A fast, easy to use, free, and community supported 2D game engine
I know this has been discussed before but how is everyone doing on the app store? I know there have been a few top games written in Cocos2d but what about everyone else? I have bought a ton of really fun games mentioned on this forum but never see them in the app store. Are you at least making $5 a day on each game?
Seems like the market is terrible right now for developers. I have many friends that were doing ok $20 a day and now not making anything.
RyanBarnard
Member
My guess is a combination of all the above. When I started developing, there was "only" 30,000 apps out there. Now with it over 70k (is it at 80k yet?), it's harder and harder to get noticed.
Another major factor was when the keywords were introduced. It makes sense why they did it, because people were hijacking popular apps with their own by mentioning it in their description (ie: "Do you like Camera Genius? Then you'll love iFart-a-rama!") so when folks search for "camera genius" this iFart-a-rama will show up. So I totally understand the keywords, but it killed people like me.
My top two apps are remakes of other apps out there ("Silly Stories" is a MadLibs type game, and "Aftershock" is a game like Facebook's ChainRxn). Nobody is going to search for "Silly Stories" when they want to do a Mad-Libs game...they'll search for MadLibs. So in my description I put "Silly Stories is a game like MadLibs...". After the introduction of keywords, then people searching for MadLibs never see my app pop up.
Meanwhile, the creators of MadLibs just put up their own "official" app, and they have keywords of "silly" and "stories" so guess what...when people search for Silly Stories, my competitor shows up!
In my book, the introduction of keywords is the biggest killer of all chances of making decent money on the app store without getting really lucky.
I really don't look at the developer when buying an app. I usually don't notice if it's gameloft or ngmoco until after I've bought something. The biggest thing I do is look at the screenshots and the reviews. If those two pass my test, then I read the description and possibly buy it. The developer barely factors into my decision.
Yikes. This is pretty scary to hear as I'm just preparing to submit my first app after months of work.
Have any developers here switched to other platforms with any success? :/
We're looking closely into Android & WebOS at the moment (O'Reilly have some good intro webcasts for each). Although the markets are currently much smaller, theres a lot less content, so theres more potential to get noticed.
But then, with Android being mainly Java based (with some usage of c++), and WebOS being Html/JavaScript based, & the large mix of hardware their becoming available on, they bring a new range of challenges and limitations to the table! So we're still weighing up whether to invest time into either of them yet, or not.
Would be interested to hear if anyone here is developing on any other platforms...
@PhilM: Yeah, that's my problem as well. I'd love to port my game to other platforms once it's done, but I think it would require more resources than I have, given how much more testing Android and WebOS would require. Plus, I'd have to seriously scale back the graphical effects to get it to run on those devices.
I wanna comment here, just so you people can hear me out.
The appstore's golden rush is most definantly over. Seriously, not that I'm trying to demotivate anyone, but as of today from what I see about 1k of apps is released daily. I just updated my app yesterday (rewrote it) September 17th, 2 hours later the release date got updated (September 17th), do you know where's it found? It's the 87th app on the release date (Entertainment) and today is already somewhere behind about in the 200th place.
With the new Alphabetic sorting and so many trash apps out there starting with 'A', you most probably never will get noticed, Bottom line:
To get noticed, to get your app visible, the only way is getting FEATURED!!
Personally I develop for fun, at my free time (not that I have much, school...) and I sumbited 2 apps as of today and have 2 more under development.
At anyrate the appstore can now be officially called junkstore, because all of those trashers are ruining it for all of us, and so do all of these big companies (not that you can blame 'em).
Whenever you release your app, make it original and fun and cross your fingers.
Anyways, it turned to be a long comment, but I just had to spill out what I think of the store's future.
Maybe we will get more chances in the future... maybe we will get noticed and maybe we will succeed eventually.
~ Natanavra here, and I wish you luck.
I have 4 paid apps and they bring in anywhere between $40-$100 a day worldwide, I've had bigger days but usually when I do a couple of updates together. Not brilliant but ok, the more apps the more it will increase, I have 12 game ideas that need doing but I will need to employee an extra programmer at some time I guess.
Like most, I'm not making very much from my apps; if I update all 3 of my apps (plus a lite version), I'll do $60-$80 in revenue for the week, and another $7 or so from ads. That said, as someone who's probably looked at a large portion of the games on the app store, I have to admit that sales justice does exist to some degree. While there are certainly things hitting the top list or being featured which aren't as good as other things, truly great and innovative games do float to the top and more importantly stay there.
I think to be successful (in the long run), apps have to hit on a number of different levels at once or be first to market with some new or catchy idea. It's not enough to produce a fun game, you have to produce a fun game which also hits at least most of the following:
- The play experience is obvious from the screen shot
- Looks great
- Has a good icon
- Is replayable
- Offers something new, unique, or of better quality than whats out there
- Is worth talking about with friends (or playing with them)
For instance, one of my favorite games on the iPhone is Drop7. I'm sure it's sold a decent number of copies, but it's never made it to any of the top lists. Everyone I know who plays it loves it and holds it in very high regards. However, it's one major issue is that it's hard to understand what you do in the game simply by looking at a screenshot or even watching someone play it. I think that's really hurt it's sales and lumped it in with the match-3 crowd despite it being one of the best puzzle games I've ever played.
