Much Ado About In-App Purchases and Arcades

Drew Crawford, over at Sealed Abstract:

See, in the in-app purchase model actually predates phones. It predates video game consoles. It goes all the way back to the arcade, where millions of consumers were happy to pay a whole quarter ($0.89 in 2013 dollars) to pay for just a few minutes. The entire video games industry comes from this model. Kids these days.

Crawford's post was in response to an article by Thomas Baekdal about in-app purchases destroying the gaming industry with the latest example being Electronic Arts' (EA) butchering of the classic videogame Dungeon Keeper. (Both Crawford's post and the original post are worth reading, and I think it is especially valuable to view a few minutes of the two videos in the original post.)

I've written about freemium as a damaging force in modern game design, so my opinion on the original Baekdal post should come as no surprise. I do appreciate Crawford's post for its content on modern app economics and Crawford's musings on potential developer strategies for navigating the various issues with app-based businesses.

However, where Crawford's post goes off the rails is the segment (highlighted by the quote above) attempting to relate today's in-app purchasing model with the arcade model of yesteryear.

The two models could not be more different.

The only similarity to be found, if you squint really hard, is in the vague notion of paying for an amount of gameplay time. The critical difference--and this is at the heart of the problem with modern freemium design--is that the in-app purchasing model has nothing to do with player skill.

Think about those old arcade games. Pac-Man. Galaga. Street Fighter 2. All of those games could be played and conquered with a single quarter if the player was skilled enough. The amount of money that a player had to pay was directly tied to his or her own skill level. By comparison, no amount of skill is going to help you acquire those Smurfberries any faster. Only cold, hard (digital!) cash will suffice.

Even the worst 'quarter munchers' like the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or Simpsons arcade games had an element of skill involved. Nothing was quite as sweet as seeing how far you could get on a single quarter.

Admittedly, racing games generally fell into the 'pay more play more' model, but that was often mitigated by the game having a 'winner gets to race again without paying' feature.

Folks, claiming that yesterday's arcade business model is essentially the same as today's in-app purchase business model is akin to saying that receiving a high five is essentially the same as getting a slap to the face. I don't think I have to tell you which one is fun and which one hurts.

In-App Purchases are a Hot Topic

John Moltz had an interesting take on the topic of in-app purchases, summed up nicely by these quotes: 

Well, sure. Ask a heroin addict and they’ll probably tell you the same. In-app purchases are just like the proverbial drug pusher, giving the first go round away for free in order to get you hooked with each subsequent high giving the promise of an even better one the next time.

 ...

What we should be asking is simply whether or not we’re spending what the app is worth. We’ve spent a lot of time decrying the race to the bottom in app pricing. Now we’re complaining because app developers have found a way to make more money.

I've previously written about in-app purchases and the culture of freemium and how both are hurting modern video game design (as well as apps in general). To be fair, I do think that there ways that in-app purchases can be designed in a way that isn't abusive towards users.

In his post, Moltz gives a fair assessment of in-app purchases. While they are often disdainful, in-app purchases are not inherently evil. He is correct when he makes the comparison to drugs and gambling. People with addictive personalities will be easy prey for exploitive tactics, while others will not be directly impacted much at all.

Folks, be mindful of the difference between good and bad in-app purchases (developers, this includes you too). 

You Don't Have to Trick Users Into Buying In-App Purchases

I received some excellent feedback for my post on freemium's negative impact on video game design. Part of that post was about in-app purchases, and some folks had the impression that I was against in-app purchases as they relate to game design. That is not the case. I don't think that in-app purchases are bad per se, but I do recognize that they have been misused in recent years (especially in freemium games).

If freemium games are littered with examples of 'bad' in-app purchases, then what kinds of in-app purchases could be considered 'good'? 'Good' in-app purchases are the kind that add to the player's enjoyment without being detrimental to the player or to gameplay. To put it another way, game designers should always strive to make in-app purchases fun and fair .

Here are some examples of good in-app purchases. Please note that I am sometimes referring to a particular in-app purchase in isolation from other 'bad' in-app purchases. 

Character Customization

The iOS game Punch Quest has a good example of in-app purchases related to customizing the player's character. By default, a player has a limited set of options to choose from (male/female and a few colors). If a player wants to use a different garment color, add a hat, or choose a different face then they can buy an in-app purchase for their character. Their character is not impacted by these selections in any meaningful way, thus maintaining balanced gameplay. People often want to customize their in-game avatar, and this is a good way for devs to fulfill that desire in a profitable way without resorting to tricks.

Options. 

New Songs/Levels

Having in-app purchases that allow players to buy new songs or additional levels to play can be a good way to provide ongoing customer satisfaction. Magic Guitar comes with several songs preloaded, and users can purchase additional songs that they wish to play. These types of in-app purchases help keep players engaged in the game without going into addiction territory.

California Dreamin, baby.

Unlocking Levels/Chapters

Another way to make use of in-app purchases is to let users unlock all of the levels/chapters in the game. Rock Runners, for example, normally requires users to complete levels in order to unlock new levels. There is an element of chance and choice to how its game map works when users unlock levels. An in-app purchase that lets the user unlock all levels is a good way to balance the needs of skillful players (who can earn their way to all the levels) and the needs of less skillful players (or players that don't have quite enough time to master the game). The latter can still gain access to all that the game has to offer, but without any significant sacrifice in game balance or fairness.

Not a bad price.

Folks, in-app purchases for games aren't all bad. In fact, some of them can be quite good for devs and players alike. Just remember to keep things fun and fair.