On a different note... technically.. if Google does not provide the api to handle this.. how are some of you thinking of actually implementing this? Will you require the game player to enter credit card or paypal/google checkout info into your game in order to charge them? I fear that if every game has some different way of doing this, it's going to deter players.. they will get tired of entering this info over and over, and more so probably fearful that the game developer has their private info. Having google provide an API is probably safer and more likely to get people to use it, not to mention only having to enter the info once for their device, then game developers can use some API to see if they filled it out, if not, ask for it, if so, use it.
I personally don't want to have to deal with requiring credt card info, billing/shipping address info to verify the credit card, etc. Nor would I want my app to be responsible for that private info if I could avoid it. So what are some ways to actually implement this feature? On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Kevin Duffey <[email protected]> wrote: > So, I am curious how a service like ScoreLoop is going to work? They > provide in-game tokens you buy with real many, or something like that. I > apologize, I haven't read up on it entirely. But a lot of android game > developers are looking to use ScoreLoop. ScoreLoop is already used a bit on > iPhone, which I thought in-game purchases were not allowed on? I could be > wrong.. I gave up on iPhone a while ago with all their ridiculous changing > rules. But if ScoreLoop can provide a way to spend real money on in-game > tokens, of which they benefit from financially, I can't see why any other > game/app can't do it. > > Here is my interpretation of the google contract, just from reading it and > bits and pieces of other posts of the past few months. From what I gather, > you can NOT sell updates (or offer updates) thru an in-game service. They > all must go thru the android market. I don't know if that is clear enough to > insinuate that game add-ons, such as new levels, can't be downloaded. If > they do mean that, then any game developer that wanted to offer say an open > game editor to make new maps for their cool game, just got shut down. I > think that stinks, and if android is so open, I can't imagine why that is a > big deal. > > I really do NOT interpret anything they say as a "no, you can't provide > in-game items for sale". In the World-of-Warcraft sense, you should be able > to sell gold for real money if you want. Or allow gamers to "trade" items > with each other, perhaps for money... for example, some player found a rare > item in your game.. you only provide maybe 3 total, that player can sell the > item to another player (somehow) for real money. If your game has in-game > payment/processing, then the game developer takes a cut, and everybody is > happy. Hell, I would be fine if google provided all the payment processing > API and required a cut. If I could sell items at .25 each for example, I am > fine with giving .10 or .20 even of that to google. Hell, google should be > doing this! If they make no money on app purchases.. as someone else said, > what's the "money maker" benefit of Android for them. I don't know why they > would NOT offer something like this from the start. Simply say "If you build > in your own payment processing.. money is all yours. If you wish to avoid > the headaches of state taxes, IRS issues, different country/currencies, > etc.. use our built in API and we'll take a 25% cut of the transaction.". > BOOM! Google, like apple, would be making big money! Coming out and saying > that, and even better providing the payment processing API (I would say > google checkout AND paypal required tho). > > > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Disconnect <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Not sure about any digital-downloads side of the amazon store, but mp3 >> store has been an exception from the very beginning, back when there were >> -no- paid downloads for android. >> >> Movie tickets are physical items, the agreement seems focused on digital >> items. (And fandango movie tickets don't alter/enhance the fandango app in >> any way, any more than buying a grill off amazon does :) ..) >> >> I'm failing the search test (because the question comes up -way- more than >> the answer) but IIRC a google/android employee was the first to suggest the >> unlockable-apps method. >> >> (As an aside, there are even examples that -directly- violate it, without >> any sort of special agreements. Take a look at pixelpipe - the free, working >> app was initially outright replaced with a paid app, then they undid that >> and released an app that just says "buy the full version". Both moves are >> directly against that agreement, but google didn't care..) >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Streets Of Boston < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I wonder how Amazon.com (Music Store/MP3 Store) interprets these rules/ >>> contract...? >>> >>> You can download music from Amazon.com on your Android phone without >>> going through Android Market for each song/album purchase. >>> >>> You can buy movie tickeds from the Fandango application. Movie tickets >>> are not charged through Android Market. >>> >>> And there are more of such examples. >>> >>> I think it's more of a protection for users of Android phones who >>> download apps from the Market. >>> E.g. what a developer can't do is putting up an application for free >>> and then charge the user some other way so that he/she can actually >>> use the application. >>> >>> It looks like store fronts are fine (like Amazon, Fandango). >>> Putting up a (free) app then charging an (additional) fee just to be >>> able to use the app at all is not OK. >>> >>> Note, this is just my interpretation of it all. I'm NOT a lawyer. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 17, 3:06 pm, Warren <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > I have still not seen an acceptable solution for in-app purchasing, >>> > and I was hoping for an official response from Google. >>> > >>> > This has been discussed in other threads, but there is still no good >>> > solution. >>> http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/threa... >>> > >>> > Collecting a fee to unlock functionality or to buy virtual items is >>> > not a technical problem. It is straightforward. >>> > >>> > However, the Market Agreement severely limits developers' ability to >>> > collect such a fee. It says all fees collected for the app must go >>> > through the Market payment processor. >>> > >>> > http://www.android.com/us/developer-distribution-agreement.html >>> > >>> > Buying another app from the Market seems the only clearly acceptable >>> > solution. But that is not ideal. It perverts the definition of an >>> > "app" and causes problems because of the refund policy. >>> > >>> > Google, how are developers supposed to handle this situation? Or is >>> > your intention that we simply not do this? >>> > >>> > While lawyers may quarrel over the actual document, what is your >>> > intent as it pertains to buying virtual items? For example, charging >>> > $1 real money for 10 in-game gold? >>> > >>> > What if only the front end of the game is distributed on the market, >>> > and the features of the front end (the app) do not change with >>> > additional fees? This may be splitting hairs but that's what happens >>> > with legal documents, I suppose. >>> > >>> > So what is the intention of the Market Agreement here? Did you intend >>> > to prevent buying virtual items or not? >>> > >>> > I would appreciate some clarification so I can proceed knowing the >>> > spirit of the law, so to speak. >>> > >>> > Thank you >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Android Developers" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected]<android-developers%[email protected]> >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+ >>> unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words >>> "REMOVE ME" as the subject. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Android Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<android-developers%[email protected]> >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+ >> unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE >> ME" as the subject. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
