PDA

View Full Version : Premium pricing (Lite/Full price on same page)



Killswitch
04-15-2014, 09:17 PM
Obviously we're not on the inside and know the actual reason for this premium pricing but the first few people will probably get a hard time.

Sitting here thinking about it from the mobile aspect.
You have Game_LITE then Game_Full.
Technically this is still free to try and it's probably why some people never understood free to try in the first place. The way it was worded before left room for interpretation. Some people probably thought you had to have a free game with IAP or something like that.

Maybe this could become part of uploading a game where you upload a LITE file and a FULL file. Then when you go to the game's page you have all the info there and LITE is clearly marked. Some developers with games that have levels can now upload like 3 levels without adding that extra layer and if someone wants the game then it's available to them by clicking the FULL button. So you'd have all the info on the page, a LITE option and a FULL option. Instead of having seperate pages, etc.

Of course if it's just premium then they should have that option too, as bad as it is :D
But there needs to be gatekeeping, make sure the pics and game match the uploaded file or there better be a solid refund policy.

If we're not going to get things like a timer option or something to make it easier for developers to do a demo then at least make it easier for them to do this premium thing.

RiotingSpectre
04-15-2014, 09:19 PM
Maybe this could become part of uploading a game where you upload a LITE file and a FULL file. Then when you go to the game's page you have all the info there and LITE is clearly marked.

Good idea. Too bad it was mine that I said in the chatbox you stole :tyrannosaurus:

Rhellik
04-15-2014, 09:19 PM
Since they already filter out games that crash (and have whatchimacalics bad content) they will screen out "fake" games. But prolly only try the for couple minutes.

Kaimega
04-15-2014, 09:26 PM
Ugh.... soo. much. clutter!

Killswitch
04-15-2014, 09:28 PM
Good idea. Too bad it was mine that I said in the chatbox you stole :tyrannosaurus:

I mentioned it earlier this morning. Nice try for 2nd place.


Since they already filter out games that crash (and have whatchimacalics bad content) they will screen out "fake" games. But prolly only try the for couple minutes.

What was the other game...Pacman like game. No one could get it to work.

mmartino
04-15-2014, 09:39 PM
I mentioned it earlier this morning. Nice try for 2nd place.



What was the other game...Pacman like game. No one could get it to work.

I think you mean Munchface. And I think it still doesn't work. At least the last time I tried it didn't

Hydrus
04-15-2014, 10:28 PM
Technically this is still free to try and it's probably why some people never understood free to try in the first place.

OUYA actually started promoting "free to play" first, and then switched to "free to try". I can understand if people are confused with the concept. OUYA was unclear and unorganized with their things from the start.


Maybe this could become part of uploading a game where you upload a LITE file and a FULL file. Then when you go to the game's page you have all the info there and LITE is clearly marked. Some developers with games that have levels can now upload like 3 levels without adding that extra layer and if someone wants the game then it's available to them by clicking the FULL button. So you'd have all the info on the page, a LITE option and a FULL option. Instead of having seperate pages, etc.

I don't like that name. It brings in the idea of phone games. OUYA needs to sort out their UI and make it seem official/professional and less confusing before doing something like this. They need to get rid of the "Free Download" button. For example, games that are not free have "Free Download" buttons on their details page and next to that "Buy". Actual free games have that but without "Buy". It reminds me of those ad sites that pop up, where you get like fifteen "Free Download" buttons across the screen. They can just label it "Demo" instead of "Free Download". If it's a free game, then label it "Free Download".


If we're not going to get things like a timer option or something to make it easier for developers to do a demo then at least make it easier for them to do this premium thing.


Developers just need to stop being lazy. It is not hard to take a portion of the same finished game, and upload it as a demo, or make a home-made timer and implement the code in a game. There is no real easier way, unless OUYA Staff go to their houses/studios and code for them.

Kaimega
04-15-2014, 10:35 PM
I think you mean Munchface. And I think it still doesn't work. At least the last time I tried it didn't

I didn't crash either, it brings up the title screen and an error message saying a network connection is required.. stupid.. but not a crash :)

Killswitch
04-15-2014, 10:42 PM
OUYA actually started promoting "free to play" first, and then switched to "free to try". I can understand if people are confused with the concept. OUYA was unclear and unorganized with their things from the start.

