I haven't decided on a price yet, however, I will be basing my price on feedback about the quality of my game and also the length of playability in my game. If it's a short 90 minutes and the quality is above average, then probably $5.
Depending on the store model, I would expect price to develop very similarly to the google or apple app store. I wonder if the OUYA store will have fixed price tiers or be free form. I don't have a strong opinion on it, but I like the idea of fixed tiers from a consumer simplicity point of view.
Emil "AngryAnt" Johansen Game developer, AI specialist, Unity expert http://AngryAnt.com
Depending on the store model, I would expect price to develop very similarly to the google or apple app store. I wonder if the OUYA store will have fixed price tiers or be free form. I don't have a strong opinion on it, but I like the idea of fixed tiers from a consumer simplicity point of view.
I like fixed tiers as well, and I think it fits well with this console.
To delve a little deeper i'd like to bring an economic viewpoint to this discussion. Do you think with the lower price point of 99$ consumers will be expecting low priced items? I know that the OUYA has a "everything is free" mentality to it. Which means that we'll all have to offer up some sort of trial (which is a very good thing in my opinion). But what will the consumer expect, everything to stay free? Will we have to resort to in-game advertisements or monetized in-game content? I guess only time will tell.
Yep, that's one of the key points. The In-App-Purchases will be visible in the OUYA Store. Currently, when setting up an IAP, you fill out price and name and what kind of product it is (Consumable or Entitlement). My guess is that information will be visible to the user so they don't download a demo and expect the game to be 100% free only to be slapped in the face with an open coffer asking for money or else they can't play anymore. Surprising customers is always a bad idea :D
Yep, that's one of the key points. The In-App-Purchases will be visible in the OUYA Store. Currently, when setting up an IAP, you fill out price and name and what kind of product it is (Consumable or Entitlement). My guess is that information will be visible to the user so they don't download a demo and expect the game to be 100% free only to be slapped in the face with an open coffer asking for money or else they can't play anymore. Surprising customers is always a bad idea :D
I haven't worked with the ODK yet, do you know exactly how the IAP works or are the details still sketchy? I'm sure it will be possible to add some sort of timed trial to a game and then allow the user to purchase the game in full through the IAP.
Any team members care to comment on this? Does anyone know?
You can do whatever you want on your end. If you want a timed trial, that's up to you. The IAP is just for the purchasing of the product, nothing more. My guess, since i haven't looked at it either, your application will get a callback and the player will be able to progress or whatever you want to do :)
Given the choice, I would probably charge $10 for the game I'm working on at the moment, but considering the cheap price of the Ouya and what gamers have said in various polls on the subject, I'd have lowered that to $5.
Trouble is, the game is essentially a multiplayer board game. That doesn't lend itself to having a demo, nor to having a free trial period, and only the most hardcore / dedicated fans are likely to go for extras and expansions
I totally understand why Ouya has gone down the f2p / free route, (and yes, I could have chosen to made a different game), but it does give me an extra problem that otherwise wouldn't have existed
SpoonThumb, here's something I learned from working on facebook games in the past. Limit the number of times they can play and they will pay to play more. That said, Let people play something like 15 minutes for free per day. If they want more than 15 minutes, charge them. Give them options of how much they can unlock (1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, Unlimited). Being a board game, people may want to learn how to play really well before spending money on something, so give them that chance :)
I hope you're also considering some form of AI. The last thing you want is for only 1 user to be online that is a potential paying customer and have nobody for them to play against. Shoot me a message on here if you want to talk f2p :)
My game is fairly similar to how a table top would play with set of pieces to create a party. Tons of different pieces to choose from based on how you want to play. It is an asynchronous board game that is played on a hexagonal chess board and plays like a tactics RPG. Allowing people to play tons of games simultaneously like Draw Something or Words with Friends.
I'm going down a generally F2P route... with microtransactions as a way of expansion rather than power or early access. The credits you earn in-game would be the exact same that you purchase, every "piece" would be the exact same price (and can also be bought in static starter "sets" or booster sets of X; kind of like Magic: TG) and you would earn enough credits quickly enough to allow you to have a decent amount of starting pieces, which are completely chosen by you. Regular play would give you credits at a starting initial rush rate and then level off into a standard daily rate.
And in addition using a cycling "free" set of pieces that can be used, allowing people to have a base set of pieces even if they haven't spent any of their earned or purchased credits. My game mechanics allow people to use multiples and any combination so the pieces are extremely cheap. Think like a dollar for three of a single piece, a static set of 4 different ones, or random set of 5 (parties will be around 5-6 pieces max)... plus a new piece or two to come out weekly/bi-weekly/monthly. Depending on how things work out of course on the dev time behind a single piece.
