What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
125 Comments
- inactive, on 03/26/2009, -6/+46I am so happy we chose to develop for android. There is a 24hr return window where the purchase price is held, after 24hrs if it is not returned it is the developers. None of this 90 day junk and having to pay back the 30%.
Android might not have the market share, but at least I am making some money on apps sold in the market. - spriggig, on 03/26/2009, -27/+62This clause sounds like a reasonable attempt to increase customer satisfaction and reduce craptastic apps that don't deliver on their promises.
- sybersnake, on 03/26/2009, -0/+28Possibly, but since when can I go out and buy a piece of software off the shelf and return if after I played with it and found out I didn't like it... same for games.. what if I make a game that can be beaten in a few days then everyone starts running back for refunds. I'm also pretty sure that I can't return music purchased through iTunes.
- Thumper13, on 03/26/2009, -5/+32Wow, that's messed up. In the Android Market we get a day to decide if we want to keep it or not.
I think that is more than reasonable.
Now we just need to wait for the Android to get as many good apps as the iphone. We have quite a few, but still lacking in a few areas. - haentz, on 03/26/2009, -2/+23I doubt that a lot of people will really use the refund option (which has been part of the Appstore contracts forever, anyway) to screw devs over... 90 days seems a little bit unreasonable, though. Especially considering the very low price of iPhone apps.
- Drahkar, on 03/26/2009, -2/+22The problem with the policy isn;t the refund practice. Thats reasonable. The problem is Apple's demand that they still make the money on the app. And that is complete *****. The developer has to pay to get the SDK. Has to pay to get it listed and now has to pay for the privilege of having the customer ask for a refund? There is a serious problem here.
I have no problem with the developer having to shoulder the cost of refund. That makes sense. But to only allow the developers a 70% profit but demand they pay 100% of the return costs is highway robbery. The end result is you will see a lot less specialty apps that everyone likes and instead be left with Mega Corporation type applications that cost $100+ to purchase. - GoKings, on 03/26/2009, -3/+2190 days? Really? I get tired of most applications on my phone after 2 weeks. 90 days sounds incredibly unreasonable.
People are asking why people would want a refund if the app was good... Yes, the app may not be good, but it could also be good but not useful to them after 90 days. So they just make use of it for the time being, and then ask for a refund. 90 days is a lot of time to see if they like it or not. - Dacvak, on 03/26/2009, -1/+15What a ***** terrible and brilliant idea.
- rnawky, on 03/26/2009, -1/+14Good thing this ***** wasn't around when the "I am rich" application was available for $999
- JackSchittt, on 03/26/2009, -1/+14This is the exact reason why this policy sucks for developers:
A lot of people use their apps for the first couple of weeks, then they get bored with it and forget about it. No matter how good it is, eventually, people will simply get tired of using it. This is especially true of things like games that can be mastered and beaten within a couple of weeks, or even a few days.
So if Johnny buys my game, and gets bored with in in 2 weeks, he can simply ask for a refund. Johnny gets his money back, Apple keeps their 30% cut, and I'm out 30% through no fault of my own.
Why the hell would I want to develop an app under those conditions? I can imagine returning my 70% that I made on the app, but to give back the full 100% is absurd.
And yes, I can easily see shady developers hurting competition by having friends repeatedly buy the app and request refunds. It might not "bankrupt" them per se, but an independent developer losing a few hundred bucks really, really hurts. - BrandonB1218, on 03/26/2009, -8/+17This is rather upsetting. Me and a few friends just started on developing some iPhone apps and to see this is quite crushing. We don't have any start up capitol at all. We hope that the apps we make are good so the users won't have to request a refund but I have a feeling that if it happens too many times for whatever reason, then we will not be renewing our iPhone Developer subscription and will just stop developing for the iPhone all together. =(
- Drahkar, on 03/26/2009, -0/+9@Goblin - Where does anyone say anything about Obj-C being crappy? I think you must have posted to ther wrong topic or something because I can't find anyone saying anything like that.