I don't like that name. It brings in the idea of phone games. OUYA needs to sort out their UI and make it seem official/professional and less confusing before doing something like this. They need to get rid of the "Free Download" button. For example, games that are not free have "Free Download" buttons on their details page and next to that "Buy". Actual free games have that but without "Buy". It reminds me of those ad sites that pop up, where you get like fifteen "Free Download" buttons across the screen. They can just label it "Demo" instead of "Free Download". If it's a free game, then label it "Free Download".

Developers just need to stop being lazy. It is not hard to take a portion of the same finished game, and upload it as a demo, or make a home-made timer and implement the code in a game. There is no real easier way, unless OUYA Staff go to their houses/studios and code for them.
They can change the name to whatever they want, it's about the concept. And with Ouya going to tablets anyway, does it matter if they use the same name? I would have preferred to see them move away from mobile mentality but it's here to stay.

If you give the people no excuse then it is easier. They could have some type of built in timer or something but if you allow them to upload as two completely independent files then it takes away some of the issue. The issue remains since free to try is dead.

Schizophretard
04-15-2014, 11:02 PM
I didn't crash either, it brings up the title screen and an error message saying a network connection is required.. stupid.. but not a crash :)

It worked perfectly fine when they launched it and I played it just the other day after months coincidentally. It definitely never crashes for me. The only games that I can think of so far that I have problems with are The Ball and Killing Floor Calamity. The Ball crashes at the white The Ball screen every time. I couldn't even take advantage of the sale because it is unplayable. On Killing Floor Calamity I can't get the carnival level to work. It will either crash while trying or I temporarily make it in before crashing. I have yet to read about others having the same problems so I assume that people can have different problems. Anyway, free to try helped me with The Ball but couldn't with Killing Floor Calamity because I didn't discover the problem with that level until after a purchase. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that sometimes free to try is beneficial for bugs and crashes but sometimes it isn't because you might not find them until after.

Edit: Anyway, I assume OUYA eventually will put in things like KS's suggestion, timers, etc. to help developers with free to try.

Hydrus
04-15-2014, 11:08 PM
They can change the name to whatever they want, it's about the concept. And with Ouya going to tablets anyway, does it matter if they use the same name? I would have preferred to see them move away from mobile mentality but it's here to stay.

The name does matter. I gave an example with the "Free Download" button above, it is confusing and shows poor planning. You can't have a good concept and bad execution, else you get OUYA, which is what we don't want. Right? If OUYA is all about playing games with a console, on the big screen, how it was meant to be, then they need to work with that and if they really feel the need to infect tablets and phones, then at least they should infect them with console mentality and not let the mobile mentality infect OUYA. You get me? Reverse what people say. The OUYA is a phone inside a console, then make a console be inside their phones. It goes beyond than just a name and concept.


If you give the people no excuse then it is easier. They could have some type of built in timer or something but if you allow them to upload as two completely independent files then it takes away some of the issue.

Everything is fine as it is, in terms of game uploads, demos and whatnot. The system works, the problem is the people not willing to accept the system because it invades their comfort zone.


The issue remains since free to try is dead.

My candle is still lit.


http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm97/mathria/kaarsen/candle-flame-1-AJHD.gif?t=1258369992

Oldkid Livegen
04-17-2014, 11:10 AM
Making Ouya IAP non mandatory really opens the platform to more people.
For example, I have zero coding skills but I think I could use Stencyl to make a simple game. I could just make 2 apks, the first one being the free demo and the second one the full paid game. I could just put a text at the end of the demo saying : "If you like this, buy the full version from my developer page" and voilą ! No coding required to make, publish and sell a video game on a home console. How cool is that ?

flamepanther
04-17-2014, 11:54 AM
Good idea. Too bad it was mine that I said in the chatbox you stole :tyrannosaurus:

He stole a chatbox? Wow!

rosse119
04-17-2014, 12:59 PM
I actually don't mind that idea KS, I may do a light version and full version if I can't work out the implementation of IAPs

Hydrus
05-08-2014, 05:30 AM
They need to get rid of the "Free Download" button. For example, games that are not free have "Free Download" buttons on their details page and next to that "Buy". Actual free games have that but without "Buy".