Post edited by GodlyPerfection on
Aggro Tactics - A tactical strategy virtual board game built with Unity3D 4.0, designed around the concept of Threat/Aggro inspired by the mechanics of chess and a customizable party like in table top games.
It only takes an hour or two to play the whole game through, so I'll just limit the number of new games you can start before you have to buy the game. I can throw in a free single player 'practice mode' so people can get a feel for the game without wasting their limited plays.
I like the way you assume multiplayer means online/internet. I'll do that if I have time, but my main focus is to get four friends round someone's house, round the TV, playing this game together
As for AI, I failed first year AI programming module at uni. I know my weaknesses...
It only takes an hour or two to play the whole game through, so I'll just limit the number of new games you can start before you have to buy the game. I can throw in a free single player 'practice mode' so people can get a feel for the game without wasting their limited plays.
I like the way you assume multiplayer means online/internet. I'll do that if I have time, but my main focus is to get four friends round someone's house, round the TV, playing this game together
As for AI, I failed first year AI programming module at uni. I know my weaknesses...
Limiting the number of full plays to entice the player to purchase a game is actually a pretty innovative idea, did you come up with that yourself or are you emulating some other app?
And if I where you I'd read up on A.I programming and really get good at it. Your not gonna want to cut features just because you don't understand them, it's such a crucial time in this consoles young life that you can't afford to make a game that's lacking. We've all got to capitalize on this great opportunity, new digital markets only come around every so often, and it pays to be in there first. But of course that's just my opinion, I've been in the tough position of having to cut features before too, so I can sympathize.
yeah i prefer the term local-multiplayer for clarification. I'm sure the OUYA market will clarify this (much like XBL). Also, local multiplayer should be much more sensible anyway, as not everyone will have an OUYA to join up online with their mates.
Can't find aapt.exe? Temp fix: Copy another one from 'android_sdk/build-tools/17.0.0' back to your 'platform-tools' -=Hicsy=- PM meFacebook
I thought that up just now... can't be the first to have done so though
The other idea I'd been mulling was to have players each put in a certain number of special coins at the start of each multiplayer game (same amount for everyone). Like an ante in poker. The coins can be spent for special power ups during game, but once you run out, that's it for that game. Then you (as developer) sell the coins.
You can even encourage people not to drop out of multiplayer games by giving them back any unused coins, but only if they complete the game
Like Bonanza or Settlers of Catan, the game really comes alive with the trading because you're trading against other people. I actually already programmed an AI that does the mechanical part of the game. It isn't great, but it works. However, my last game suffered from major scope creep and a pile of features that didn't really add to the game, so improving it to a point where I'd feel happy including it gets pushed way down the list
This discussion may be in violation of US law! (I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice).
From "The Small Business Start-Up-Kit - A Step-by-Step Legal Guide, 6th edition" published by Nolo. Excerpt from Page 94 - "On a cautionary note, be aware that antitrust laws forbid business competitors to fix, or even merely discuss, prices. For this reason, you won't find newsgroups or bulletin boards online where other businesses in a certain industry offer specific info on their pricing. Both online and off, pricing discussions among businesses in the same industry are not just taboo, they're illegal."
This discussion is not about price fixing. The discussion is about the value and price of a game that we intend to sell to the public. We're not discussing behind closed doors to raise the price of the market on the consumer forcing them to pay higher prices for a good/service. There's a large difference between a public discussion about how much people are considering selling their products at and actually forcing the market's price up.
Unfortunately LudemeGames is right, in th US it's illegal to discuss pricing within the same industry. The point being, what if we all decided that we'd all charge $1000 for each of our games? No games would be cheap, so all users would have to pay that über high amount, they wouldn't have a choice.
Perhaps just talking style of purchases using subjective terms like "a lot", "a little less", "the same price", etc.
^ And I'd say the concept of under cutting helps that a lot... lol...
Aggro Tactics - A tactical strategy virtual board game built with Unity3D 4.0, designed around the concept of Threat/Aggro inspired by the mechanics of chess and a customizable party like in table top games.
Personally i think it all boils down to quality of the game and length of gameplay that can be had.
For really exceptional works of art i would expect to see anywhere from $5-$20 but for basic casual games $1-3 roughly. Ouya still has to take their cut from each sale you make as well, so 99 cents isnt going to be much of a profit after ouya takes their cut to keep the store/system running.
I would hate for the majority of the community to either just give away all of their stuff for free or charge nearly nothing for it. This ends up shooting most other developers in the foot if they have a large scale project that should cost a bit more than the standard 99 cent app/game.