- BrandonB1218, on 03/26/2009, -1/+10People like you are going to hurt a lot of small time developers like my self and my friends.
- StuartGibson, on 06/14/2009, -0/+8haentz had said that he would prefer to use Java over "the crappy objective-c" he was being forced to use, but the post has been edited since my reply.
- theebayk1d, on 03/26/2009, -17/+25Thats seriously ***** UP!
- BrandonB1218, on 03/26/2009, -2/+9Read HexiumVII's comment. That's why it's bad for developers, because people WILL abuse it if they know this refund policy is in place.
- CressCrowbits, on 03/26/2009, -2/+9First we need to wait for Android to be available on a desirable handset. The G1 is a horrible, ugly thing.
- sodoh, on 03/26/2009, -1/+7Actually after you explain it, it makes perfect sense and isn't a big deal. I take it apple can't request the money back from the developer after the 90 days?
- jakem1, on 03/26/2009, -0/+690 days is far too long. A refund period that long simply encourages people to buy apps with the intention of returning them once they become boring or something new and shiny captures your attention.
As for the 30% commission, well it is Apple so what did you expect? - monkeyrun, on 03/26/2009, -1/+7I don't think users can just return any apps they don't like.
According to my experience, the app has to be not functioning as advertised (e.g. broken) in order to qualify for a refund. - mabsark, on 03/26/2009, -1/+7"Why should Apple foot the bill for hosting a crappy application that people want a refund on?"
They shouldn't, but they shouldn't profit from it either. - whytey, on 03/26/2009, -1/+790 DAYS?!?! you would have thought it was only 1 month especially for low priced apps
- Pizza_Hutte, on 03/26/2009, -0/+6I was possible to return software for a long time at Electronics Boutique. They stopped the policy due to the exact abuse you mentioned. As soon as the policy ended my purchases decreased dramatically, and I had never returned a piece of software. I just wasn't as confident buying without it.
- MerchantofPanic, on 03/26/2009, -2/+7Sounds like a good way for a developer to shut competitors down - buy a ***** load of competitors apps, ask for refund, then watch as competitors bank balance slowly drains into the apple account.
- kingatrock, on 03/26/2009, -5/+10I've bought 2 ***** games for $0.99 The Developer was horrible and the reviews were skewed, (before they started making you actually have the game before you could review it) I didn't think 99 cents was a big deal for everything else I was getting but now I could at least get my money back and screw those lazy ass ripoff artist developers.
- inactive, on 03/26/2009, -6/+11***** APPLE
- hljboss, on 03/26/2009, -8/+13"...could bankrupt developers" screams the sensationalist headline. Puuuhleeeeze! What kind of idiotic hyperbole is that? Do the math. Yes, if 70% or more of all of the customers of a particular app demanded a refund it could cost the developer money, but if the app's that bad, I think they deserve to be out of business. Isn't that how capitalism works?
- twignificant, on 03/26/2009, -3/+8Typical Apple lameness.
::secretly cradles iphone:: - r3zonance, on 03/26/2009, -2/+6Yes, as an iPhone developer myself I don't see this as being as much of a problem as is being made out.
All it is saying is if someone buys my app for $0.99, Apple get's their $0.29 and I get the remaining $0.70. If Apple issues a refund within 90 days, it MAY be a full refund. However, either way Apple has had to do their bit of hosting, distribution etc. (for which they take 30%). The customer has to be given their full refund, so as the developer "I" have to cough up the full cost of the refund and Apple still gets to keep their 30% share, basically because they had to do the distribution and hosting still.
Besides, because of the 90 day clause, the credit will all come out of money which the developer has not yet received.
If there is a greater than 70% return rate (which is what would be needed for a developer to receive nothing for the sales) then the "so-called developer" needs to really think about their chosen career path. - mabsark, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4"People are silly enough to purchase these apps for .99 - 999 and then realize that was plain stupid and decide they want a refund."
If people are stupid enough to buy such useless and pointless crap, they don't deserve a refund, they deserve an education.
