frauenfelder — 2014-04-17T12:40:40-04:00 — #1
hurleyef — 2014-04-17T12:51:48-04:00 — #2
This looks fantastic. I can't wait for the android version to drop.
prezombie — 2014-04-17T12:56:58-04:00 — #3
Even if it is pretty, I really doubt it's worth confirming to big gaming that it's profitable to hold back three quarters of the game to sell as 'dlc'.
Five dollars for the first chapter, then a dollar each for the other three chapters, not to mention the paid hint system and a walkthrough that costs twice as much as the actual gameplay. sheesh.
If it was two bucks a chapter, it would be marginally less scummy.
urnotafish — 2014-04-17T13:12:55-04:00 — #4
OMG. Developer wants enough money to buy a coffee and a samich? Highway robbery.
hurleyef — 2014-04-17T13:17:59-04:00 — #5
From the review on pocket lint:
Each objective you accomplish at the end of a level goes towards a total that can be used to unlock the next level pack - in the shape of a new boxed board game. There are five available at the moment, with four of those needing you to unlock them as you progress. ...
If you don't want to play your way through to unlock the packs, they can be bought through in-app purchases, but we haven't found the need. You can also buy hints that will help you complete levels, but again we haven't needed to.
In fact, in-app purchasing seems to be there because it's all the rage rather than a necessary evil. And we like that.
theflash — 2014-04-17T13:24:40-04:00 — #6
Perfect, that's what I was hoping. The game looks gorgeous, I was hoping they didn't make the whole thing un-purchasable by forcing IAP.
samsam — 2014-04-17T13:28:19-04:00 — #7
It looks amazing. I was really confused by the post at first, because it appeared to be a stop-motion video for a boardgame.
t3knomanser — 2014-04-17T14:01:56-04:00 — #8
It's nice to know that their DLC isn't evil. How's the actual gameplay, though?
jandrese — 2014-04-17T14:07:36-04:00 — #9
IAP is here to stay unless people start paying a more reasonable price up front for mobile games. Asking for a full and complete game that someone worked on for months for $3 is almost an insult. These aren't stupid little puzzle games that someone tossed together in a weekend, yet they are priced like them, which is why developers are forced to make up the difference in IAP.
I would be a lot happier if the games got more expensive, but dumped IAPs entirely. Maybe have a free or very cheap demo version, and a full priced regular game.
ben_ehlers — 2014-04-17T15:11:28-04:00 — #10
The typically ebullient Touch Arcade gave it 5/5. The Board Game Geek forums are also pretty jazzed by it too.
bfarnn — 2014-04-17T15:14:22-04:00 — #11
You know, I'm gonna go ahead and recommend it. I've only played halfway through level one, but so far it scratches a lot of rewarding itches. Pretty compelling puzzles with the right balance of logic and trial-and-error-learning.
wishlish — 2014-04-17T15:27:38-04:00 — #12
I don't have a problem with IAP at all- devs have to make money. What I have a big problem with is the lack of disclosure of IAP, and the App Store web listing is a prime example of this.
The app description never ever mentions the IAP. The Top In-App Purchases reveals some of the IAP, but if you didn't read the Pocket Link review linked above, you wouldn't really understand what's in there. And when you get something like this:
3. Unlock Classic Cha...$0.99
...well, it's just more frustrating than it needs to be.
I'm less upset about this sort of thing when the app is free to start, though it still bothers me. But this is a real pickle- I'm supposed to pay $4.99 for the app, and then I might have to use some IAP to finish the game, and the extent of that IAP isn't evident from the App Store listing.
I'm probably going to buy the game at some point- it looks like a lot of fun, and I'm happy to pay a few bucks for a great iPad game. But I'd also love to see more open disclosure of a game with IAP, and am puzzled why developers shy away from it.
daneel — 2014-04-17T16:02:11-04:00 — #13
I hate IAP, I won't buy it, and the games that have it are irrevocably broken because of it. The model leads to bad games focussing on grinding. I have and will continue to pay decent prices for decent games (most recently, FTL, well worth the $10 on iPad, and Monument Valley for I think $5, which is too short, but tres awesome). Even these 'expensive' games are still chump change - if you're not prepared to pay even the price of a beer for a game that you'll get hours of entertainment from I'm not sure how you can expect people to write them for you. I'll happily keep chucking money at people like Capy and Vlambeer.
There was one exception - I bought the expansion pack for Scribblenauts Remix because I enjoyed the game and wanted more of it - but that was buying extra levels a year or so after the original game was released.
I really don't understand the idea of buying head starts, extra lives in infinite runners etc (I don't understand why anyone playing them would want them, because all it does it make the idea of a high score table utterly pointless, and that's all the game is).
Bought and loved PvZ. Haven't even opened PvZ2 because of IAP.
Also, I don't see the point of locked content at all. Just open it all up, let everyone try it. Why restrict it access to people who get to later levels? What purpose does it serve?
waetherman — 2014-04-18T08:22:52-04:00 — #14
How is a $3 price for a game any more "insulting" than paying $1.29 for a song on iTunes? Successful games make millions, and being low in price helps a game be successful. I have little sympathy for someone who spends months making a bad game, prices it poorly and makes no money. Potentially making millions from a few months work is a privilege, not a right, and developers should thank their lucky stars that they're in an industry that allows them such flexible, creative and lucrative work opportunities, which largely exist because of protections provided by copyright and patent laws.
jandrese — 2014-04-18T10:36:31-04:00 — #15
Is it common for artists to put 3000+ hours into a single song? If they are, then I apologize because I've been underpaying for music then.
mattpolicastro — 2014-04-18T15:02:23-04:00 — #16
It's a great game. Bought it last night, and spent quite a bit of time getting halfway through. The IAP is extremely tasteful—I was tempted to buy more hints, but they were virtually invisible otherwise.
I've always been a big Hitman fan, and GO is a lovely, quirky addition to the series. Solid puzzles, beautiful presentation.
lanthade — 2014-04-18T15:27:37-04:00 — #17
Bought it last night, I've now played through all 5 currently available levels. I was not once prompted for any IAP. I only used one of the 5 hints the game comes with (didn't know what it was when I clicked on it).
Based on this I'm led to believe that IAP is only there for people who don't have the patience or Google ability to solve the puzzles on their own.
PvZ2 was mentioned above by daneel - I've played through that whole game w/o a single IAP as well. That game does require IAP to unlock some items. Near as I can tell with Hitman Go there is no content that is only accessible from IAP.
Hitman Go is an enjoyable game, not hard, but it does have some tricky spots if you want to get all the points (I still have 9 points to go back and get). The value proposition is pretty good. $5 for about 5-6 solid hours of well crafted play time. Considering I've paid more per hour for console games I think that's fine. The only downside is it has little re-playability. Hopefully they make more levels.
itsumishi — 2014-04-19T00:03:07-04:00 — #18
I'm no developer, but your description of the gaming industry sounds very different from virtually every other description I've heard. Flexible, creative and lucrative? Perhaps for a lucky few, but more often I hear about excessive demands for all employees to work plenty of unpaid overtime.
waetherman — 2014-04-19T07:25:47-04:00 — #19
itsumishi — 2014-04-19T09:31:42-04:00 — #20
Well that's one company, and from the sounds of things they're the "Google" of the industry. It's also worth noting they laid off about 20 per cent of their workforce in one go* less than 12 months ago. Here're some insights into other parts of the industry:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-09-18-game-development-the-humane-way - This one is about a company trying to do things more humanely, but they point out this isn't the norm.
*Wikipedia states they've got just over 2000 employees as of December last year.
next page →