If the trend is set to give away most games for free or charge only 99 cents, then the community gets this mentality that since most games are cheap than 3-5 dollars is sky high. This could potentially drive off developers wanting to make a large nice quality stuff that does cost a bit more only due to the lack of a community willing to pay as they are expecting to pay nothing for everything.
Yup. this is my biggest fear too. Some good game will be tagged with low price by the Developer them self (because of some certain reason, like expanding their brand, their studio fame/name, and did not want to use the game price as their main income, etc).
If this is happened, it will kill other Developers with good game who wanted to tag their game with reasonable price.
Imagine like this "Okay, I've create a cool 3D game. This is worth 10 USD" But then, another "cooler" game only tagged for, let's say... 1 USD. If these two game is in the same genre, and if I was this "10 USD developer", I will get pissed off.
I just hope that it wont become like the android marketplace where alot of stuff is 1 dollar. I am willing to pay 5 - 20 dollars for a quality game on OUYA and I hope others will too.
I really hope mobile pricing trends don't infect the Ouya as well; this isn't a device you pull out for a few minutes on the bus. With a full gamepad, an overclocked chip, and a comfy couch, there's room for games of the sort you see on PC, XBLA, PSN, etc.
Games like Fez, Super Meat Boy, Dustforce, Mark of the Ninja, Faster than Light, Castle Crashers, etc. All of which are in the $10-15 price range (excluding sales).
That said, with the Ouya's tiny initial market of 60k units, even with rapid growth there's no way $0.99 will support a developer. So while I do expect some developers to launch ports at mobile prices, I hope it will quickly trend upward towards a more sustainable price point.
I think the more casual games will be cheaper (probably $5 or less) and the more hardcore games will be upwards of that. Just speculating, but that's what I think will happen.
EDIT: Yeah, and as noct points out, a $1 game on the OUYA just won't be profitable.
Post edited by Killa_Maaki on
You didn't remember the plot of the Doctor Who movie because there was none; Just a bunch of plot holes strung together.
A good rule of thumb ive seen already was the final fantasy release on the android.. they charged (from what i thought i heard) about 15-20 dollar range. So i would think the 3-10 dollar range for average indie apps/games wouldnt be out of the question.
Bottom line if players want the game, they'll pay for it if they think its worth it. Just dont go overboard on the pricing and set the pricing at what you yourself would pay for a decent game.
I know id easily drop 10-20 dollars on the right games if i thought they were something id play and enjoy.
I just hope that it wont become like the android marketplace where alot of stuff is 1 dollar. I am willing to pay 5 - 20 dollars for a quality game on OUYA and I hope others will too.
Yeah I want it to be like XBLA and PSN and all the great games you can get there, rather than being full with 99cents gimmicky games.
But it would be thoughtful from the devs to set some kind of guideline up for the F2P thing. Otherwise I could imagine the store will be swamped with Games that greet you with game unlock IAP on startup.
So there should be some minimum playtime requirement or something to get your Game into the OUYA store.
sodafountan
Posts: 38Member
Comments
Game developer, AI specialist, Unity expert
http://AngryAnt.com
To delve a little deeper i'd like to bring an economic viewpoint to this discussion. Do you think with the lower price point of 99$ consumers will be expecting low priced items? I know that the OUYA has a "everything is free" mentality to it. Which means that we'll all have to offer up some sort of trial (which is a very good thing in my opinion). But what will the consumer expect, everything to stay free? Will we have to resort to in-game advertisements or monetized in-game content? I guess only time will tell.
Any team members care to comment on this? Does anyone know?
Trouble is, the game is essentially a multiplayer board game. That doesn't lend itself to having a demo, nor to having a free trial period, and only the most hardcore / dedicated fans are likely to go for extras and expansions
I totally understand why Ouya has gone down the f2p / free route, (and yes, I could have chosen to made a different game), but it does give me an extra problem that otherwise wouldn't have existed
Website
I hope you're also considering some form of AI. The last thing you want is for only 1 user to be online that is a potential paying customer and have nobody for them to play against. Shoot me a message on here if you want to talk f2p :)
-=Hicsy=-
PM me Facebook
I'm going down a generally F2P route... with microtransactions as a way of expansion rather than power or early access. The credits you earn in-game would be the exact same that you purchase, every "piece" would be the exact same price (and can also be bought in static starter "sets" or booster sets of X; kind of like Magic: TG) and you would earn enough credits quickly enough to allow you to have a decent amount of starting pieces, which are completely chosen by you. Regular play would give you credits at a starting initial rush rate and then level off into a standard daily rate.
And in addition using a cycling "free" set of pieces that can be used, allowing people to have a base set of pieces even if they haven't spent any of their earned or purchased credits. My game mechanics allow people to use multiples and any combination so the pieces are extremely cheap. Think like a dollar for three of a single piece, a static set of 4 different ones, or random set of 5 (parties will be around 5-6 pieces max)... plus a new piece or two to come out weekly/bi-weekly/monthly. Depending on how things work out of course on the dev time behind a single piece.
Founder of ReachingPerfection.com
It only takes an hour or two to play the whole game through, so I'll just limit the number of new games you can start before you have to buy the game. I can throw in a free single player 'practice mode' so people can get a feel for the game without wasting their limited plays.
I like the way you assume multiplayer means online/internet. I'll do that if I have time, but my main focus is to get four friends round someone's house, round the TV, playing this game together
As for AI, I failed first year AI programming module at uni. I know my weaknesses...
Website
Just bribe @AngryAnt I hear he's got a soft spot for AI :) Only kidding hehe
And if I where you I'd read up on A.I programming and really get good at it. Your not gonna want to cut features just because you don't understand them, it's such a crucial time in this consoles young life that you can't afford to make a game that's lacking. We've all got to capitalize on this great opportunity, new digital markets only come around every so often, and it pays to be in there first. But of course that's just my opinion, I've been in the tough position of having to cut features before too, so I can sympathize.
-=Hicsy=-
PM me Facebook
The other idea I'd been mulling was to have players each put in a certain number of special coins at the start of each multiplayer game (same amount for everyone). Like an ante in poker. The coins can be spent for special power ups during game, but once you run out, that's it for that game. Then you (as developer) sell the coins.
You can even encourage people not to drop out of multiplayer games by giving them back any unused coins, but only if they complete the game
Like Bonanza or Settlers of Catan, the game really comes alive with the trading because you're trading against other people. I actually already programmed an AI that does the mechanical part of the game. It isn't great, but it works. However, my last game suffered from major scope creep and a pile of features that didn't really add to the game, so improving it to a point where I'd feel happy including it gets pushed way down the list
Website
From "The Small Business Start-Up-Kit - A Step-by-Step Legal Guide, 6th edition" published by Nolo. Excerpt from Page 94 - "On a cautionary note, be aware that antitrust laws forbid business competitors to fix, or even merely discuss, prices. For this reason, you won't find newsgroups or bulletin boards online where other businesses in a certain industry offer specific info on their pricing. Both online and off, pricing discussions among businesses in the same industry are not just taboo, they're illegal."
Website
^ And I'd say the concept of under cutting helps that a lot... lol...
Founder of ReachingPerfection.com
For really exceptional works of art i would expect to see anywhere from $5-$20 but for basic casual games $1-3 roughly. Ouya still has to take their cut from each sale you make as well, so 99 cents isnt going to be much of a profit after ouya takes their cut to keep the store/system running.
I would hate for the majority of the community to either just give away all of their stuff for free or charge nearly nothing for it. This ends up shooting most other developers in the foot if they have a large scale project that should cost a bit more than the standard 99 cent app/game.
If the trend is set to give away most games for free or charge only 99 cents, then the community gets this mentality that since most games are cheap than 3-5 dollars is sky high. This could potentially drive off developers wanting to make a large nice quality stuff that does cost a bit more only due to the lack of a community willing to pay as they are expecting to pay nothing for everything.
Some good game will be tagged with low price by the Developer them self (because of some certain reason, like expanding their brand, their studio fame/name, and did not want to use the game price as their main income, etc).
If this is happened, it will kill other Developers with good game who wanted to tag their game with reasonable price.
Imagine like this "Okay, I've create a cool 3D game. This is worth 10 USD"
But then, another "cooler" game only tagged for, let's say... 1 USD.
If these two game is in the same genre, and if I was this "10 USD developer", I will get pissed off.
Games like Fez, Super Meat Boy, Dustforce, Mark of the Ninja, Faster than Light, Castle Crashers, etc. All of which are in the $10-15 price range (excluding sales).
That said, with the Ouya's tiny initial market of 60k units, even with rapid growth there's no way $0.99 will support a developer. So while I do expect some developers to launch ports at mobile prices, I hope it will quickly trend upward towards a more sustainable price point.
EDIT: Yeah, and as noct points out, a $1 game on the OUYA just won't be profitable.
Bottom line if players want the game, they'll pay for it if they think its worth it. Just dont go overboard on the pricing and set the pricing at what you yourself would pay for a decent game.
I know id easily drop 10-20 dollars on the right games if i thought they were something id play and enjoy.
But it would be thoughtful from the devs to set some kind of guideline up for the F2P thing. Otherwise I could imagine the store will be swamped with Games that greet you with game unlock IAP on startup.
So there should be some minimum playtime requirement or something to get your Game into the OUYA store.