Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google To Stop Describing Games With In-App Purchases As 'Free'

Posted by Soulskill on from the insert-coin-to-continue dept.

An anonymous reader writes After a series of investigations, lawsuits, and fines over how in-app purchases are advertised and communicated to users, Google has agreed to stop labeling games that use in-app purchases as "Free." This change is the result of a request by the European Commission to stop misleading customers about the costs involved with using certain apps. "Games should not contain direct exhortation to children to buy items in a game or to persuade an adult to buy items for them; Consumers should be adequately informed about the payment arrangements for purchases and should not be debited through default settings without consumers' explicit consent." The EC notes that Apple has not yet done anything to address these concerns.

8 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. Apple has 'done nothing'??? by printman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Free apps with in-app purchases show that fact right under the 'Buy' button. And a simple setting controls whether in-app purchases are allowed at all, require approval, or can go through automatically (default is require approval). And iOS 8 has the proxy stuff for family accounts (parental approval for everything if you want).

    How is this Apple 'doing nothing'?

    --
    I print, therefore I am.
  2. Good. Now what about ads? by danbob999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We should be able to filter out adware applications too. I don't understand how people tolerate adware and nag screens on their cellphone. I thought the days of the infamous WinZIP "I agree" were over. I certainly wouldn't use a file browser, instant messaging client or or text editor on my PC with ads. I don't see why it would be anymore acceptable on phones.

    1. Re:Good. Now what about ads? by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I Want a game of decent quality, with no add, no in app purchase, no attempt to try to get you to purchase a full version, no attempt to try to upsell an other service and all free.

      Heck why limit it to game or software. I want all my products for free with no strings attached. However I want to be sure my employer pays me for my job of writing software.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Good. Now what about ads? by Garfong · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't want it all for free, but I think companies should be honest about their business model. I think they should distinguish between "Free" trial, "Free" with paid upgrades, "Free" ad-supported, etc.

  3. Re:Really people? by Iamthecheese · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're right: absolutely nothing is free. Except Linux and Chrome and Internet Explorer and Java and TCP and pictures of the Alps and FreeCiv and Libre Office and Wikipedia and the RepRap design and CERN data and the open hardware repository and NIH publications and water filter designs and Acura NSX blueprints and clothing patterns and Project Gutenberg and the Internet Archive and don't even think about saying they're "not really free". In all cases we're talking about voluntary contributions of work. Games are as digital as all of these others and claiming no game is free in that context is total bullshit.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  4. Nothing is free by phorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In terms of monentary cost, many useful things are. Free software also used to be less of a crapshoot (is it *really* safe, a virus/trojan, adware, or nagware)?

    Apache: Free
    OpenOffice/LibreOffice: Free
    Java: Free

    There were/are also a lot of free utilities that - while not pretty - were basically in the realm of "hey I made this to solve X for myself and thought somebody else might find it useful."

    There may be some learning involved to *use* the product, and certainly many FOSS solutions involve community-provided updates, but in terms of personal cost it's free for me.

  5. Worse yet.. by GrBear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Worse yet are PAID apps that have in-app purchases. Companies double-dipping piss me off to no end. Either make your app free with in-app purchases, or sell it to me without extra charges later.

  6. Re:Really people? by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're free for you the end user.

    So you agree that they're free in the sense that everyone in the discussion has been using the word "free."

    So no, those things you listed aren't free.

    I'm confused. You admitted that they're free "for you." Who has been arguing that they are costless for all? Who has defined "free" as costless for all? How do you reconcile costless for all with "free for you?"

    Actually, I'm not confused at all. You've constructed a pseudo-syllogism using a false proposition in an attempt to belittle the GP while making yourself feel authoritative and smart.

    Free doesn't mean what you think it means. You're not even a pedant, you're simply wrong. Go away.