Hacker News Reader

Comment by Mithaldu | Hacker News Reader

I don't see that in the article at all. At what point does he decry the shareware model as abusive in that article?

He doesn't. I don't think it is. Here's a review where they call a demo version with paid upgrade to the full version with no other IAPs "tacky".

http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPhone/Glyph+Quest/review.asp...

Ah, i didn't realize that you were referring to a completely different article. I read that one and have to say i think you're not seeing the subtle differentiation he is making. He is not against shareware altogether.

He's slightly annoyed that the game doesn't outright explain that it's a shareware/demo/whatever, which is a reasonable complaint when you keep in mind that many other games do this by having their demos labeled "Lite" or similar.

DanBC was referring to shareware/demo model as being called unsavory because some people don't like IAP in anything at all ever. "This game would be great except after the first few level it asks me to spend money to buy the full version. It should be free! 1 star, and I'll maybe give 4 stars if the developer makes it free like it should be!" Is a common review.

You could check if the player has left such reviews and if they have deactivate IAPs from the start and run ads instead. This could improve your reviews and revenue (but in the long run it might incentivize players to leave bad reviews if widely used and known). Would it be disrespectful of the player's privacy?

reread parent comment. reconsider post.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com