This academic conference on games gets underway in earnest.
The first day of Meaningful Play 2014 started this morning with a keynote, continued with 3 conference sessions (6 choices each) followed by another keynote, and concluded with a special event where lots of games and research were presented in a social environment of happy, controlled chaos.
(There was actually “continental breakfast” available first thing, for those into waking up that early, but my schedule was not conducive to that.)
The proceedings were (briefly) opened by Johannes Bauer (Michigan State University), who chairs the Department of Media and Information at MSU, which department presented the conference. (Interestingly, I have known Johannes for about 20 years in a completely non-game context.) He introduced conference organizers, Brian Winn (Michigan State University), who I have known since before he started the first Meaningful Play, and Casey O’Donnell (Michigan State University). Casey spoke about the monsters theme as a metaphor for games and game studies, saying, “Monsters aren’t bad, only complicated.” Brian provided the selected hashtag, #MPlay and some (more grounded) conference numbers: 300 attendees from 17 countries and 23 US states.
The opening keynote was “Computer Game Studies: Moving Forward (?)“, presented by Mia Consalvo (Concordia University), who also had been one of the respondents last night. She structured her entire talk as a “Dear Espen” (a play on Dear Esther) letter replying to a 2001 commentary by Espen Aarseth. It helped set up the discussion on game studies, the primary focus of the conference, as well as subtly playing on the theme of diversity in games, which cannot help being an undertone of the discussion, given recent events. The talk was interesting and engaging but, if I am honest, not terribly enlightening, especially given that I have been a part of the game industry through the entirety of the history she covered and that the talk was targeted at researchers; the only time developers were really addressed was when she entreated us to all work together (i.e., for game developers to listen to scholars). My (retrospective) takeaway is that the area of “game studies” has to struggle for relevance within the larger industry.
For the first set of sessions, I attended a panel, “The Meaning of Casual: Serious Dialogues about Casual Games“, with presentations by Shira Chess (University of Georgia), Adrienne Shaw (Temple University), and Lauren Cruikshank (University of New Brunswick), with a remote from Maria Cipollone (UX researcher at Zynga). The panel was (ostensibly) about taking casual games seriously, which I found really intriguing, but there was a large overlap in the genres discussed, completely excluding the types of casual games that my company builds. Specific points made about nurturing games targeted at young girls do not translate to casual games in general, and where puzzle games or solitaire were mentioned, there seemed (to me) to be a bit of the same air of derision that the panelists were supposedly denouncing. (I was astounded, too, that discussion of nurturing games never once mentioned the word, “tomagotchi”.) The remote presentation was the most interesting, but the conclusion was one that we already know well, specifically, that “casual gamers” can be anything but casual about playing.
That panel provided a basis for some interesting observations, however. The first two presenters (at least) have been called out by name in the #GamerGate controversy, which I suspect is the reason that the group seemed to be a little bit insular. Whenever I saw one of them throughout the day, the others were always there. (This is in contrast to my own conference behavior, where I often eschew friends in order to make new acquaintances by talking to other people.) On that (parenthetical) note, one of my new conference friends went to the workshop, “Make the Course You Want to Take: MSU’s Surviving the Coming Zombie Apocalypse” and she (an educator) raved about how good that session was.
Then, there were two more sessions in the afternoon. [OK, I admit it: I went home for a few hours, as I was not fully prepared to exhibit tomorrow, and I was also yawning due to “jet lag”, my normal schedule being closer to Pacific Time. 🙂 ]
The afternoon keynote was “Meaningful Leverage: Breaking the System of Ignorance“, presented by Erin Hoffman (Game Design Lead at GlassLab), who is probably best known as being “ea_spouse“, from the exposé on labor practices at Electronic Arts. This keynote was quite enlightening, and well-presented. Hoffman began by discussing the concept of systems as known to game developers, with references to game balancing, noting how easy it is (or can be) to “break” a system, which in the context of game design is a Bad Thing. She then turned the topic on its head, looking at the larger world, making the case that ignorance itself is a system that feeds upon itself, and asking how we could work to break that system (improving education and fighting poverty being two obvious approaches), which would be a Good Thing. This a fascinating concept, provoking thought and discussion, and seemed to be very well-received among attendees.
