Slashdot Mirror


App Store Developer Speaks Out On Game Piracy

theguythatwrotethisthing sends in a write-up of his experience releasing an iPhone game on the App Store. By using a software flag to distinguish between high scores submitted by pirates and those submitted by users who purchased the game, the piracy rate is estimated at around 80% during the first week after release. Since a common excuse for piracy is "try before you buy," they also looked at the related iPhone DeviceIDs to see how many of the pirates went on to purchase the game. None of them did.

12 of 762 comments (clear)

  1. First pirate! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Harrr!

    1. Re:First pirate! by Tridus · · Score: 5, Informative

      TFA is about a small company and a $2 game.

      Try again.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    2. Re:First pirate! by WaywardGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I haven't had any pirated software for the last 10 years, but then again, I've been running Linux. Anyway, back in college (1982-1986), I pirated all sorts of software I could not even imagine being able to afford. When I got a real job (1986) and since, I've paid for virtually all of it. However, my generation didn't grow up comfortable with pirating.

      One interesting thing I found in 1991: I tried selling "shareware" where you are suppose to buy the application if you use it and like it. It was downloaded and obviously heavily used a few thousand times. It was a memory checker for Windows programmers. How many programmers sent me a check for $10? One. Good grief. At the same time, my father wrote a shareware application useful for Delta pilots to "bid" on their routes for the next month. Dad made $32K on it! The difference? Pilots were older, middle class workers who never pirated anything. Programmers were young and on the leading edge of piracy (and we still are).

      This game is a very interesting data point. I would expect that a young hacker who can pay $400 for an iPhone just might have $2 for a game. Frankly, I don't think this is as much about ability to pay as a new culture of piracy.

      As for me, I don't pirate anything any more unless the author deserves to burn in hell, which is a very small portion of authors. For example, to read books now days I need to convert them to audio and play them, since my central vision is failing. I can break the Microsoft Reader format, which works well for me. I just buy the e-books and then translate them for my needs. However, some authors, like J. K. Rowling, are rich greedy bastards who don't care about the disabled. I already own all her books, and most of the movies. I felt pretty good about downloading her collective works on The Pirate Bay, and would encourage all of you to get it there to punish her.

      --
      Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
  2. Didn't think App Store piracy was that big by mikael_j · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seems strange to me considering the pricing and how much more convenient it is (at least IMO) to just use the App store. In fact, all the apps I've got on my iPhone are from the App store and were either free there or I paid for them.

    That's not to say I'm fervently anti-piracy, I'll admit that I've downloaded a fair amount of movies, music and software in my life but it's almost always been because it was too expensive, not yet released where I live or simply much more convenient to do so.

    As an example, a piece large expensive "professional" software that I want to use at home for fun or some minor non-commercial purpose isn't something I'm about to pony up $300 or whatever it costs for (I try to use open source when there is a good alternative), I've also downloaded games simply because I wasn't willing to pay full price to play it once for a few hours with a friend or two and then never play again. As for music and movies it tends to be a combination of pricing ($20 for an album I've never heard that probably only has a handful of good songs?), convenience (DRM) and it simply not being available where I live yet (woohoo, ordering Region 1 DVDs from the US). But a $4 iPhone game that can be downloaded in a minute at the click of a button? That seems pointless to me...

    /Mikael

    --
    Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    1. Re:Didn't think App Store piracy was that big by BorgDrone · · Score: 5, Interesting

      (..) I've downloaded a fair amount of movies, music and software in my life but it's almost always been because it was too expensive, not yet released where I live or simply much more convenient to do so. (...) But a $4 iPhone game that can be downloaded in a minute at the click of a button? That seems pointless to me...

      Same here, I've spent more money on software in the year I've had my iPhone than in the decade before that. If I can buy a great game like Monkey Island for a few euro's it's not even worth the effort to pirate it.

      I would happily pay an honest price for (on-demand) movies and series if only it was as convenient as buying app-store apps and if it would actually be available over here. For example: the new Stargate series, it'll be years before it's on TV here, and they'll probably mess up the order (I have no clue why they do this, but they can's seem to ever show any series in the correct order over here), stop halfway through a season, broadcast it at random times, etc. It's almost as if they don't want people to follow the series.

    2. Re:Didn't think App Store piracy was that big by ElMiguel · · Score: 5, Funny

      When they finally mailed it out to us, 6 months after billing my company / me thousands of dollars for it,

      Is your company in the habit of paying bills for items you haven't received yet?

      And if so, what is your company name and address, please?

    3. Re:Didn't think App Store piracy was that big by Dhalka226 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What gives you the moral right to restrict him from listening to/using it. It isn't like there is some law of scarcity involved that makes it necessary to restrict access?

      Rejection of the "I take what I want" attitude that pervades our society is in no way immoral. Quite the contrary, the people who think that just because they don't like the price or don't want to spend the money that they can have somebody else's time and effort anyway is immoral.

