I'm honestly surprised that some people are so desperate to not pay $5 for Angry Birds. I mean, I sort of understand pirating $800 apps like Adobe's suite, but $5 for a bird slingshot game?
For full disclosure's sake, I am an iOS and Mac developer, so I have some skin in the game.
Considering hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people get the same game for free on Android phones/tablets, there's some strangeness to paying for it on other platforms.
I looked over the shoulder of someone playing Angry Birds with ads. The paid version was worth every penny.
There is nothing on this earth more jarring to a game design than having some out-of-context ad pop up on the screen. Particularly when the screen is already half the size of a decent postcard.
Actually, it's not a burn. The game, like most others, only has so many levels. I've gotten past all of them, and I don't find it fun to try to get 3 stars on them all. So until it updates with more levels, I don't feel any need to play it.
It's definitely matured enough, and Rovio initially intended to release a paid app alongside the free one.
However, they still haven't, and given that press release from a month or so ago stating they were on track to earn $1m per month from the "free" version, I'm starting to see why they haven't. I doubt they'd make anywhere near as much ongoing ad revenue if they released the game for a dollar or two.
Comments
I'm honestly surprised that some people are so desperate to not pay $5 for Angry Birds. I mean, I sort of understand pirating $800 apps like Adobe's suite, but $5 for a bird slingshot game?
For full disclosure's sake, I am an iOS and Mac developer, so I have some skin in the game.
Whoever wrote this clearly thought it would work on other, more expensive apps. Perhaps they didn't have the money to actually test it :)
Considering hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people get the same game for free on Android phones/tablets, there's some strangeness to paying for it on other platforms.
They get the game with ads. There is no strangeness at all about not paying for a version with ads and paying for a version without them.
I looked over the shoulder of someone playing Angry Birds with ads. The paid version was worth every penny.
There is nothing on this earth more jarring to a game design than having some out-of-context ad pop up on the screen. Particularly when the screen is already half the size of a decent postcard.
Disable 3G and wireless on your Android phone and you won't see any ads :)
I would gladly pay to play Angry Birds ad-free on Android.
Or at least, I would have while I was still playing it.
As a friend of mine pointed out when I complained:
http://www.cyrket.com/p/android/com.bigtincan.android.adfree...
I'm not going to comment on the ethics, just noting that there is a "solution." (Also: requires root)
I recently bought an Archos 101 Android tablet and installed Angry Birds (from the included AppsLib).
I never saw any ad...
Bug or feature?
> Or at least, I would have while I was still playing it.
Ohhh nice burn. ;)
Actually, it's not a burn. The game, like most others, only has so many levels. I've gotten past all of them, and I don't find it fun to try to get 3 stars on them all. So until it updates with more levels, I don't feel any need to play it.
It's only free because the Android marketplace hasn't yet matured enough for a paid app. To compensate, the Android version has ads.
It's definitely matured enough, and Rovio initially intended to release a paid app alongside the free one.
However, they still haven't, and given that press release from a month or so ago stating they were on track to earn $1m per month from the "free" version, I'm starting to see why they haven't. I doubt they'd make anywhere near as much ongoing ad revenue if they released the game for a dollar or two.
I think you assume the wrong motivation.