One point I found interesting, albeit mostly unrelated to the keynote itself, was when Hoffman dismissed casual games as “meaningless”. I happened to be directly behind the table occupied by the presenters from the earlier panel on casual games, in a line of sight to the speaker, and it seemed that the whole table had a visceral reaction of discomfort at the statement. The sentiment (or flinching) must have been somewhat broader, because the speaker immediately attempted to clarify her intent. However, I do not think that she helped her case any by stating that did not mean they were unimportant, because they must provide something that is otherwise missing in the lives of casual game players. Wisely, she quickly moved on before digging that hole any deeper; so shall I. 🙂
After a dinner break, there was the Special Event: Conference Reception, Game Exhibition, and Poster Session. The main event was held in the ballroom, with the posters (and open bar) just outside. Alas, some of the scheduled posters were not there (and few of the authors), but fortunately, Allen Trammell was there to discuss his most interesting one, Vertiginous Play: Debating “Fun” with the Diplomacy Wives Club, in which he looked into archives of the fan community of Diplomacy (a board game) from the 1960s and found parallels to current debates within the video game community. After a healthy discussion there, I attempted to introduce myself to the aforementioned casual games micro-group to share my thoughts, was rudely rebuffed (an action rife with opportunities for speculation), and then bumped into Brian Winn, for the first time since his conference started, and had a (no doubt) much more fulfilling conversation with him.
Inside the ballroom, there was all manner of activity, with lots of games, both digital and “analog”, being discussed, demonstrated, and played. There was bustle everywhere, and the event seemed to be really successful. Some of the digital games that I saw were Fat Chicken, though Josh Mills was struggling with the seemingly inevitable technical issues when I visited, After the Storm, an interesting educational game for reading and writing in the context of journalism, and Guided Meditation, which was my first direct experience with the Oculus Rift headset (and my first VR headset experience in probably 10 years). On the board and card game side, after meeting Clay Ewing, I made a point of checking out both Humans vs. Mosquitos and Vanity, the former (in particular) being impressive in its ability to convey a message in the context of an elegant card game that would be welcome at one of our regular game nights.
I also came across the game, The Bone Wars, a game about paleontology in a (narrow) historical context that taught me something with just the description. What made this most interesting for me, though, was that I got involved in a discussion with the project advisor, Paul Gestwicki (Ball State University), in which we were able to discuss technical aspects of game development in depth. We talked about tools, and game engines, and the difficulties inherent in creating general Solitaire deal solvers, and all manner of other topics of interest to programmers. The conversation lasted until the event had technically ended and the ballroom was starting to empty.
Returning to my office at the end of a long day, I am looking forward to more to come. (I also realize that I parked downtown three different times, in three different cars…)
A special talk prepares attendees for the conference itself.
Tonight, prior to the official Meaningful Play 2014 opening, there was a pre-conference Quello Center Lecture Series talk entitled, Racism, Sexism, and Video Games: Social Justice Campaigns and the Struggle for Gamer Identity.
I found the talk quite interesting and informative, and incredibly timely, though there was not much that was actionable The respondents generally agreed with the premise, merely stating a different perspective. All of the speakers referred to “stereotype threat“, which (oversimplified) is the tendency for individuals to exhibit negative traits ascribed to groups to which they belong when confronted (subconsciously) with the stereotypes. One example given was that a purple alien in the midst of many green aliens would tend to behave in a manner attributed to purple aliens generally. Answering a question, Ratan extended the idea to suggest that this manifests not only within an individual online game, but also in the selection of games played, which provoked a response from an audience member that is probably best described as “vehement (eventual) agreement”. 🙂
At a result of this exchange, I found myself considering the programming team that I (originally) led at Spectrum HoloByte. I was hired as Senior Software Engineer, and Lead Programmer on Star Trek: The Next Generation, “A Final Unity”, which was developed by an internal division called the “PC Group”. The other big group was the “Sim Group”, which programmed military simulations, namely the Falcon aircraft simulators. Our PC Group had been responsible for the line of Tetris games for MS-DOS, while the Sim Group had just finished shipping Falcon 3.0, which by internal accounts (verified by documentation) had been one of the worst death march situations in the industry.
