• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

'Dillo Hills [Development]

fex said:
Almost entirely self-taught. Full story after the game is finished. ;D
Click to expand...

Can i be invited to this discussion! myself and a group of people have been wanting to get started, so hearing someone else's story, ESPECIALLY SELF TAUGHT. could be inspirational!
 
Getting more excited every day. Looks like a very colorful game, which always looks amazing on the Epic's screen (and other Galaxy S, I'm sure) :)

I'd prefer a paid version of the game, naturally. I just wish I could pay more for good games that deserve it.
 
Wow, I had not actually considered that they might only release a version with ads. That is probably the only thing that can make me not play this game... if it is ad-ridden. If I can't pay for an ad-free version, I'll stay away :/
 
After watching all the beta videos ( multiple times :P) I still think the flight is too horizontal. The creature looks like he's just darting over the hills, making it impossible to get more than a few perfect hills in a row. My recommendation would be to make it more oval like.
 
irmac said:
After watching all the beta videos ( multiple times :P) I still think the flight is too horizontal. The creature looks like he's just darting over the hills, making it impossible to get more than a few perfect hills in a row. My recommendation would be to make it more oval like.
Click to expand...

Aye, this is why I really want to get a more up-to-date video out. All of the videos you've seen so far are using the old physics engine: we've spent the past two days completely overhauling it, and the experience now is significantly different.

I know it's really hard to explain without seeing it in action. Again, I'll try to get a video up soon.
 
Nuwanda said:
Because not releasing a paid version actually gives them more money :p (I don't really see how, but that's the reason they gave in the Handcent SMS forum, and the developers of one of the most popular Android apps probably know more about this than you and I do :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...
Paid version is a revenue now while the Ad version generate revenues for the life of the app on the phone. Most apps on Android is only a couple of dollars. If you use that app for years (ex, Handcent), then the ad revenue that the dev can make from you way surpass the couple of dollars for the paid version.
 
Roze said:
Paid version is a revenue now while the Ad version generate revenues for the life of the app on the phone. Most apps on Android is only a couple of dollars. If you use that app for years (ex, Handcent), then the ad revenue that the dev can make from you way surpass the couple of dollars for the paid version.
Click to expand...

So then you would have to make a subscription program? :) Make users login and order the game through the site (pay anually or so?).

Maybe then this would be an option:
First release it with ads, only an ad version. After a month or so you check how much the revenue made by ads is, and the amount of users playing it. Multiply the amount made by 12 and divide that by the users, this would be the price for annual payments (subscriptions). Ofcourse you can adapt this part every time you calculate your revenue again.

Just my 2 cents...
 
Roze said:
Paid version is a revenue now while the Ad version generate revenues for the life of the app on the phone. Most apps on Android is only a couple of dollars. If you use that app for years (ex, Handcent), then the ad revenue that the dev can make from you way surpass the couple of dollars for the paid version.
Click to expand...

Yeah. One model is better for applications that provide a couple weeks of solid entertainment, while the other is better for applications that are used for months and months.

We're still talking everything over, though, and I have another dinner with potential investors tonight to continue this discussion.
 
NLCJ said:
So then you would have to make a subscription program? :) Make users login and order the game through the site (pay anually or so?).

Maybe then this would be an option:
First release it with ads, only an ad version. After a month or so you check how much the revenue made by ads is, and the amount of users playing it. Multiply the amount made by 12 and divide that by the users, this would be the price for annual payments (subscriptions). Ofcourse you can adapt this part every time you calculate your revenue again.

Just my 2 cents...
Click to expand...

I hate annual subscriptions :mad: I want to pay it once and once only!

fex said:
Yeah. One model is better for applications that provide a couple weeks of solid entertainment, while the other is better for applications that are used for months and months.

We're still talking everything over, though, and I have another dinner with potential investors tonight to continue this discussion.
Click to expand...

Since you've stated that this isn't you're 'full time gig', I'm guessing you and your friends are looking into starting up a company with investors and lawyer talk :) I think that's cool! Best wishes that Dillo hill becomes a great success to get you guys started on the right foot.

I will still say that best option is to release both right away. As another member stated, Google has not opened the Market to the rest of the world. This would mean a paid only version would just mean those people would end up pirating your game to play with it. Having Ad only would mean you have people who will find a way around the ads (airplane mode or adblocker). So, both for the win!!! ;)
 
is this going to be available for android 3.0? or more precisely the xoom? if you don't have a beta tester for it, let me know and i'll gladly do it.
 
WesC510 said:
is this going to be available for android 3.0? or more precisely the xoom? if you don't have a beta tester for it, let me know and i'll gladly do it.
Click to expand...

I know that AIR 2.6 does support Android 3.0, so my first guess is that it will work. However, I may get in touch with you later this evening to have you try it out, just to be sure.

Every since yesterday's fiasco, I'm being a little more cautious about who I distribute test files to (trying to work with local testers only, as much as I can), but I will discuss it all with you later this evening, if need be.
 
fex said:
I know that AIR 2.6 does support Android 3.0, so my first guess is that it will work. However, I may get in touch with you later this evening to have you try it out, just to be sure.

Every since yesterday's fiasco, I'm being a little more cautious about who I distribute test files to (trying to work with local testers only, as much as I can), but I will discuss it all with you later this evening, if need be.
Click to expand...

totally understandable. thanks either way man.
 
I almost bought tiny wings for my iPod touch that I haven't picked up in years. Glad I waited...I would much rather support you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom