paid
Latest
The strange economy of the App Store
A few App Store apps have already gotten the public browbeating for tweaking their prices, and here's another: as Johnathan notes, there's a new app on the top of the heap in the paid pile, and apparently the only reason "Units Convertor" (sic) is there is because it used to be free.We can't necessarily call them out for switching just to sit on top -- what would you do if you had a free app that was being downloaded like crazy and decided you wanted to make some money from it? But being that free apps far outweigh paid apps in terms of distribution, even the #21 free app can quickly jump to the top of the paid pile. We've already posted about how developers might be getting a raw deal out of the App Store (and some publishers have told us personally that they agree), but the economics are very interesting in there right now -- you've got a basically free economy, and considering that most of the apps out now are easy to make, it's just as likely that you'll see a free version of an app that does the same thing as a paid app.Of course, what's happening in there actually mirrors what's happening out here with software: some of the best applications around are actually being given away for free. We're still in a strange place with the App Store and its pricing, and you have to think that eventually things will settle down and the developers who deserve to get paid will.
Reading between the lines: are more PvE to PvP transfers possible?
The announcement earlier in the week that Blizzard was allowing free transfers from a couple Oceanic PvE realms to the Oceanic PvP realm Thaurissan lead to a storm of speculation that Blizzard could be considering opening up PvE to PvP transfers on a wide scale.Blizzard has recently said that they won't be allowing large scale transfers from PvE to PvP servers. This rule was supposedly in place for a number of reasons, the main one of which has always been the relative ease of leveling a character on a PvE server compared to that of a PvP server. Having done both, I can say that it wasn't too different – a few more tricks had to be used when leveling on the PvP server, but in no way was my leveling prolonged on the PvP server because of the PvP elements.Drysc chimed in on this very topic yesterday.
A lifetime subscription to Azeroth
Tobold has a good post up about lifetime subscriptions to MMORPGs that got me wondering: why hasn't Blizzard ever offered a lifetime subscription to WoW?The obvious answer, of course, is that they think they can make more money by not doing so. In order for a lifetime subscription to be profitable, the player that buys it has to either stop playing before the subscription would have ended, or not be a major drain on the system after their subscription becomes "free." It's a gamble on both sides.Now, Tobold's reasons for liking his LoTRO lifetime subscription and not jumping on a Hellgate London subscription aren't really applicable to WoW-- HgL is going to be completely different, with no subscription fee required for some players. But would you invest in a lifetime subscription for Blizzard's game? There's little chance they'll offer one now (usually a lifetime subscription is offered at the start of a game's life), but you never know-- if reception to WotLK isn't great, maybe they'll offer it right before the expansion to try and nab players that would quit right afterwards otherwise. By Hellgate's prices, a lifetime subscription to WoW would be $225. Let's go a step further and say that because WoW is so popular, Blizzard would charge $250 for a lifetime subscription to the game, approximately the same price as a year and change paid monthly. Would you take that deal?
Junkets and the game writers who love them
The Washington Post has published an interesting report on game reviewers and their experiences with junkets. A junket is typically an all expenses paid trip covered by the publishers in the gaming industry. The junket the Washington Post specifically covers is the Fallout 3 junket where "airfare, hotel, food, drinks and shuttle bus were provided, courtesy of Bethesda Softworks." Now, just to be clear, it's the job of publishers to do these junkets and sway opinion by whatever means necessary (and in some cases, whatever is the keyword) -- that's marketing. It's the job of the "journalist" not to be swayed by it -- that's tough and really means standing by ethics (which if the writer actually went to journalism school is the first class you take). Most newspapers have a strict policy of not letting companies pay for their writers to attend and the Washington Post points out a few attendees paid their own way, but most did not.One writer for PC Jeux, Ghislain Masson, has been to Russia twice, India, "a five-day extravaganza in Las Vegas funded by Midway" and Paris. Of course, we stumble across moments of ethical irony often in this business and there's even moments of too close for comfort. Some would make the argument that there is a world of difference between being invited to an event and having everything paid for to attend. The question is, "Do these junkets influence the outcome of reviews?" The writers in the Washington Post piece don't believe so, but we'll leave it up to the readers to decide.[Via GamePolitics]*Note: Joystiq does not and has never accepted paid junkets.
EA an awful place to work. Awful great!
var digg_url = 'http://www.joystiq.com/2007/05/16/ea-an-awful-place-to-work-awful-great/'; Remember when the online buzz about Electronic Arts was all about overworked staff and unpaid overtime? That's so two years ago. The new buzz, apparently, is that EA is the second best place for new graduates to work, according to a Fortune Magazine list.They make a decent enough case -- EA employees get five to ten free games per year, heavy discounts on games and systems, plus amenities like an on-site gym, a DVD library and stock options. Still, given the past complaints, we can't help but gape at Fortune's statement that EA employees "might not have time to spend any of the $60,000 starting salary that's offered to the average entry-level worker." They had to understand the irony dripping from that line when they wrote it. Didn't they?[Thanks Keavin]