My initial team was five programmers, including myself, but what makes it interesting is that the team was 60% female (back in 1993). I was, of course, one of the two male programmers, and I had been considered for 3 positions, but in the interview process I made it clear that I was not interested in flight simulators and did not wish to be considered for the Sim Group opening (though the producer insisted that we talk anyway). The other male programmer had been integral in the Sim Group for the previous product but, for his own reasons (n.b., “death march”), had chosen to switch groups. On the other side of the building, the Sim Group had exactly zero female programmers.
I have always thought that this arrangement was interesting, but in the context of the talk, it provides some anecdotal evidence that not only is there some gender bias in games played but, to the degree allowed by business, this is also true of games being developed. In other words, three female programmers gravitated to the group creating puzzle, board, and arcade games, while two male programmers moved away from the war games. For the record, this was one of the best teams, in terms of atmosphere, I have experienced (until “circumstances” intervened, as they eventually must).
A Note about #GamerGate
This talk took place just one day after the story broke about Anita Sarkeesian receiving terrorist death threats and having to cancel her talk at Utah State University, so despite having been scheduled for months, the topic was almost disturbingly topical. Aside from an offhand joke on Twitter (below), I had not been following or involved in the #GamerGate controversy, so I was interested to learn that several of the players in the “social justice warrior” (not a pejorative) space were to be speaking at Meaningful Play 2014 (again, having been scheduled many months before the storm even began). This really sets an underlying theme for the rest of the conference.
I think #GamerGate is what happens when people read the comments. 🙂
— Gregg Seelhoff (@GreggSeelhoff) September 17, 2014
My personal take on the controversy is that it is disappointing that there are “sides” and each faction is trying to somehow “win”, despite there being no achievable victory conditions. At an academic conference, and especially within the audience for this talk, there is unlikely to be any sympathy with those who make threats, but it is not merely the ignorant who are stirring the pot. As somebody who is not innately a member of any disadvantaged minority group (except “genius” 🙂 ), I still appreciate (and actively support) the push for diversity in the game industry, but cannot support rhetoric which serves to divide and/or supports deliberate disruption of the field in which I have made my career.
So… New Cooperative Game Rules:
- Live and let live.
- Stop talking; start doing.
- If you say “them”, you lose.
- You do not win when others lose.
- more games
- more diversity
- more choices
- more prosperity
I am happy with a collaborative effort, so please feel to contribute rule suggestions.
This is the International Academic Conference on Meaningful Play.
This week, Michigan State University hosts Meaningful Play 2014, the fourth edition of this bi-annual academic conference discussing “games that matter“.
Meaningful Play 2014, running October 16-18, 2014 in East Lansing, Michigan, includes numerous keynotes, speakers, panels, roundtables, workshops, papers, and special events, all examining and promoting the idea that games can (and should) have a positive impact.
This year, SophSoft, Incorporated is not only attending the conference but, for the first time, we are sponsoring Meaningful Play. In addition to sponsoring, we will be exhibiting our games (as Digital Gamecraft) in the Pure Michigan Game Exhibition and Celebration, giving away free copies of Demolish! Pairs, and I will be participating in a panel, Growing the Game Industry in Michigan: 2014 Update.
