By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Nintendo and iOS pirating

 

Would you pirate a $10 Nintendo iOS game?

Definitely Yes 28 27.18%
 
Probably Yes 10 9.71%
 
Probably Not 12 11.65%
 
Definitely Not 53 51.46%
 
Total:103
Conina on 11 December 2016
Ganoncrotch said:

Wait are you suggesting that the average mobile game is $1? in my experiences of all the games I've played very few of them have any up front payment request, the vast majority of Mobile games entry cost is $0 and then make use of IAPs to get their earnings that way, even Nintendo/Niantic's Pokemon Go is completely free up front so I would dispute the $10 fee being 10x more than the average mobile game, I think it would be far far greater since when you factor in all of the apps you can get for $0 the average will be closer to nil than $1

The lowest paid tier in the iOS-AppStore is 99 cent... so the average of the paid apps (which includes most of the good mobile games) should be more than $1.



Around the Network
Turkish on 11 December 2016

I usually play on my iPad when I go on vacation, places we usually don't have interweb.

A shame of online only, I expect the more we see this the faster pirates will find solutions to make them playable offline, also on pc and consoles.



HoloDust on 11 December 2016

Silly thing is making it always online will only increase number of pirated copies.



Jranation on 11 December 2016

You can try it out for free. If people don't like it, they can don't buy it.



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Ganoncrotch on 11 December 2016
Conina said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Wait are you suggesting that the average mobile game is $1? in my experiences of all the games I've played very few of them have any up front payment request, the vast majority of Mobile games entry cost is $0 and then make use of IAPs to get their earnings that way, even Nintendo/Niantic's Pokemon Go is completely free up front so I would dispute the $10 fee being 10x more than the average mobile game, I think it would be far far greater since when you factor in all of the apps you can get for $0 the average will be closer to nil than $1

The lowest paid tier in the iOS-AppStore is 99 cent... so the average of the paid apps (which includes most of the good mobile games) should be more than $1.

So you are saying that the $10m a day Pokemon go is not a "good" game so as that falls under the games you can get for $0



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Around the Network
bdbdbd on 11 December 2016
derpysquirtle64 said:

75mb per hour was reported by appleinsider. We'll see if that's true.

The internet connection requirement is bad not because some people won't be able to pirate the game but because it is unknown what will happen if you get disconnected. If it will throw you out of the game then it's bad. For example I play mobile games and handheld games mostly in the subway where internet connection can be lost between stations. Will I be able to play this game without being interrupted every time I lose a signal?

Seeing how often Ios 10 loses signal, you better hope so.

Ganoncrotch said:
robzo100 said:

Super Mario Run is right aorund the corner. I went to the NYC event where Miyamoto debuted it and I played it. I'm older so I wans't floored by its "newness" especially since aesthetically it is anything but new, but it was solid fun and without a doubt of the high teir class of iOS games, of which there are not many.


So, how does Nintendo handle it? It is online only to prevent piracy. Here is the defense we hear:

 

  • SMR is a higher-quality mobile game with higher production costs than average mobile games
  • SMR offers no in-app purchases or ads, and therefore 100% of their profit comes from the single intitial purchase of the game
  • iOS has upwards of 60% piracy rate (Android has 95%)
  • SMR is $10 (ten times more expensive than the average mobile game), logically it is far more likely to be pirated.
  • Nintendo as a company has [likely] been greatly hurt by piracy in the past, specifically with regards to their portable platforms
I can't argue with these things really. It's unfortunate a mobile game can't be played well in mobile situations (airplane, subway, etc.) but then again Wifi is clearly improving to the point where trains are reliable now, and subways may not be so far away. The important point is that a precedent has been set with the first official Nintendo App with a dollar sign attached to it.

So then, is this how Nintendo will follow suit from here on out for the mobile division? What are they reasonably not budging on?

 

Wait are you suggesting that the average mobile game is $1? in my experiences of all the games I've played very few of them have any up front payment request, the vast majority of Mobile games entry cost is $0 and then make use of IAPs to get their earnings that way, even Nintendo/Niantic's Pokemon Go is completely free up front so I would dispute the $10 fee being 10x more than the average mobile game, I think it would be far far greater since when you factor in all of the apps you can get for $0 the average will be closer to nil than $1

This propably means the software you actually pay for - remember, every corporate message you read or hear has some sort of spin in it.

FromDK said:
derpysquirtle64 said:

75mb per hour was reported by appleinsider. We'll see if that's true.

The internet connection requirement is bad not because some people won't be able to pirate the game but because it is unknown what will happen if you get disconnected. If it will throw you out of the game then it's bad. For example I play mobile games and handheld games mostly in the subway where internet connection can be lost between stations. Will I be able to play this game without being interrupted every time I lose a signal?

offcourse..?.

Nintendo want people to be happy.. so some kind of "the game stops the moment you dont have a signal" dont make sense.. like come on.. :)

Lots of stuff Nintendo has done lately doesn't make any sense...

LurkerJ said:
bdbdbd said:

I did a quick search and found some figures from a Cook keynote a little over a year ago, that Apple had sold until then, 500million Iphones, 200 million Ipads, 100 million Ipod touches (and 80 million Macs), which makes me wonder what the active device means. Of course, I have no clue how many Apple watches they have sold, but I'm doubtful anyone who owns a Mac, an Ipad, an Iphone and Apple watch (or a combination) is going to (or need to) pay separately for the software on every device (then again, if it's Apple and it's fanboys in question). On Android you'd need to pay only once for the software to access it on all your devices, don't know if works the same way on Apple devices.

"The growth of our services business accelerated during the quarter to produce record results, and our installed base recently crossed a major milestone of one billion active devices"  This is Cook's statement, he said that in January 2016.

"An active device is a device that has engaged with Apple services over the past 90 days" another quote from the same keynote. Apple services include the App store and iCloud.

The point remains, no matter how you slice the numbers, you end up with a very large addressable install base. Not to mention, Apple has been aggressively promoting the game on the App store. No other App has enjoyed such exposure on the App store, that says a lot giving the game isn't released yet!

I'm not arguing here about if a userbase (or the non-pirating one) wouldn't be big, just that the percentage seem so high there's likely some sort of spin in it. Of course, three months is a timeframe you don't need to have a device in daily, weekly or even in monthly use, and knowing Apple, it's more likely that it's the number of devices (ever) linked to Apple accounts that visited Icloud or app store in the last three months.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

LurkerJ on 11 December 2016

bdbdbd said:

LurkerJ said:

"The growth of our services business accelerated during the quarter to produce record results, and our installed base recently crossed a major milestone of one billion active devices"  This is Cook's statement, he said that in January 2016.

"An active device is a device that has engaged with Apple services over the past 90 days" another quote from the same keynote. Apple services include the App store and iCloud.

The point remains, no matter how you slice the numbers, you end up with a very large addressable install base. Not to mention, Apple has been aggressively promoting the game on the App store. No other App has enjoyed such exposure on the App store, that says a lot giving the game isn't released yet!

I'm not arguing here about if a userbase (or the non-pirating one) wouldn't be big, just that the percentage seem so high there's likely some sort of spin in it. Of course, three months is a timeframe you don't need to have a device in daily, weekly or even in monthly use, and knowing Apple, it's more likely that it's the number of devices (ever) linked to Apple accounts that visited Icloud or app store in the last three months.

Well, the statement is very clear. Connected to an Apple server during the 90 days that preceded the statement. What's their to spin? Yes, it USUALLY doesn't mean that these devices are active on the daily basis but we are talking about mostly iPhones here, can anyone live without checking their phone every 5 minutes these days?  How do other companies report their active userbases? I think it's great Apple defined what "Active" means, you don't always get a definition.