I was looking through some old threads and found this (http://ouyaforum.com/showthread.php?825-OUYA-Games-will-all-be-free-Everything-will-be-an-in-game-purchase).

Every game will be Free to download. Every game will have to have some sort of free aspect to it whether it (a) the entire game is free, (b) a level or multiple levels are free, (c) the game is free but there are in game purchases, or (d) the game is free but there are in-game purchases of add-ons.

There will be no games in the marketplace with a price next to them. They will all be FREE. It's just up to the developer to decide how much of the game they want to make free.

I think OUYA counts demos as full games, but with less 'free' in them. Weird thought.

Sitting Fox
05-09-2014, 02:38 PM
I really think allowing people to tie multiple apks to one game, working out like it does with games with demo and full versions now with IAPs, would be a great thing to do. It would definitely make creating a freely playable part of a game easier for anyone having difficulty implementing IAPs themselves.

Granted, you could technically do it now, creating one part as a free game and the other part as a premium game, I think that seems kind of unappealing. I'd rather my game be listed as one.

Sluup
09-17-2014, 01:36 AM
Browsing the Nintendo eShop on my 3DS, I saw that in the games detail screen to see the ratings, screenshots, trailer, ect... While there is a download button to purchase the game, there is also a demo button like this game has.
http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj117/Slupp_Klopp/E9A19CC0-319A-466A-82B6-FEB8883B89C5_zpsbrnohvjq.jpg
Maybe OUYA Inc. can utilize this idea and start wrapping a demo alongside with the full game on their detail screen, too.

I would like some feedback on what you folks think about this idea and come up with some reasons why it will and will not work with OUYA, and also how it will impact us consumers and developers if it were to be utilized.

RiotingSpectre
09-17-2014, 01:39 AM
I had this idea a couple months ago when I was screaming into their ear when the premium titles started showing up that had their demos in separate tiles in Discover instead of being within the same menu. It's a good idea.

Sluup
09-17-2014, 01:54 AM
I had this idea a couple months ago when I was screaming into their ear when the premium titles started showing up that had their demos in separate tiles in Discover instead of being within the same menu. It's a good idea.

Scream louder! Louder!!!! It is a good idea!!!!!!!!! AAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!

ezraanderson
09-17-2014, 01:57 AM
~
Yes. This would be great, I don't want to release "Free" and "Paid" games/apps and clutter the Discovery Store, So having a "Demo download" and "Paid download" rolled into one game-page would be a very good idea. This would also help eliminate the need for the ODK payment system, which I don't like to include because it fractures my code-base for other android platforms.

RiotingSpectre
09-17-2014, 02:04 AM
They turned down the idea once before when I suggested it months ago and they'll do it again. If you want OUYA Incorporate to listen to anything that you say then create a following and then unleash it on them. With admissible behavior of course.

Killswitch
09-17-2014, 02:43 AM
Didn't I start a thread with the same idea? Same idea I believe me and RS talked about too.

Sluup
09-21-2014, 04:03 AM
I do believe this is a great idea, it would make discover cleaner. Then again, like, only two studios have made standalone demos, so I guess this idea would be pointless to utilize now. But the idea is still great. Smaller file-size to download and try, instead of downloading a gigabyte. I'm looking at you The Cave! But I do hope more independent developers will push out standalone demos to get this idea into consideration. :D

Sitting Fox
09-21-2014, 03:43 PM
Didn't I start a thread with the same idea? Same idea I believe me and RS talked about too.

Yes, you did. xD

I'm still for the idea. Part of the stated reasoning for removing the free-to-try requirement by OUYA, inc was because people couldn't figure out how to implement the ODK and be able to make a demo for their game they wanted to sell.

Allowing for two separate versions in one listing, demo and paid/full, makes a heck of a lot more sense (in regards to the above paragraph) and helps devs who do want to make a demo for a game they want to sell. (I can't speak for everyone, but I don't want my game split up like it's two separate games.) Especially when there is such a lack of documentation to help people implement the ODK on their own, except maybe if you're using Unity (and even then, there was just a thread about how that was not very up to date and whatnot).

And even if they did make the documentation, this would still be a good idea. It's just plain simpler on the dev. The whole thing about premium games was doing it for the devs. However, I would definitely see less of a need for it if there was good documentation to help out, but there isn't much that I can tell.

Like Riot said, it probably just needs a more unified backing behind the idea. They didn't want to listen to someone who just didn't like the organization of it in Discover and doesn't make games for OUYA. It would take work to do, and they've already got work to do. However, they listened to the batch of devs that were dissatisfied with the free-to-try requirement, even though it was against one of their founding principles.

Devs for dual downloads, go go go! xD

Jeffry84
09-21-2014, 04:35 PM
<----this guy approves the idea.

Killswitch
09-30-2014, 06:58 AM
Yes, you did. xD

I'm still for the idea. Part of the stated reasoning for removing the free-to-try requirement by OUYA, inc was because people couldn't figure out how to implement the ODK and be able to make a demo for their game they wanted to sell.

Allowing for two separate versions in one listing, demo and paid/full, makes a heck of a lot more sense (in regards to the above paragraph) and helps devs who do want to make a demo for a game they want to sell. (I can't speak for everyone, but I don't want my game split up like it's two separate games.) Especially when there is such a lack of documentation to help people implement the ODK on their own, except maybe if you're using Unity (and even then, there was just a thread about how that was not very up to date and whatnot).

And even if they did make the documentation, this would still be a good idea. It's just plain simpler on the dev. The whole thing about premium games was doing it for the devs. However, I would definitely see less of a need for it if there was good documentation to help out, but there isn't much that I can tell.

Like Riot said, it probably just needs a more unified backing behind the idea. They didn't want to listen to someone who just didn't like the organization of it in Discover and doesn't make games for OUYA. It would take work to do, and they've already got work to do. However, they listened to the batch of devs that were dissatisfied with the free-to-try requirement, even though it was against one of their founding principles.

Devs for dual downloads, go go go! xD

What she said x2

It's something I want to do REALLY soon...so one page would be great.

Looks like the feature is coming but not in the next OTA, possibly the one after. Of course things can change but that's what we're looking at for now.

Eldon.McGuinness
09-30-2014, 02:22 PM
I really don't get why the ODK would be an issue, OUYA could have just as easily built in a timer that closed an unpurchased game after X amount of time. Demo with 0-2 lines of code being needed at max.



import OUYAstuff

onCreate(){
OUYAstuff.initialize(UUID_OF_GAME)
}

/* init would then check receipt and all the other jazz, then start the game with a timer if there is not a receipt OR without a timer if there is one.
* When the timer is done it uses an OUYAstuff based view to prompt the user to either buy the game to continue or exit the game.
* This could all be done outside of the actual game code, other than the little bit I mentioned up top, and if you are a dev and can not import
* those couple of lines for what ever reason, maybe OUYA could help in those cases or make a simple tutorial for each dev setup that shows how to do it.
* I don't think it would matter much though since there are tutorials already on how to use the ODK so meh.
*/



I think the real issue stems back to many devs do not want demos as many games, regardless of platform, are repetitive at best and lose luster very quickly

Killswitch
10-01-2014, 06:01 AM
People have mentioned timers before, I know I was one of them but others mentioned it too, I'm sure if you search the forum you'll find mentions.

I don't know who these devs are who don't want demos because not many have said that here on the forum. But if you can separate things then you can do a stage of a game as the "lite" version without setting some parameter. Just eliminates another barrier.

Eldon.McGuinness
10-01-2014, 07:31 PM
People have mentioned timers before, I know I was one of them but others mentioned it too

I'm 99.99% sure I was one of them too, though am just too damned lazy to search. Back on topic thought, there really is no reason this could not have been done for ALL games. There would be nothing the "devs" could complain about then since it is a minimal intrusion into their codebase, unlike the current ODK setup.

*Looks OUYA's way* You hear that? It is the sound of change knocking at your door...Change the store back to requiring demos, I refuse to buy a game that I can not try out and so do many others. Make the ODK a no brainer for doing a demo if you have to, but c'mon do something.