I have attended Meaningful Play two (of three) previous times, in 2008 and 2010 (missing 2012 only due a scheduling conflict), and I found them to be quite refreshing. Like other conferences I have attended, I leave filled with inspiration, but as an academic conference, this one also challenges me with many new ideas about games, with scientific studies, unique approaches, and non-commercial products not seen at major industry events.
Over the new few days, I intend to document my experiences and takeaways from Meaningful Play 2014, for which I will link below as articles are published:
- Meaningful Play 2014, Day 0
- Meaningful Play 2014, Day 1
- Meaningful Play 2014, Day 2
- Meaningful Play 2014, Conclusion
Mobile games may not play by the same rules.
We have now entered summer (in the Northern Hemisphere, anyway), which is traditionally a slow time for sales in the game industry. The explanation over the years has generally been that this is a time during which people take vacations and spend more time outside, so they spend less time at the computer or game system and play fewer games. This certainly makes sense for desktop and console games, but in this day of increased use of mobile devices and handhelds, the traditional explanation may not hold (as much) water. When one of your game systems (i.e., phone) travels with you everywhere, it makes sense that it would get used as much as usual; in fact, it is likely used more in places like airports, the back seat of a car during a long drive, and the hotel room after the swimming pool has closed for the evening.
Of course, if summer shifts play to mobile games, where the (dubious) profits are marginal, at best, this is still likely to result in an overall slump for companies who support more than one type of platform. Nevertheless, I expect that consumer behavior changes differently in the summer with respect to mobile games. I would hope for extra game purchases in preparation for a vacation or while waiting during travel.
Interestingly, our limited data (with a little squinting 🙂 ) can fit that scenario. Since the holiday weekend at the end of May (Memorial Day in the United States, Late Spring Bank Holiday in the UK), downloads have changed. At the start of that weekend, we saw a spike in downloads which mostly persisted through the (holiday) Monday, after which they essentially flatlined for a few days. Then, last weekend, we had another (smaller) spike on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, then (now) back to zip. Alas, our total download counts are too small to draw definitive conclusions (or even be statistically significant 🙁 ), and it has only been a couple of weekends. (Our sales do not definitively correlate with downloads.) Also, many schools around here are still in session, so we are not really into the heart of summer vacation season either, though the weather is definitely much improved.
Operating more on the assumption that mobile sales may persist through the summer, and the knowledge that sales really need to improve, than on the need for experimental data, we have decided to put Demolish! Pairs on sale for 50% off throughout the month of June, and we have likewise discounted all IAP products in Demolish! Pairs FTP similarly. Sure, it may skew the data, but in a good way. 🙂
As a reward for reading this blog post (assuming that you have done so in a timely manner), I will tell you that we are approaching the 1 year anniversary of the Demolish! Pairs release, and to celebrate, we plan to make the game absolutely free for one day only, on June 18, 2014. You can download the game on that day (two weeks from today) and keep it forever.
“There’s a hole in the cat bag!”
Our game development consulting site is back online.
The site is sophsoft.com.
Historically, this site has been the main web site for SophSoft, Incorporated, our parent company. We have had and used the domain name since November 14, 1995, and the official corporate name was, in fact, taken from the domain name.
The site has been down for a while, though. Honestly, we found ourselves in a bit of a weird and unfortunate situation. When our business partner and artist, Rick Tumanis, died back in 2011, it was a huge loss. Not only did we need to regroup from the sadness, but we also no longer had our Art Director to draw upon. This meant both that the services we offered would need to change and that the person in charge of web design and appearance was, shall we say, unavailable.
After more than two and half years, with the site having been pulled when we replaced a web server quite a while ago, I finally made the move and built the new (albeit small) site and published it for those who have been looking for our game development services. I kept a few items from Rick on there, but realigned the focus. At some point, I will add pages specific to our various contracting projects, but for now, the site is back.
If you need game development assistance, either with technical programming challenges or with higher level management and design, or want to have an entire game created by a professional team with decades of experience, be sure to check out SophSoft.
