importance of free markets, but I also think it's unethical to make a free game then slip in a $99.99 dollar in-app purchase. I mean really.

I hope everyone approaches this functionality the way you are. Best of luck with your game.

design219

uptimistik said:
Well! You guys are some ethical upshots! I plan on charging $99.99 just to hit the Play button!

Haha, well, there was a thread about a year ago (if I remember correctly) where a user changed the price on his game for a day from $.99 to $99 and had three sales. I don't know what happened with that. He said he did it as a joke, but that's the kind of thing that I would hope Apple would frown on.

olster1

I read somezhere that with IAP, you need to have to have a range from the samllest amount to the largest amount. Not to take advantage of the the youngens but to allow people who are willing to part with the cash to do so. Qs soon as IAP arrives, thats my strategy.

BlackbirdStudios

design219 said:
but I also think it's unethical to make a free game then slip in a $99.99 dollar in-app purchase. I mean really.

That's kind of hard to judge. A lot of apps are not "slipping" $99 IAPs, they are available for the person to get more volume of currency, at a lower price per (credit) So, it just depends on how popular the game is. If the currency is worth that much to people, I guess just let them have it. I have had a game before where I would have easily purchased $99 of in game currency because of how much I like the game.

I wouldn't call it unethical, because that's not really lacking ethics. I would just call it crazy

SlickZero

Depends on how it's used. Having IAP in a lite version to get the full version is absolutely fine. I personally don't care for IAP used in ways to get more in-game money, or items, but it seems to be the norm.

Unfortunately, GameSalad has a lot of unethical, bottom feeders, like the ones that publish templates as is, and these types of people are going to take a crappy game, and think that they will make it better by fleecing the few customers that unfortunately get scammed into buying their P.O.S. by having ridiculous IAPs in their games. But then again, it will be a Pro feature, and thankfully, the bottom feeders don't buy Pro, so we'll have to see what happens when it becomes available.

Chunkypixels

Im with you on the most part design219, theres something very unsavoury about how some devs use in-app purchasing... and as we've already seen many times here on the GS forums, Im pretty sure were going to be witness to some downright abusive implementations of IAP once its available.

If its done honestly, and presented clearly, with enough option for the user to change their mind...then I have no problem with apps giving the option to buy a pair of golden underpants for $99...

What I do have a problem with is games aimed specifically at children, with IAP, especially some of the ones Ive seen, where the developer tries to put in "trap" buttons, with little or no warning, in places that the player has a high likelyhood of pressing....

Ive downloaded a number of kids apps, for my 4 & 5 year old nieces to play, only to be horrified at some of the tricks being pulled regarding IAP and Ads.

I think IAP, and Ads have no place in a childrens/family/education game, and developers opting to use such, are showing a real lack of moral judgement.

quantumsheep

Chunkypixels said:
Im with you on the most part design219, theres something very unsavoury about how some devs use in-app purchasing... and as we've already seen many times here on the GS forums, Im pretty sure were going to be witness to some downright abusive implementations of IAP once its available.

If its done honestly, and presented clearly, with enough option for the user to change their mind...then I have no problem with apps giving the option to buy a pair of golden underpants for $99...

What I do have a problem with is games aimed specifically at children, with IAP, especially some of the ones Ive seen, where the developer tries to put in "trap" buttons, with little or no warning, in places that the player has a high likelyhood of pressing....

Ive downloaded a number of kids apps, for my 4 & 5 year old nieces to play, only to be horrified at some of the tricks being pulled regarding IAP and Ads.

I think IAP, and Ads have no place in a childrens/family/education game, and developers opting to use such, are showing a real lack of moral judgement.

Got to agree with you there, sir.

What worries me is that multi-million dollar companies like Bethesda and CCP (eve online) screw up IAP - I'm thinking Horse armour for the elder scrolls IV and a monocle for in-game characters in EVE.

I shudder to think what a bunch of amateurs like us lot here would do! Hopefully my fears will be unfounded...

QS

Weswog

I think the only way to make IAP fair is if you make it so that the person unlocks like 25-50 more levels with IAP purchases instead of getting stupid in game stuff (weapons and stuff) you should earn the weapons and not have it handed to you. Just my 2 cents

Cheers, Weswog

quantumsheep

Weswog said:
I think the only way to make IAP fair is if you make it so that the person unlocks like 25-50 more levels with IAP purchases instead of getting stupid in game stuff (weapons and stuff) you should earn the weapons and not have it handed to you. Just my 2 cents

Cheers, Weswog

That entirely depends on whether your app is free or not.

If it's free, then fair enough, charge for more levels.

If you've already paid for an app though, you might be a bit peeved that all levels aren't included in the price and you have to spend more.

Well, *I* would be!

QS

Weswog

quantumsheep said:
That entirely depends on whether your app is free or not.

If it's free, then fair enough, charge for more levels.

If you've already paid for an app though, you might be a bit peeved that all levels aren't included in the price and you have to spend more.

Well, *I* would be!

QS

Yeah me too! I mean the free apps that have IAP purchases can have extra levels but I don't like the whole weapon buying or farmville with cash to help your FAKE crops.

Cheers, Weswog

NesesitaGames

Does anyone know whether In-App purchases are supported on Mac App Store games?

imGua

Don't see anything unethical in app purchase, when you buy in-game currency. All social games do that. And some people are willing to pay thousands of dollars in those games. It's their choice.

calvin9403

I think I will made my next game free, and it has IAP so you can unlock levels but thing etc

BlackbirdStudios

imGua said:
Don't see anything unethical in app purchase, when you buy in-game currency. All social games do that. And some people are willing to pay thousands of dollars in those games. It's their choice.

+1

BlackbirdStudios

I don't see anything unethical about this situation:

Let's say I make a game with 100 levels, and then I decide to take time to make another 100 levels. It would be perfectly fine to charge $0.99 for that. Of course it is always good to give some apps level upgrades for free, (hence Angry Birds) but I think in this situation (especially if its a good game) its ok to charge the 99 cents.

calvin9403

BlackbirdStudios said:
I don't see anything unethical about this situation:

Let's say I make a game with 100 levels, and then I decide to take time to make another 100 levels. It would be perfectly fine to charge $0.99 for that. Of course it is always good to give some apps level upgrades for free, (hence Angry Birds) but I think in this situation (especially if its a good game) its ok to charge the 99 cents.

yes totally agree

and can we charge for the play button? like there is only a button when it is out there and after you purchase you can play it(again because crack apps)

or apple will reject it?

design219

BlackbirdStudios said:
... but I think in this situation (especially if its a good game) its ok to charge the 99 cents.

Yes, sounds very reasonable.

But what do you guys think about an InAppPurchase of $99 bucks? That's what this game game "company" has in their other iPhone game.

My point is, yes, it's a free market, but this seems like an obvious "If we get just a few suckers, idiots or little kids we'll be rich" type of move. I really dislike what they are doing. (okay, I'm probably a little upset about them using my game name with a TM tack on too.)