Cool idea and execution but having in-app purchases to buy hints for a game targeted to kids is a big no.
I get the market forces and such but I don't want to have an app subtly teach my non-existent kids to reach out to in-app purchases like that.
I get the market forces and such but I don't want to have an app subtly teach my non-existent kids to reach out to in-app purchases like that.
In the old days, the free version would be a limited preview of the game, and would direct users to purchase the full game. We called it a demo or shareware, as in you were intended to share and copy it widely.
You could also have the “in app purchase” be the full game unlock.
Dont get me wrong, at that time very little ppl in my country had ccs to actually buy any software even if, they wouldnt give it to kids :)
The fact that this isn’t open source, as it stands, means the latter is not a primary goal - which is not an indictment, just an observation.
The complaints will come, regardless, for that reason alone, given the marketing/narrative.
You’re selling a product to parents/educators who want to gamify the technical education of their children. That market, small as it is, despises micro transactions.
There are plenty of arguments for open sourcing things. “Closed source apps necessarily deprioritize helping children” is not an obvious argument to me. Can you draw the connection more explicitly?
Not to mention, it’s an app trying to help kids get exposed to underpinning technologies - seeing how the game itself is made would be optimizing for that end.
It’s not that closed source deprioritizes, but the “helping kids” were the sole and primary goal sought, there’s a clear answer to what would align with that.
All said, it’s not a critique of the OP - reconciling ideals and practical reality often require trade offs that would allow for a project like this to happen in the first place.
I also think there's a lot of people out there who would pay to have Hacktivate running offline, using the full power of their device, and with no external resources being required, so I made that too.
Suggesting that I need to make them open source to prove I want to help kids learn is really strange, particularly when literally thousands of students around the world are benefitting from my work without paying a cent.
But so too is making money off the iOS app, correct?
This isn’t “HackVille by Zynga,” it’s an indie dev trying to make a product they believe in. I hope it succeeds and inspires more high quality edutainment.
It'd be nice if we had robust, no-strings attached funding streams to make this kind of content, but we don't, so if we want it to exist, consumers need to pay for it.
I think it’s fair to claim that a large enterprise will eventually crank the money dial to maximum extraction. But a solo dev is free to follow their conscience and make money in a responsible way.
I don’t like the “pay per hint” model as currently implemented, but I’m willing to give the developer the benefit of the doubt that they didn’t think it all the way through.
So take advice where it’s offered but don’t mistake complaints for advice.
2. Is it really true that "the game is X levels and in-app purchases is a-lot-more-levels" is banned but "the game is Y levels and limited features and in-app purchases gets you features and hints" is not?
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#bet...
FWIW my favorite non-predatory pattern is a level-limited free version with a single “unlock full game” IAP. That way users don’t have to lose their progress switching to paid.
When they get into the groove, at X+1 level show them "Did you like this? You can get 200+ levels if you convince your parents that this is a worthwhile investment for your learning." (copy TBD) and bam, you have a traditional game with a demo and a way to buy it that doesn't train kids to expect in-app purchases for every breath they take.
And btw, $25 is high even for an indie steam game, a mobile game will be even harder to market at that price. Just FYI. Best of luck!
I was not aware how predatory this market has become until an annual subscription after a "one week trial" renewed itself automatically despite having been already cancelled on the last day.
I'm assuming the money is lost because third party subscriptions might require earlier cancellation, but that was the last time I allowed for anything with such a short trial period.
And that's another topic, plus this is part of the gameplay, not just some cosmetic stuff.