“Nothing Short of a Masterpiece.”
Our social media service provided some interesting data.
The XXII Winter Olympic Games (a.k.a., Sochi 2014) took place in Sochi, Russia on February 6-23, 2014. Digital Gamecraft started covering the event via a special @DGOlympics Twitter account, and a new DGOlympics Facebook page, January 24.
Prior to the actual competition, we reported all manner of information about the upcoming events, schedules, venues, and athletes, and once events got started, we reported news and results for all 98 athletic events, in 15 disciplines within 7 primary sports. We provided a totally free real-time service, on two platforms, with no advertising.
On Twitter, we posted (necessarily) short factoids and results, including podium finishers for every single event, as well as qualifiers and/or standings (as appropriate) from earlier segments of the competition. At the start of each competitive day, we posted a list of the medal events that day and highlighted other interesting events. At the conclusion of competition each day, we posted medal rankings and counts for the top countries.
The format of the result posts was a sport/discipline tag (e.g., #bobsleigh) followed by the event within that discipline, including ‘Men’ or ‘Women’ as appropriate, and then the actual results or interesting facts. We originally began using #men and #women hashtags, but clicking on either brought up a whole lot of irrelevant and inappropriate garbage, so we dropped that practice quickly. We made a point of always mentioning the results for American athletes, usually tagged with #TeamUSA.
Shortly after we started posting results, we began to also send out congratulatory tweets to those athletes who earned medals and also had a Twitter account.
By the end of Sochi 2014, we had made almost 1500 tweets (since London 2012).
On Facebook, we posted essentially the same information as Twitter, but without the size constraints, we often included information from several related tweets in a single Facebook update. For example, all of the upcoming events and highlights for a day were included in one update. Also, some updates (including medal ranks/counts) provided a little more information (e.g., top 10 instead of top 5) than the similar tweets.
The format of the result posts was similar to Twitter as well, except that sport/discipline tags were included at the end of each post, rather than within a sentence, where the name was spelled out normally. Results for a single event (or segment thereof) were often combined into a single update, but results from different events were always separate.
We posted hundreds of updates by the end of Sochi 2014.
Beginning with just a few (<10) Twitter followers left over from London 2012, we simply worked on providing a quality service, without external marketing. Throughout the course of the Winter Games, our following grew gradually and organically to nearly 40 (paltry). The Facebook page was brand new, and with a single request to all of my friends, the number of ‘likes’ jumped to just short of 30 overnight, but it took the duration for it to grow to almost exactly the same number as Twitter followers.
As Sochi 2014 got started, our Facebook page passed 30 ‘likes’, which is a significant milestone, because at that level one gains access to Insights, which provides information about how many people see each post, the number of people “engaged”, and the total “reach” of your page. This is where things started getting interesting.
Despite the measly ‘like’ (and ‘followers’) counts, posts were clearly being seen and read far more widely. Our total engagement numbers were higher than the total number of ‘likes’ on the page, and our reach was in the thousands each week. Individual posts varied widely, but some got hundreds of views each (without being ostensibly shared), far beyond expectations with fewer than 40 ‘likes’. On the Twitter side, with no similar analytics, we could still see similar behaviors, when results were often retweeted within minutes of posting, and almost always by somebody who did not follow us.
Though our hopes were to gain more Twitter followers, our tweets congratulating athletes did get some responses, in the form of favorites and retweets, as well as at least one non-athlete Twit who wanted to argue the validity of an official result. Here is our shout out to the athletes who took the time to acknowledge our tweets:
- Arianna Fontana (ITA) – Short Track [1 silver, 2 bronze]
- Eliza Tiruma (LAT), Luge [bronze]
- Katie Uhlaender (USA), Skeleton [4th place]
- Denis Ten (KAZ), Figure Skating [bronze]
- Denny Morrison (CAN), Speed Skating [1 silver, 1 bronze]
- Patrizia Kummer (SUI), Snowboard [gold]
- Lukas Hofer (ITA), Biathlon [bronze]
- Anke Karstens (GER), Snowboard [silver]
- Niklas Edin (SWE), Curling [bronze]
The sheer number of hours (more than 200) spent compiling information, monitoring the events, and reporting results was astounding, and completely exhausting. When the Closing Ceremony began, we were more than ready to post the final tallies and be done with the Olympics for 2 more years (at least 🙂 ).
