Hacker News Reader

Comment by tdiggity | Hacker News Reader

The Sonic game uses the most vile type of in-app ad. The ad requires you to play Game of War for some indeterminate amount of time. You are made to play it after every stage. I hope Sega changes this, it basically makes their game unplayable.

View on HN

I'm starting to get to the point where I wish people weren't allowed to call advertising supported products "free." I don't know what other term would be better, but I feel like users are paying some non-monetary cost.

"adware" works for me.

Brainshareware is more accurate but it is a mouthful.

This is adware like popover ads used to be on the web. You know, the ones you couldn't get to the background.

Apple changed apps with In App Purchases from being able to say "Free" to "Get." Maybe they'll do the same with ad supported apps as well.

Does any app have “Free” on the download button now?

Just noting that they changed that for all apps, even truly free ones with no ads or purchases.

That is why I am starting to randomly click on ads simply so they waste the money and get a lesser ROI and scewed stats.

Since it's a skinner box, why not call it skinnerware?

What does this mean? Skinner boxes have nothing to do with showing ads.

> Skinner boxes have nothing to do with showing ads

Watch this add.

Get your reward.

Users are (on average) clearly paying some monetary cost as well, otherwise the business model would not make sense. So rather than paying X to get a product, you now pay some Y >> X, plus the additional annoyance and wasted time.

Well, Play Store does explicitly mark the app as contaning ads.

Google has invented such a narrow definition of 'not-advertising' that the label cannot distinguish between apps bundling countless third-parties vs someone linking directly to their own website in the game-ending credits.

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...

freemium?

Is this a joke? It seriously sounds like an onion article, that's how absurd it is.

No, this is quite common. They have ads now which are just webviews that open an HTML\JavaScript version of a small slice of a game, often Game of War or similar generic RTS\tower defense mobile trash. Apple actually does allow this app-within-an-app method of code downloading if it's just a webview. They actually force you to not just watch but actually play and progress in the game for about 20/30 seconds (i.e. add play one short round of tower defense or drop a few units on the ground and fire at enemies) before going back to the app.

I'm trying to find an example of a game with it so you can see for yourself (I would assume many Android games have the same thing), but it seems I've uninstalled them all out of frustration.

This is my preferred way to pay for games, having it ad-free so I can trial the game without paying, then if I like it pay a one-time $1.99 to play the game ad-free.

I think everyone wins, you don't pay for games you don't like, game developers are funded and can focus on making enjoyable games instead of trying to engineer games using dark tactics to extract maximum revenue with pay to win IAP's.

The Game of War is an ad that you can close after a short time when the X appears. Not a fan of this ad-style but I wont be seeing too many ads if I like the game as I'll just shell out for the one-time ad-free IAP.

Not that I'm defending the ad, but if you wait the timeout an x will appear to close the ad. No game play needed

Was just going to say this. It's annoying, but of all the ads, it's actually more of the least offensive. Instead of a faked video of what the game "is" you actually get to see the mechanics of it. No idea how true the ad is to the game since it's not my cup of tea but it's smart.

The ads like this usually have fine print explaining that the game/ad is not representative of the actual gameplay experience.

Many ads like this will also let you exit out by pressing the area where the x would appear immediately, even 10 seconds before they actually render the icon.

Actually, these ads are a little smarter (more likely poorly programmed). I've waited and tried to time it out, and no X appeared. A few times, I was presented with the "click here to install" modal window with no other option to exit/close (after waiting for 60 seconds+). If you click on the install button, a browser opens, then the app store open, and when you finally make your way back to the original Sega game I found that it couldn't keep it all in memory and the whole thing reloads from the beginning.

I'm not taking it too seriously, but it's a real quick way to make me never play any of the classics they put out on IOS.

IIRC you can escape that one by tapping in the top right before it loads.

I seem to recall you can close out of it after 5 seconds without playing unless they've got different tech for the sega ones. Either way it for sure means I'd never ever play a game that had such a shitty and obnoxious ad.

Other fun patterns: - Fuck you for playing games on mute whilst listening to music, Ima override that with super loud obnoxious bleeping for my ad - This ad is just going to keep pretending you clicked on it and open the app store, even though you didn't - Top new feature ad: freeze phone when wifi drops (because I'm on the underground and signal is transient).

I'm fine with a pop up ad that I can x out of straight away to "pay" for a free app. That's a fair deal, same as advertising in a magazine etc. But the obnoxious phone hijacking appstore opening stuff just ensures I'm angry and sure as hell not downloading.

I simply don't understand how those make people not annoyed and actually generate conversions

> I simply don't understand how those make people not annoyed and actually generate conversions

if you can preselect your target group/audience to consist purely of suckers, this can be very profitable.

it's literally preying on the weak. it is so clearly and straightforward EVIL that it should be regulated.

and it is, in many EU countries at least. but the lowest common denominator for these ad markets is whatever the big, US-based, app/play stores allow. even if they'd make regulations (in law), which they won't, I strongly doubt they would pick a sensible[0] level of what is considered "okay", given that extremely powerful (including beyond deceptive) advertising is already considered so "normal" and ingrained in US culture. certain ads are basically allowed to con people (within some limits, but still)

[0] in terms of public health

Or, you can just purchase the game to get rid of the apps.

Then its not exactly free.

oh no :(

This is such a false dilemma. "Pony up money or get the same content with a less-than-stellar ad experience." What about supporting your product with ads that don't suck? I know this is much easier in theory, but I'd like a Web where the advertisements didn't suck so much.

Mobile ads are much better than web ads, in my experience. You just need to wait X amount of seconds and it's gone. Apps don't have pop-unders or any of those insufferable loop traps.

Plus you can often pay to make them go away. You usually don't have that ability on the web.

there's a certain level of abusive advertising beyond which I think whoever decided to put it there deserves to have their software pirated.

sure, the ad networks also carry blame, but the devs provide them with a platform and medium. both are guilty and the cumulative effect of the ubiquity of abusive ads is very damaging to society.

Deal with ads and play for free or pay to not have ads. Or you know, don't play at all.

The top left is always a close button, click it at any time to close the add.

How does this "gameplay" react with ad blocking dns ?

What happens with wifi off ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com