Why Doesn’t iTunes Have Game Trials?

Nothing is more annoying than going into iTunes to see what video games are available for the iPod Touch and iPhone to find it cluttered with hundreds of duplicate games. Developers seem to find it most useful to release two games instead of one single game: a full version and a “lite” version.

itunesDevelopers know gamers want to try before they buy, so many will create a game they’re hoping to sell, then a limited “lite” version with partial levels or stripped of features. They’re obviously trying to work around the fact that Apple released a half-assed game shopping experience. These pro and lite versions assist in cluttering the shopping space.

iTunes App Store should allow users to trial a game by allowing them to download a neutered version of the game title or using a time-trial like many other downloadable game services. Electronic game downloads are usually non-refundable because you can never give back a product which you can make infinite copies. The solution to getting users to buy into your product is to allow them to try before they buy.

Apple’s obviously enjoying the immense game sales from the application store but they may be able to increase their sales by allowing gamers to see what they’re buying before they walk away empty handed. This would also limit the total products found in the App Store because developers won’t have to post to revisions to their game title to allow gamers to try before they buy them.

There are some obvious downsides, Apple wouldn’t be able to boast the thousands of products in their store because many would be substituted for a real game download system. Okay, that’s really the only download I can think of… any others?

Developers may opt out of a trial system, forcing gamers to buy it before they try it based on the text and screenshots or utilize a time trial or limited featured version.

Thoughts?

0 thoughts on “Why Doesn’t iTunes Have Game Trials?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Sony’s 10-Year Vision: Graphics or Games?Sony’s 10-Year Vision: Graphics or Games?

Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo have great visions for their consoles, they all strive to stand out from their competitors. Nintendo’s key initiative is to get non-gamers on board and provide the world with something a little different while Microsoft’s concept is to get a 360 into the hands of all gamers and build a huge community. Sony’s selling point? Graphics.

When it comes to standing out amongst the other consoles, Sony cannot compete with the Wii‘s quirky cuteness and Xbox 360‘s one-year lead on sales, games and overall functionality. They were late to the game because of technological advances in Blu-Ray and overall graphic horsepower. They’re providing a console that will still look “teh awesomes” ten years down the road, similar to the attack plan of the PS2 product which still sells today.

Sony’s Scott Steinberg, Vice President of Product Marketing for SCEA had nothing but great things to say about the console he’s marketing…

“I think that we’re seeing, graphically, PS3 games starting to create some distance and some of the other competitors are going to feel that they’re getting long in the tooth, looking quite dated, because they haven’t created that ten-year vision from a horsepower standpoint” (psu.com)

Really? Does anyone look at the Xbox 360 and say “this thing looks dated.” Each new title release continues to look more advanced and more graphically appealing than the last. Sure, Resistance 2 looked graphically epic, but the title isn’t on the shelves yet. As a matter of fact, very few PS3 titles are on the shelves when it comes to graphically appealing titles everyone wants.

As Nintendo has proven, it’s not always about the advanced graphics but the fun value and access to many titles across many genre’s of gaming. We’re happy about a nice 10-year vision but there is a reason classic games like Pac-Man, Missile Command and Galaga are still talked about and played by gamers: simple and fun.

Microsoft may not have a ten year vision, this is true, but I’d rather have a hot console I can play for the next six years than own a more expensive console with few games until its third year of life. The PlayStation 3 has been beating the Xbox 360 sales in 2008, is this too surprising given the fact that the Xbox 360 was out a year ahead? Sales aren’t always going to be rosy and over the top (unless it’s the Wii).

Rather than concentrate on how many more consoles the PS3 has sold compared to the 360, look at how many Wii consoles have sold to the graphically superior PS3. Perhaps Sony should speak less to the gamers about how awesome their console is and speak more to the developers so we can get titles worth buying for the console. Gamers only win when a console has games for them to play.

Apple, The Great Casual Platform?Apple, The Great Casual Platform?

Apple’s iPhone and iPod platforms have been great stages for launching some hot casual game titles. Besides the slick sexy look the platforms play games well, have great user interface features and, as developers are concerned, offer great support and turn around speeds.

While Nintendo and Sony own a lot of the market in terms of hand-held devices, Apple is growing in the space and offer developers an easier time getting their titles to market. Ironic considering Apple has never been a huge gaming platform for their primary computer architectures.

Although Apple is the upcoming shining star in this area, it’s important to remember they’re the underdog. It’s often in the best interest of the “little guy” to kiss up to developers and make their migration to the platform as easy as possible. Once Apple becomes the top dog in the industry, will they forget the “little guys” that made their platform so great and become just another big company in the mobile game space?

Hopefully Apple won’t forget about those developers that are making their platform great by turning their back on them once they’ve become a market leader. We don’t need another Montreal Screwjob.

Seven Games That Need to Be RemadeSeven Games That Need to Be Remade

With the strong rumor that Halo: Combat Evolved is going to be remade graphically from the ground up, it brings us to the question of why aren’t more games being remade? We’re not talking about reboots like the new emo Devil May Cry, or re-imaginings like the first person shooter XCOM. We’re talking about a true remake like you see endlessly from Square-Enix with its Final Fantasy games on the handhelds – they’re completely faithful to the original, save a new engine, graphics and occasionally an additional mission or two; the upcoming localization of Dragon Quest VI is a great example.

So, we’ve picked out seven games that desperately need a modern remake, sometimes due to their primitive graphics, sometimes due to their incompatibility with the current OS, or the fact you need to do some major tweaking to get them to run (unless GOG.com does it for you, bless their souls.)

These games aren’t old or have already been remade, so you won’t see M.U.L.E., Sid Meier’s Pirates or Seven Cities of Gold – in fact, the oldest of the games is from 1994. You also won’t see games that require little work to be remade, which is why you won’t see Grim Fandango here, either. These games would require serious undertaking. The games also have to remain the same genre and style, so no Elder Scrolls version of Ultima IV, either.

Without further ado, here are five older games that desperately need a remake – in alphabetical order.

(more…)