First, the number of ‘likes’ on Facebook and the number of followers on Twitter do not tell the entire story. We were clearly reaching many times that number of people.
Second, providing a purely informational resource, free of charge, is not enough to fully engage an audience. We probably needed more cats and misspelled “meme” images.
Third, a comprehensive information resource like the one we provided seems to lose interest over time. Whether it was Olympic weariness or something more general, our “reach” numbers peaked after about a week and a half, and then slowly declined (although they remained in the low thousands).
Fourth, a concentrated social media resource requires a major commitment of time which, in this instance, is in no way justified by the results. I, personally, am not sure that I am willing to commit to this again for Rio 2016.
Fifth, even after providing loads of information for weeks, people on social media are apparently still jaded against marketing messages. Our penultimate Facebook update, which ended with “Please note that DGOlympics has been brought to you by Digital Gamecraft, developer of Demolish! Pairs, http://demolishpairs.com/“, got the fewest views of any post during the entirety of this experiment, by a factor of 2.
Please share your tricks (and failures) about dealing with social media in the comments.
The new year has gotten off to a snow start, though.
For us here at SophSoft, Incorporated and Digital Gamecraft, 2014 is starting a little bit later than originally scheduled. We took our usual couple of weeks off at the turn of the year, but the weather decided to insert itself into our plans. On the first full day of our break, we were hit by a serious ice storm, and although we were very lucky to be mostly unaffected by the power outages, our immediate neighbors were without electricity until New Years Eve. Fortunately, they were back online just in time to watch the Michigan State University Spartans win the Rose Bowl!
On the first day “back” from the break, we received more than 18 inches of snow, which essentially shut down all of East Lansing and surrounding communities for a couple of days. Although we could still get development work done, the first priority was digging out, and that took many hours of physical effort, so it was not easy to just jump right back onto the project schedule. On top of that, we received several pieces of personal news, both bad and good, so it was an emotional week, too. (Personally, I managed to get sick in the midst of all of this, from which illness I am still recovering.)
Nevertheless, despite the slow ramp up, we are now approaching full speed ahead with game development in 2014. We added some newer development systems to assist with our desktop and mobile development, so now we have a state-of-the-art environment for creating games for Windows (up to 8.1), Mac OS X (through Mavericks), Linux (Ubuntu), iOS, Android, Windows Phone, HTML 5, Silverlight, Flash, Xbox 360, OUYA, and more. If anybody needs to contract some programming talent, you can contact me here.
The 2014 Winter Olympic Games in Sochi (Russia) are just three weeks away, and we expect to have unprecedented coverage, both through our @DGOlympics twitter feed, where we will again provide results for all events (as we did for the London Summer Olympics in 2012), as well as through a new (broader) game site that we plan to announce shortly. If you have any interest in the Olympic Games, please follow us at @DGOlympics and spread the word.
On the Solitaire front, our top priority is finishing the substantial rebuild of Pretty Good Solitaire Mac Edition and the other Goodsol Solitaire Engine games. While we have, unquestionably, the best technical platform (and the most games) for the Mac, we are revisiting the interface to make it even more fun to play. Of course, we are also planning to add many more new games in our relentless march toward 1000. 🙂
We have a new iOS upgrade for Demolish! Pairs (and later, Demolish! Pairs FTP) in the works. We are adding (at least) one new play mode, by popular request, and several other new features. (The exact list of features will be determined based on scheduling considerations.) Of course, you can buy Demolish! Pairs on the App Store now and get the upgrade for free when it is released.
There are currently three more major projects in design and development, but I will announce each of those here at an appropriate (later 🙂 ) time. Additionally, there are always a number of maintenance projects which, at this point, include changes to our iOS games mandated by Apple to be “optimized for iOS 7”, modifications to most of our Windows games to properly handle touch interface changes made in Windows 8.1, and of course, everything can use a fresh coat of virtual paint for 2014.
Rather than spend any more time typing about this, I should get back to actual development work, as 2014 is looking to be our most exciting year yet!
The first submission of Demolish! Pairs FTP was rejected by Apple.
As I mentioned in my last post, I decided to embrace the free-to-play concept fully (if perhaps halfheartedly). Unfortunately, my first attempt for iOS did not result in reciprocation, as Apple reviewers rejected the IAP (In-App Purchase) products submitted with the product, Demolish! Pairs FTP. (Alas, it took the product 8 days to get a review, which then lasted only 15 minutes before the rejection notice.)
I had designed what I thought was a well-balanced menu of (4) IAP products, ranging from a “Golden Ticket” at $3.99 (the current price of the “paid” game) down to an inexpensive “Two Day Pass“. This last item ran afoul of a guideline I had overlooked:
“Content subscriptions using IAP must last a minimum of 7 days and be
available to the user from all of their iOS devices”
The inclusion of that product was intended to mimic a standard overnight video rental, which is a clearly established mechanism for viewing movies, instead applied to a downloadable video game. I felt that the inclusion of a $0.99 item (subscription, in this case) was important to anchor the bottom end and provide a quick, low resistance, purchase option for the customer. The economics also basically require that a product priced in such a manner be something of a standalone, since the gap between pricing tiers is 1 dollar US, so this lowest (non-free) tier does adequately fill the space between any two other tiers; the short subscription would have met the need quite nicely.
I accepted the decision (since I had completely missed this restriction in my earlier review of submission guidelines), but not without registering my thoughts on the matter:
I realize that you do not have the authority to overrule the cited guideline, but I personally feel that it is misguided and stifles innovation. In particular, overnight rentals have been well-established in the video rental industry, and our “Two Day Pass” option was intended to be analogous. Now we have no method to test the acceptability of this approach (to customers) under iOS.
Indeed, I do intend to experiment with this option under Android, if possible (and I will read payment guidelines with this in mind), since one major goal of this whole procedure is to learn what does and does not work in this arena.
Preparing a second submission
Clearly, Apple was not going to allow me to experiment with this idea (as is), and I was convinced that extending the subscription to 7 days would unbalance the design, as would increasing the price of what was, very deliberately, the most inexpensive choice. Besides, the “Two Day Pass” idea was already engraved in button artwork. 🙂
Rather than taking a bat to my IAP product design and hoping it remained stable, or delaying release long enough for a redesign to accommodate a different low end option, I decided to simply remove the “Two Day Pass” entirely, initially offering only 3 IAP products for sale. Although the anchor I wanted is no longer there, this whole exercise is somewhat experimental and, certainly, incomplete data now is better than complete data delayed (and, hence, no data in the interim).
It pained me, due to the many hours of design, implementation, and testing, but it was far easier to remove the option than to add it in the first place; the second submission of Demolish! Pairs FTP was completed on the same day as the initial rejection.
Planning for the future
The design for the free-to-play version of Demolish! Pairs already envisions several updates to the IAP system that were not (fully) implemented for the initial release. A replacement for the inexpensive subscription product was just added to the list of features to be added in future upgrades, and an idea is already in the works.
With the removal of the fourth product button from the store page, the “hole” in that page looks even larger than it did previously. However, the view actually contains (hidden) controls for some of the upcoming options, including the fourth product button, so the store will look progressively better as we roll out these features. Of course, all of that is premised on the free-to-play edition actually registering on the income needle.
So, now we wait (again)…