Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple, Google Vying For Mobile Game Exclusivity

Posted by samzenpus on from the mine-all-mine dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Here's an interesting look at the battle for mobile video game money between Google and Apple. 'Last August, for the launch of "Plants Vs. Zombies 2," a highly anticipated sequel to a popular zombie-survival strategy game, publisher Electronic Arts Inc. struck a deal with Apple, which promoted the game prominently in its App Store, according to people familiar with the matter. In exchange, one of these people said, EA agreed to give Apple about a two-month window of exclusivity for the title, which wasn't released on Google's Android software until October.'"

12 of 52 comments (clear)

  1. Too bad it sucked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    because of micropayment hell.
    Was looking forward to it and would have paid for it. It as good time waster when flying.

    1. Re:Too bad it sucked by mlts · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Almost all games have fallen into that pit since 2011 and IAP became doable. Games that cost a few bucks and were very playable now are "free", but require numerous micropayments to be even playable. Want the same weapons/towers/birds that you had when you paid for the game in the pre-2011 version? That'll cost you, likely $10-20 total.

    2. Re:Too bad it sucked by Swampash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      because of micropayment hell.
      Was looking forward to it and would have paid for it.

      Quoted for great truth.

      PvZ was and remains a fantastic little cartoon tower defence game. PvZ2 is rubbish.

    3. Re:Too bad it sucked by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

      >But there's another issue that is ... odd that I don't know if anyone's considered. The vying for exclusivity on this title implies that they (Google/Apple) think that this game is so awesome that it will cause people to abandon a competitors phone for their own instead of waiting for the exclusivity to run out.

      Well at least Apple think that. Not so much Google or they might have vyed harder.

      >Are the marketing guys just making this stuff up as they go along?

      Yes.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    4. Re:Too bad it sucked by gweilo8888 · · Score: 3

      Mod parent up. This is the reason I've stopped playing games almost entirely -- I am sick of being nickel-and-dimed to death.

    5. Re:Too bad it sucked by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 2

      Mod parent up. This is the reason I've stopped playing games almost entirely -- I am sick of being nickel-and-dimed to death.

      This sounds like going to a cheap theater and complaining the experience sucks and concession stand prices are high.

      One option is to go to a theater that does't suck, and pass on the concession stand.

      Neither of these will be cheap AND good. Shocker.

    6. Re:Too bad it sucked by rk · · Score: 2

      Nothing wrong with Sudoku, but the EA version would say "Want to place a 9 here? Wait 20 minutes, or buy the 10 pack of 9s for $1.99!"

  2. Re:What's the point? by gweilo8888 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It only works well when the hardware is perceived to be equal. I've never owned a Playstation, have bought Xbox from the start and own almost every game in the Halo franchise. It's far and away my favorite non-racing game, but at the same time, it's not enough to skew me towards the XBone over the PS4.

    I still remember how Microsoft screwed the pooch on the XBone's launch, how clearly they deride the gamers who keep them in business, and I can also see how their hardware is nowhere near the caliber of that in the PS4. So for the first time, when I upgrade it will be to a Playstation and not an Xbox.

    And that shows rather nicely that exclusivity doesn't work if your hardware or overall offering is considered inferior by your potential customers.

  3. Not News by bananaquackmoo · · Score: 2

    I hate to break it to you, but this isn't news. This kind of behavior has existed in the games industry and app-store industry pretty much since they've existed.

  4. Re:What's the point? by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most likely they wanted to release it a couple months early for iOS anyway, and found a way to convince Apple to give them free advertizing for something they were going to do anyway.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  5. As a developer who uses in-app purchase ... by perpenso · · Score: 2, Informative

    What is a developer to do? People want to try before buying.

    Personally, in the things I publish, ex Perpenso Calc, a RPN Sci Stat Biz Hex Bill/Tip calculator that supports fractions and complex numbers, I like the idea of two apps. A fully paid app that is ad free and includes all functionality and a second free app that has only basic functionality, scientific functionality, but is expandable and ads are removable (Biz, Hex etc are in-app purchase). The later lets people try things out. As an incentive to buy the fully paid version I offer it at a bundled price, less than if all in-app purchases are made in the free version.

    I understand the controversy but this is the best solution I've come up with so far. I would be happy to hear other suggestions.

  6. Re:What's the point? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

    It would be one thing if it was just fanboys' asserting that the PS4 is outperforming the Xbox One. Game developers have confirmed it as well. Developers are still trying to optimize their games for both platforms; but it seems that GDDR5 is beating DDR3 + ESRAM for now. Also Sony for the most part has kept focus on the objective of the PS4 being a gaming console. MS has tried to make the Xbox One as an entertainment console instead.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.