"Why should Apple have to eat the cost of the transaction because someone is making a product that does not deliver on its promises?"
So, are you trying to tell me that such a transaction costs 30% of an apps price?
Are you trying to tell me that the cost of a transaction for a £1 app is 30p, and the cost of a transaction for a £10 app is £3?
And here's me thinking that the cost of the transaction would be less than 1p regardless of the price of the app.
Crazy or what? - eastshores, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4If you actually read the article you would notice this is a fairly new clause that was added to the contract, dating back to around 3 months ago. Whether that is true or not I don't know, but that is at least what the article implied.
- mabsark, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4"Actually it's a good thing, cos I'm very disappointed with some of expensive apps. Developers should think twice before producing sorts of crap"
You should think twice before buying ***** useless apps. - pentiumii, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4wait i thought the whole point of the needing to be approved to be in the apps store was to keep ***** apps out
lol i don't know y u people think apple doing this to protect it customers the fact is if apple was forced to give back it 30% when apps where return u see end to this bull ***** ninety day return policy
apple doesn't care if the apps good or not there getting paid either way - MonsterRayn, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4Heh....I find it funny that I get a week (or is it 30 days?) to decide if I want the iPhone, a $299 purchase. However, I get a full 90 days to decide if I really want to pay for, and keep, a fart app. Interesting.
- MWeather, on 03/26/2009, -1/+5Apple's share isn't just for hosting and distribution. If it is, that's a ripoff. You can transfer a gigabyte for $0.29, using the rest of the money you would have paid apple for advertising and get way more people to install your app.
IF it were trivial for the average user to install non-appstore apps, which it isn't.
The 29 cents includes a rather hefty extortion fee, which should be refunded. Keep a nickel for the bandwidth and other costs if you like, but refund the fee for selling the app on the appstore. - raydeen, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4If Apple approved the app in the first place, why shouldn't they? If I purchase an app for my mobile phone, I certainly don't get the option of a refund. Caveat Emptor.
- MWeather, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4"Why would I pay for a game that can be beaten in a few days?"
Why would you pay $5 for several days worth of enjoyment when you can got to the movies for an hour and a half for $30? - MtheoryX, on 03/26/2009, -1/+51 month is even too long.
If you haven't made your mind up in, at most, a week, then piss off. - EMGroup, on 03/26/2009, -5/+9Apple and their monopoly schemes...tsk tsk
- shanec1980, on 03/26/2009, -0/+3Buyer beware.
I.e Suck it up. - Audi0, on 03/26/2009, -2/+5Cheeky *****
- dolbinau, on 03/26/2009, -4/+7This is concerning considering this data:
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.ph ...
I agree with the 24 hour Android model. - phoomp, on 03/26/2009, -1/+4Why would I pay for a game that can be beaten in a few days?
- waremaster, on 03/26/2009, -1/+4Maybe this will make developers of apps such as iFart, I Am Rich and so on sit up and take notice. People are silly enough to purchase these apps for .99 - 999 and then realize that was plain stupid and decide they want a refund. Now that just cost the developer of that stupid app money. Why should Apple have to eat the cost of the transaction because someone is making a product that does not deliver on its promises?
- BingoPower, on 03/26/2009, -6/+8Just develop an application with some features that are disabled. After 90 days, all the good stuff becomes enabled!
- raquel9e, on 03/26/2009, -1/+3@phoomp Because you didn't know it could be beaten in a few days?
- mabsark, on 03/26/2009, -0/+2Your logic is terrible. A single refunded app will cost the dev 30p for every £1 refunded.
- twignificant, on 03/26/2009, -0/+2I know! I need redemption!
::secretly awaits to 3.0 update to go out and buy stereo bluetooth headphones:: - MtheoryX, on 03/26/2009, -0/+2Rule 34?
- r3zonance, on 04/05/2009, -0/+2I too am making money for doing nothing more than writing an application. I don't have to worry about setting up payment agreements and lots of contracts. My app is selling quite happily.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 127 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is