Generally, when I see a quality game not selling well, you can find a reason why. Sure, it's great to get featured by apple, and that will definitely boost your sales temporarily, but the ones that stick around on these lists are generally a cut above the rest in the factors listed above.
Hey, I'd love to get rich making indie games in my spare time; but I think that's a bad reason to do it and highly unlikely. In fact, I find I'm more creative and happy coding when I'm not worried about making money off the app. My next two apps are going to be free, and I'll make a pro version or something if they do well. I find things much more rewarding when you don't have high expectations of things, and generally speaking the low-expectation projects I've worked on have always been more fun and successful in the long run. We expected Guitar Hero to sell around 100,000 copies when we launched it and look what happened with that.
Do you think it is just luck, that e.g. Chillingo gets so many apps in the top 100? I do not think so. Most of the time you can tell which games will go to the top. Sure there are exceptions. The "problem" is there are many apps out there and there are also many high quality apps among them. But I agree that it it hard to make such apps without a decent budget.
It is easy for me to write something like this as I have not realeased anything yet :)
zombie
ob1
Member
Well, it's not as easy zombie. Reviews (and having a foot in the door at review sites), timing, luck, brand name, "cheating" and other factors seem to prevail.
I have seen very nice games do no money, while a month later a bad clone was TOP1.
For exemple, we made it in the TOP50 games in the Netherlands because of one single review on a site that is syndicated a lot. I think the same might happen in several parts of the world if only one of the big US sites would review us.
A friend hesitated to release a small "crap app" he made in one evening. He made more money with it than all his other successful apps together.
And the rules of the store change all the times, making it even more difficult for indies.
@ob1 it seems that making "crap apps" and "copy cats" is the actuall way for success, and it scares me a lot. I love developing something that has quality, not some junk and I love updating and adding new features... even if it's a simple app, make it have interesting features and something somewhat original.
My first app makes basically no money at all (0-5$ a week...) but it was one of the first apps that let you scare your friends... simulating an iPhone and pranking your friends (although I understand it's not much) but I update the app from time to time, so it won't become a junk app...
I don't really know how the appstore works, it changes constantly and it's really hard to keep up and somehow succeed. Personally I dream of success in the store, and meanwhile I develop for fun.
Just my 2 cents,
~ Natanavra.
Codemattic
Moderator
You know what Apple should do? Charge developers for each release. I know Im going to get heck for saying it. But maybe $20-$40 per review. Reviews would be faster bc they could just hire more reviewers when there are more apps that need it. And it would put the brakes on people flooding the store with crap apps.
Any resource thats too cheap gets flooded. Web URLs cost basically nothing, so every damn name is bought up by some holding/ad company and it sits mostly idle with ads.
ok - go ahead and let me have it :)
I would rather see a submission limit, say two apps a month per dev account. This would decrease the approval wait times for everyone, and reflect a desire for quality over quantity. Problem is, Apple doesn't really seem to have such a desire. They aren't ramping up the number of app reviewers they employ, and are rather simply making devs wait longer for the approval process to complete (especially when rejections are involved -- as reviewers make no effort to let you know about multiple issues per rejection, often equating in a few submissions per app -- I know it doesn't matter to you (until it happens (and it prob. will at some point for something))). At the end of the day, Apple doesn't have the same concerns because, as I said, they aren't spending more money to hire more reviewers, and are sitting on a pile of cash (notice how when companies like Apple and Nintendo start printing money they seem to care less about helping those who helped them get there?). Also, they love slides with big numbers ("Our platform has 8 trillion apps!") The app-a-day'ers make the review process much longer for the rest of us (time is money...). The fact that there is not a better system to let users sort by rating is a joke. Apps that may be quite good, but have been out for a while, are buried in the piles. :-(
Agree with every word, AkumaStreak!
Codemattic, Akuma's method is prefered by me, because I'm a minor and I can't pull out cash everytime I want to publish an app, besides I can't have a legal paypal account (Apple won't recieve payment from them anyway...) so it's a stupid system.
I agree the best way is limiting! In total, I don't think there are too many registered devs maybe 5k of devs but I don't think there are anymore than that... So limiting is the best approach, giving a fair chance to everyone.
These are just our thoughts and suggestions, but in practice Apple basically gives a **** about the people who help her get to the top, the indie devs mostly. They don't do anything, they just keep loading bullshit into the store and create those stupid systems (Alphabetic sorting is ****** up!)
Ok, so I've gone a bit wild, I'll just cool down a bit.
~ Natanavra.
Among the qualities listed in your post slipster216, I would pick "viral" + "replayable". I think that is exactly the case for Stick Wars and that's why it runs so well. Stick Wars is the only Cocos2D game making big money so far. Other cocos2D games were featured by Apple but after a while they all disappeared from the top 100.
Codemattic
Moderator
Slipster216: "I have to admit that sales justice does exist to some degree." In addition I do think Apple has been pretty good about promoting small developers in the store. Its a pretty good mix between big brands and one or two guy shops.
@jptsetung: "Stick Wars is the only Cocos2D game making big money so far." One idea I took from SW is I think people really like stores where you can level up weapons. Like you finish playing the game but then want to go back and play it again but this time buy the shotgun instead of the uzi and see what thats like.
@Codemattic I think that people like upgrading, they like RPGish stuff, they want to get stronger and stronger, and unlock new things, just to see how this new weapon works or how do the new troops look like... It's all about creating interest amongest your clients.
cando
Member
@natanavra there is more to games then just plain RPG.. iphone is a little different market then other gaming consoles like psp.
A majority of users are NOT gamers. the theme of the game should be appealing to the audience.. see the latest success for say: "Battle Bears", the game just hit the right chords with the audience - it has got replay value, is easy to pick up and learn and is cute!
Agree about not all players are RPG-ers. Look that sheep launch game. It's fast, it's well polished, it's fun and makes you play it again and again to see something more. What I think iPhone gamers like is games in which they can't see the end. Where they expect something new all the time. But I am not talking about puzzle games with different levels. They are enjoyment for a while, then you get bored with it...
About Apple and small developers... We are obviously in not too good position right now. And if those trends continue we'll end up like dinosaurs. If Apple continues with this politics only big developers will survive and make more money, but with time it'll all collapse because there will be no more variety that small developers bring to the table. Of course it's nice to see big and good game from big developer, but what would be app store without iFart, don't touch red button, etc? We all laugh at those apps like they are of minor quality (which they are in fact), but those kind of apps made App Store so viral and so likable for buyers... You see kids chating about Moron Test, iPhone Mirror and not too much about big names. And that spreads the word about App Store, about iPhone, and brings more buyers. I just hope Apple is aware that without small developers they'll just give more chance to Android and similar phones and to whatever may come next...
In that sense I see suggestion about limiting number of apps per month like a good one. Of course if it would be valid for big developers also.
Codemattic suggested charging for review, but that looses my point of small developers making "crap" apps and spreading the viral effect of App Store. Sorry codemattic for not agreeing with you, he he :)
That's interesting but looks pretty impossible for bunch of crazy developers working on same code on many different locations on Earth (someone maybe even beyond :)
What would be more doable is combining together to form a production company, in which every game from member developers would be rated from all other members, and if it passes, then it could be released under the company name. Every member's earning would be calculated separately, percentage of money would be sent to him and some percentage of money would belong to mother company, which can be used for marketing, promotion and other stuff to boost the branding of the company...
Also every new member should be rated by other members by his work (real game or sample one) and accepted accordingly.
All of that may prolong production time, because of testing and everything, but may bring more money and visibility to every single member in the long term
cando
Member
@crmagicxxx yeah, sounds like a doable idea. What is needed is a platform. There are a lot of open source projects which are successful where people are working from different parts of the world and are able to successfully come up with stable products. A small team to run/manage a "production group" and loads of independent programers/graphics/level designers/game designers can then be managed and given a slice of the pie :)
Good examples: Mozilla Firefox, Ubuntu, Eclipse,..
Online
Member
Hi folks,
I must agree with most of the comments I've seen on here. My app was released and then made a bit of money for a while but after that its pretty much resigned to the bottom of the bin. Now i'm under NO illusions that my app was fantastic, it was not the best in the world (it was my first ObjC / Cocos2d app and was more a way for me to understand how it all worked) and it didn't really 'DO' anything to be honest.
I think a good point here to remember is that the App Store is a mechanism for developers to distribute their applications and handle the payment side of things - it should not be solely relied on for the marketing side of things. Great if your app hits #1 or gets featured - but long term its the marketing of your app thats going to get it there! Developers need to spend more time marketing their apps, getting the apps out to the review sites - heaven knows there are enough 'Iphone App' review sites out there, if you can get onto those they have a tendency to be quite viral too...
As for the app store review process, I sometimes wonder whether its worth it. Considering the amount of rubbish on the app store and the proliferation of 'fart' style apps etc (these should be a genre in their own right!) exactly what flight to quality is the review process trying to control here? Baby Shaker App? Well, it might seem wrong, but any worse than a farting app? or one where you run around gunning people down? If the review process were abandoned and you could publish on day-1 would that make things better? Would developers be more inclined to release smaller bug fixes more often?
There are some really good apps out there and kudos to those developers - but surely the cream would rise to the top anyway regardless of some 'apple sanctioned' review process.
Thats my 2c worth...lets see Apple take 30% of that! :)
I think the app monthly limit idea could still be abused, as you could have multiple accounts, at a one off yearly fee, thats not too expensive for the devs who are submitting lots of junk apps.
Although I don't particularly like the idea, the fee per submission might be the only way to help reduce the amount of tat, although perhaps leave free apps as free submissions, and only paid apps incur a submission charge.
Some nice ideas here about production groups etc.
You must log in to post.
