Hacker News Reader

Comment by S_A_P | Hacker News Reader

I think in app purchases for apps targeting users under 13 is a really bad idea. Even if there isn't some dark premise behind it, I feel like an asshole every time I tell my son "no" I wont buy you extra {whatever} for your game at just 2.99. Kids games should be reasonably priced(0-5 dollars) and not monetize with ads or upsells.

View on HN

Sorry how is that even remotely reasonably priced? It has a limited market, that can't buy their product, that is hard to make engaging and appropriate. Either be willing to pay $15 a pop, be willing to accept in product advertising, in product upselling, are really basic (ie non custom story book artwork), or that they shouldn't exist at all. Frankly, sounds like you are asking just too much.

15$ for quality product is ok. Chaptered games/applications (iWork etc.) are ok. ADs are not. IAPs are not.

This should be tattooed on every single iOS dev.

PS: I actually wish there would be at least few 30-60$ games in the store. And not those crappy ports of gamepad/mouse games (shooters etc.) with unplayable controls. Or some good, but very old, not so polished ports of ports of classic games (FFT). It would be nice to play some great western RPG, with interesting story (not that boring save the world stuff), it should be turn based to adjust to device controls, some good graphics (not like those Top games from store) - look up Bastion on the PC, THIS is how AAA iPad games should look like. And no sequels. Please.

Tattooed? Sorry, but this comes across as a rant.

Can't reply to the comment below. About "tattooed" word - this is usually called irony. And it is a common phrase about "remembering things", I don't see what's so bad about saying that.

In app purchasing is used by many developers as a kind of shareware. What's so insidious about try before you buy?

I don't think there is anything insidious when you are targeting the potential phone owner. However a 4 and a half year old playing my phone feels differently about in app purchasing and has little concept of money and value.

Then why are they being given a phone and not a children's toy?

Are you suggesting that "Talking Tom Cat" is not a children's toy? Because otherwise, you're sounding more than a little self-righteous here.

I don't know the answers, but I think it's reasonable to ask whether technology can make a positive contribution to kids' lives. I don't think it's productive to belittle people for experimenting with ways of doing so.

It is not a children's toy anymore than a laptop computer is a kid's toy. The software on a machine doesn't change the delicacy of the hardware. People who want rock solid, well-tested toys for children are better off buying a LeapPad than handing their 4 year-old a $500 iphone or iPad.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com