      Claiming "I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so shut up!" may be true in theory, but it's not relevant. It's not about control, it's not about lording money over the poor folks who would oh-so-love to use your product if only they could afford it. It's about realizing that there is a value to peoples' time and that they deserve to be compensated for that time if they so wish. If they so wish. Nobody gives a damn what you wish other peoples' work cost. If you don't find the product worth the money, if you don't have the money to spend, so be it; you're not entitled to take it. You wouldn't steal a physical object, and the reasons have nothing to do with some BS rationalization over whether or not property is actually lost.

      I've fought long and hard against people who call downloading music, movies or software "theft" or "stealing," but people like you abuse the difference to justify your entire behavior. No wonder so many people just want you to shut the hell up and go to jail. You're beginning to make me a convert.

      Those who claim that it is a sin, are those who want to strive backwards into the middle ages.

      It sounds awfully like you're the one who wants to strive backward into the middle ages. I'm sorry that people making money from non-tangible goods doesn't meet with your approval, but that's the way we've gone as a global society. That you would literally attack somebody who suggests maybe, just maybe, you should actually have to compensate people who create something rather than just taking it as you please makes you little more than a neanderthal, desperately trying to provide some sort of moral justification for something you planned on doing anyway.

      Of course, wasting resources is exactly what you are promoting. Efficiency is not in your vocabulary.

      You're right; stealing is the most money-efficient way for you to get something. In fact it's the most money-efficient way for anybody to get anything. Yet we've decided as a society that it's not only illegal but immoral. I wonder why that is? Could it be that the only way it doesn't collapse in on itself is when as few people as possible are doing it? And you're advocating doing that as efficient for a society? Congratulations, sir. Your self-entitlement astounds a person who thought he could no longer be astounded by the depths to which people will sink to self-justify.

      You have the right to claim that, but it doesn't make it true.

      It has been true since the formation of modern societies. Laws and punishments for theft are always among the first that socities create. That you want morality and legality set aside for your personal enrichment--just as long as other people go ahead and pick up the tab to allow your free-loading to continue--doesn't make it true, or reasonable, regardless of what overblown, over-used excuse you throw up for how this is sooooo different and we should all just chill, maaan.

      Efficiency my ass.

  3. Re:Maybe the game sucked? by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If an app is good, you should be able to find independently written positive reviews for it. There's always the score provided in the app store, too. I release most of my code under BSD/GPL licenses, but I absolutely require people to abide by the terms as I own the copyrights. There's no excuse for violating the rights of others, regardless of how little faith you might have in "so many of the programs" available for purchase. If you've got that little faith in the app store, maybe you shouldn't bother with it in the first place.

  4. Another example by happy · · Score: 5, Informative

    I am the iPhone developer for the Notifications app (see http://www.appnotifications.com/). On the first day my app was published on appulous (that happened very quickly after my app was on the appstore), the piracy rate was 99.3%. On that 99.3% I had about 1% who bought the application after trying it.

    That was in the beginning of September, I now have a total piracy rate of about 50%. My app requires network and connects on my server, therefor my stats are pretty accurate. I think the piracy rate would be way higher than 50% if my app did not have to connect to my server.

    --
    http://blog.penso.info
    1. Re:Another example by happy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Good question, which I don't have a "true" answer for.

      My feeling is, as very little percentage of pirate finally bought the app after "trying it", having them downloading the app for free did not help on the sales after. Almost none of those hackers did post on blogs, Twitter, etc so it doesn't help neither.

      What might have helped a bit is being listed on appulous, I guess some people are tracking the 'hacker' websites to see what's hot, and what was released recently. What might happen is people buying the app straight without going through the hacker stage. However, as I had 99.3% of hackers on the next days after it was published on appulous, which only 1% bought the app after, I would say it did not impact on my real sales.

      I think Photoshop is a different case which you can't compare with mine. I agree with what you say about it, but I don't think it applies on mine (sadly ;).

      --
      http://blog.penso.info
  5. You can't beat pirates by Veggiesama · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you slash the price of the game in half in a few months and re-advertise it (like Steam has been doing with their weekly sales), then you will see another jump in sales. If you cut it down to 1/4, you will get even more sales. Some people think $4 is a good price, but others won't pay more than $2, and still some will wait for the $1 or $0.50 sale.

    Each step allows you to reel in more buyers, because everybody has their own price threshold.

    Games depreciate in value quickly--that's just how it is. Eventually the game won't be worth anything to anyone. Then you should give it out for free, along with a big fat advertisement for your next game. You ARE working on the next game, right?

    Some people wouldn't pay a cent for the game in the first place, and they are the real pirates. You can't negotiate with them, so don't even bother. It's wasted development time to fight them. Even if you somehow make your game unpirate-able, they will just ignore your game and find something else to occupy their time.

    What you CAN do is try to net the would-be pirates who simply have a lower price threshold. Also you might net a few guilt-ridden pirates who think they are "redeeming their sins" by eventually buying the game they pirated, even though it's been a few months since release and the price has dropped significantly in the meantime. You might also pick up a few people who just like thinking they're getting a good deal.

  6. Re:Maybe the game sucked? by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You don't tend to get a high score unless you play the game. Why were all these people playing the game if it sucked?