I also don't understand why they would spin to the degree you are implying they had, which again, they didn't, their statement is very clear and sounds spin-free to me. Active or not, Apple makes most 90% or more of its porfits the moment they sell you the device. It doesn't matter if you don't use it after that. Unlike other OS'es that benefit from an active userbase to constantly mine their data and sell it to advertisers.



bdbdbd on 11 December 2016
LurkerJ said:

Well, the statement is very clear. Connected to an Apple server during the 90 days that preceded the statement. What's their to spin? Yes, it USUALLY doesn't mean that these devices are active on the daily basis but we are talking about mostly iPhones here, can anyone live without checking their phone every 5 minutes these days?  How do other companies report their active userbases? I think it's great Apple defined what "Active" means, you don't always get a definition.

I also don't understand why they would spin to the degree you are implying they had, which again, they didn't, their statement is very clear and sounds spin-free to me. Active or not, Apple makes most 90% or more of its porfits the moment they sell you the device. It doesn't matter if you don't use it after that. Unlike other OS'es that benefit from an active userbase to constantly mine their data and sell it to advertisers.

If I buy myself a new device, I don't need the old one. Granted, I can always sell or give the old one away, but considering only the two newest Iphone models seem to be of interest, and older than that, people do not seem to be interested getting one even for free (not around here, at least).

There's always a spin because it's corporate message. Either you want to make a statement for the investors (of the company) or you want to make your market look bigger for the software developers (or publishers). But if that's the case that Apple makes 90% of it's profits on hardware sales, I can understand the need for the spin, as the app store isn't that lucrative market in the end. Then again, it does make perfect sense.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Conina on 11 December 2016
Ganoncrotch said:
Conina said:

The lowest paid tier in the iOS-AppStore is 99 cent... so the average of the paid apps (which includes most of the good mobile games) should be more than $1.

So you are saying that the $10m a day Pokemon go is not a "good" game so as that falls under the games you can get for $0

No, where did I say that? Please stop twisting my words.

And if Pokemon Go gets revenue of $10m a day, the Pokemon Go players also paid more than $1 on average for it... some played it for free, others paid at least 99 cent, since the tiers are the same for in-app purchases.

 



LurkerJ on 11 December 2016
bdbdbd said:
LurkerJ said:

Well, the statement is very clear. Connected to an Apple server during the 90 days that preceded the statement. What's their to spin? Yes, it USUALLY doesn't mean that these devices are active on the daily basis but we are talking about mostly iPhones here, can anyone live without checking their phone every 5 minutes these days?  How do other companies report their active userbases? I think it's great Apple defined what "Active" means, you don't always get a definition.

I also don't understand why they would spin to the degree you are implying they had, which again, they didn't, their statement is very clear and sounds spin-free to me. Active or not, Apple makes most 90% or more of its porfits the moment they sell you the device. It doesn't matter if you don't use it after that. Unlike other OS'es that benefit from an active userbase to constantly mine their data and sell it to advertisers.

If I buy myself a new device, I don't need the old one. Granted, I can always sell or give the old one away, but considering only the two newest Iphone models seem to be of interest, and older than that, people do not seem to be interested getting one even for free (not around here, at least).

There's always a spin because it's corporate message. Either you want to make a statement for the investors (of the company) or you want to make your market look bigger for the software developers (or publishers). But if that's the case that Apple makes 90% of it's profits on hardware sales, I can understand the need for the spin, as the app store isn't that lucrative market in the end. Then again, it does make perfect sense.

They surly said 90 days, because if they said 60 they wouldn't have been able to shout ONE BILLION. "billion" is a headline maker. I am just saying, the statement in itself, is pretty cut and dried. 

Just checked, and my "90%" was accurate when they made that "one billion active Apple devices" statement. However, months ago, things started to change:

 

 

Services growth is due to Apple Pay exploding in popularity (and iPhone sales typically falls before the new iPhone), every other category includes only hardware though. The Watch/iPod/Accessories are included in "other".