Reply With QuoteActually, I think you should take out the results of the vote on the dev forums, as it'll be interesting to see if the poll here / gamers expectations meet with what devs are doing.
Edit: you can also vote multiple ways?
Sell in-game features (advanced game options, unlockable content)
Sell in-game goods and services (energy, bullets, building upgrades)
Unlock the full game for one price, after a free demo level
Add in-game advertisements
Other method, not listed here
None: the games should be totally free
So, OUYA recently held a poll for developers, asking them, "How do you plan to monetize your games". We thought it would be interesting to take a poll of gamers and ask you "How would you like to see developers monetize their games?"
Please give your opinion as a gamer, of how you would like to see games monetized on OUYA. Feel free to leave some comment and/or elaborate on your answer.
Actually, I think you should take out the results of the vote on the dev forums, as it'll be interesting to see if the poll here / gamers expectations meet with what devs are doing.
Edit: you can also vote multiple ways?
Demo then single purchase. $1 hats, do not want. Also pay to win sucks donkey danglies
Exactly this. In app purchase are awful.Originally Posted by d_brennen
I like the idea of full game + ability to play the full game for a limited time/lives for a small ammount as if you were playing an arcade game
I completely support paid apps and games as it gives back to the devs.
IMHO having 2 versions (demo & full) will make the game list pretty cluttered and the experience won't be that good. I propose that the games should be free for a limited time after which the user should pay for the game. Also I expect games to be under 10$. AAA may carry a heftier price tag.
Pay and unlock full version.
PLEASE NO MICROTRANSACTIONS!!!
I could live with in-game ads if they are conveniently positioned and if someone make a total free game they can always ask for donations as I ALWAYS support indie devs if their games are good and I play them.
I second that!
Microtransactions aren't inherently evil and can actually result in far more revenue than standard paid.
BUT.
Developers have a tendency to be lazy here. They say, "oh, we'll just stick progressively more powerful weapons in here and give them progressively higher prices".
The problem with this approach of course is that developers must continually release new items, and they tend to try and top their last items (so the game ends up with progressively more and more overpowered weaponry which in reality costs players a few dollars to buy and completely smack down any and all noobs in their path)
To this day, the only game I've seen that does it right is Team Fortress 2. Not once have I felt like I was at a disadvantage for not purchasing in-game items. The items are all properly and carefully balanced with each other, so that paid weapons are not more powerful than default weapons, rather they simply offer a different experience (such as a minigun that is slower to spin up and deals less damage, but makes up for it by slowing down enemies)
But this leads me to believe F2P is difficult to balance, and developers rarely even attempt to do so (I remember one time playing Battlefield: P4F, I pulled off a headshot but it turns out the target was wearing some uber helmet they purchased that negates any damage bonus from a headshot, so they were mostly unscathed. I rage quit right then and there)
I actually prefer the demo unlock system myself, coupled with purchasable DLCs (like map packs and such).
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks