Live data from Hacker News

Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

twitter.com

71–80 of 255 posts

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#71
post #9

It's almost as if when given the choice people prefer games without microtransactions, even if they're older and have fewer features/powerups etc.

I would be just happy to pay for new, interesting and challenging, levels for Angry Birds "the thing" 1.0. But, when the gameplay is so absurdly easy you can beat everything with one finger, all the levels are pointless, and most of screen real estate is dedicated to selling you gems or ability to resume playing level after losing it, it just does not make any sense. You have to seriously be mentally retarded to play…

You can play chess and go with one finger...

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#72
post #60

If it's "too popular" why would you not just increase the price to like $10? It shouldn't which way you make money, as long as you make money.

If you removed it and then re-list essentially the same game under a different name first then all the people who already own it will have to re-buy it next time they update their phone. If you just raise the price then those people who already bought it will get to keep playing for free, and that's just leaving money on the table.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#73
post #19
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a gas station finds they can't sell gas at $2 per gallon, they could rip out the gas tanks and stop selling gas or they could raise the price to whatever is profitable. I'm not understanding the business logic of removing the game.

What if a gas station finds that people keep fueling up and then driving off -- the customers don't seem to want to plaster their cars with bumper stickers related to the advertisers who are paying extra to the gas station and they don't seem to want to use the fuel "filter" that requires you to put a small extra charge on your credit card every few miles or the fuel won't move from the tank to the engine? For the sa…

> What if a gas station finds that people keep fueling up and then driving off

I'd assume the price of gas would go up once they found it wasn't being subsidized by other sales.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#74
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't play any iOS game with either ads or with a "free but micro-transaction model." If you look in the pay up front category on the app store, there are very very few games. It's too bad.

I think we should really call out Apple and Google for mismanagement here. Imagine if there was the option to play a game for an hour as a free trial, and then buy the game instead of having to plunk down $4.99 sight-unseen - or having your game in the Free category with the microtransaction shovelware around it. If I'm the developer who wants users to have any semblance of try-before-you-buy, the free category (with…

Games could still do this (via a single one-time "microtransaction"), and some do this. But standard microtransactions are stupidly profitable, enough to tempt most devs.

And, frankly, the gaming industry at large has proven that paying up front does not prevent microtransactions. Even in mobile games.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#75
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is definitely an element of conditioning here. People have grown accustomed to frenetic action and the studios like it because it’s easier than hiring good writers – especially since they’re hoping for global sales and humor, subtly, and nuance are hard to translate – but that’s a learned preference based on what dominates the market. If different things came back on the market people would get used to them, to…

Older movies are full of filler too, but it's generally less exciting filler - looooong shots of a car driving through the countryside or plot beats that could be 1 minute stretching to 10 without having any reason to be as long as they are. Over time movies have learned to cut a lot of fat.

It's about conveying atmosphere and mood, not conveying plot-points as rapidly as possible.

Same reason a book might spend two pages describing a lazy dog laying on a porch swatting flies with his tail, instead of cutting straight to who said/did what.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#76
post #58
post #9

It's almost as if when given the choice people prefer games without microtransactions, even if they're older and have fewer features/powerups etc.

I won't play any iOS game with either ads or with a "free but micro-transaction model." If you look in the pay up front category on the app store, there are very very few games. It's too bad.

Google and Apple aggressively push developers to use IAPs rather than up-front paid games, and often won't feature games & apps costing more than 99c. They incentivized the current market.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#78
post #11

They can't compete with what they once were, so they bury the past. I suspect many industries are like this. If classic movies were played alongside new Hollywood releases, the new movies would probably be choked out. Accordingly, Disney will even restrict the availability of their old movies on DVD. They can't stand competing with their former great selves.

> Accordingly, Disney will even restrict the availability of their old movies on DVD.

I don't know if this applies to Disney given they just launched a massive streaming service containing almost all of their back catalogue.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#79
post #58
post #9

It's almost as if when given the choice people prefer games without microtransactions, even if they're older and have fewer features/powerups etc.

I won't play any iOS game with either ads or with a "free but micro-transaction model." If you look in the pay up front category on the app store, there are very very few games. It's too bad.

I'm right up there with you.

I will admit that paying like $15 four years ago for Stardew Valley on iOS felt a bit weird, but $15 is pretty cheap considering that it's the full game. It doesn't make you buy gems every twenty minutes, or watch an ad every time you plant six crops, or spam your friend to share your status for some extra gold.

It's a full game, and you pay a nominally-high-but-ultimately-reasonable price for it.

Similarly, The Binding of Isaac is also a pretty good iOS game. I don't remember how much I paid, but it was slightly higher than average, but it doesn't spam me with any microtransaction crap.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#80
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Applications on the App Store need continuous maintenance and updates.

I realize that, but it seems that a wildly successful older game would probably be able to amortize that cost over quite a few people still buying it at $3, $5, or $10.

It’s hard to get people to pay for anything anymore.

For instance, Soul Caliber was ported to iOS and it costs $10. I think I might have been one of the few people who bought it.

It seems like the only way that you can make non scammy games make sense is via subscriptions like with Apple Arcade and even then it’s probably a loss leader for Apple and they subsidize game makers.

This is partially the fault of the App Store model that doesn’t allow upgrade pricing.

Post reply on HN