Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
MOST PEOPLE DON’T pay for mobile games or apps. With so many offered for free instead, we’re more likely to download them even when there are games that cost less than a euro.
But apps need to make money somehow and they do this either through ads or in-app purchases. The latter is more lucrative provided you have an addictive game on your hands.
The principles mentioned here can be applied to the majority of free-to-play smartphone games, but for this example, we’re going to refer to Clash Royale, the latest game from Clash of Clans maker, Supercell, and one of the top grossing apps in the App Store.
Some context
Clash Royale is a two-player game which combines elements of tower defence, card collecting and strategy games.
In each match, your goal is to destroy your opponent’s towers in three minutes and make sure your own aren’t destroyed. The eight cards you select comprise of different troops or items for you to complete your goal, all of them can be upgraded by collecting cards or unlocking chests.
The game is easy to dip into and is very addictive once you grow accustomed to it.
So how does it make money? Such games use a few methods but it’s can be summed up in three steps: developing a motive, creating a habit and then making you choose between time or money.
Time after time
To begin, this is the home screen:
There’s quite a bit happening here but the important parts to note are the chests, both at the top and bottom. All of them – with the exception of the Crown Chest – have a timer of some sort. The common chests at the very start are unlocked pretty quickly, but better ones can take as long as 24 hours to unlock.
Only including four slots for chests isn’t an accident either. If you win a fight and already have all four slots filled, you don’t get anything except crowns (one for each tower you destroy) and getting one is tough enough as it is.
Like most free-to-play games, currency is broken up into two collectables: coins and gems. Coins are used to upgrade cards while gems are used to speed up different processes like opening up chests, something collected after every battle you win.
At the start, progress is pretty rapid and it’s pretty easy to make your way to the second arena without much trouble. The rewards for each battle flow in quickly as well but both slow down once you get settled into the game.
Convincing you to visit regularly
For free games, if you’re not paying with money, you’re paying with time. You could wait it out, but games like this want you to play regularly, which is why they alert you when there’s a development of some kind.
Such games offer alerts for chests being unlocked, new challenges starting or just telling you that you haven’t visited in a while so you open it multiple times a day.
Once that becomes habit, it leads to…
Time vs money
It’s entirely possible for you to play the game without paying a cent, but you’ll be sinking a lot of time into it as a result.
This is why many players eventually spend gems unlocking chests or buying cards to gain an advantage. If you’re playing it regularly, you’ll hit a stop-start flow which can be frustrating if you prefer longer playthroughs.
Sooner or later, you’ll run out of gems so you can either fight more battles to pass the time or wait around for those chests to unlock. Alternatively, you could just pay real money for them which brings you here.
In marketing, there’s a term called ‘anchoring’ which refers to how people rely on the first piece of information they see (the anchor) when making a decision.
To give an example, if you go into a shop and see a small bottle of water on sale for €2, and see a medium bottle for €2.50, the latter deal will look like the better one.
However, you’ve no idea what the small or medium bottles really costs or if you could get it cheaper elsewhere. Because your reference was the €2 bottle you saw first, the other deal appears to be better by comparison.
Nobody is going to spend €100 (or even €50) on in-game currency unless they’re really addicted and 80 gems for €1 isn’t great value, but it’s very likely they are the first ones you’ll see.
The real ones that are targeting you are the €5 and €10 offers since they are the better deals by comparison. The currency is only relative to this particular game – you can’t really compare it to another app or service, even the maker’s previous games – so you make a judgement based on that.
With all of this said, you can get through Clash Royale and similar games without spending a cent, but you’ll have to change the way you play strategy games. Just make sure you either have a lot of time or money if you want to reach the top.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
So he got sick and she moved in 6 or 7 weeks ago? How did she afford the private rental house for the last 5 years?
Having said that, allowing her to stay until the end of Jan would hardly seem excessive, although there is probably some family that are entitled to the house waiting for years and hoping to have a place for Christmas.
Where did you get the 6/7 weeks & 5 years figures?
Agree that leaving them in the house until the end of January does not seem excessive, would really seem to be fair on the children who are grieving for their father
read the original article in the Wexford Echo – link included above
Read it there, cheers
Awful story but (and I’m ashamed to say) I’m becoming a little numb to these tragic stories as they are now a daily headline.
Where did she live before she moved in. She should have thought about her children before she left her own house.
She moved in with the children’s father to care for him during an illness. They must of got to see more of their Dad before his death, I think that would of been the most important thing for them.
Thanks Dara, I’ll try remember that next time
Why wasn’t she living with him all the time? before his illness? I’m sure it’s not as it seems tbh.
That’s really none of anyone’s business Donna.
None of these stories are what they seem
They split up years ago and only moved in at the end of September
Donna, the story from the Wexford Echo says they were married but separated with 5 years.
Alan , she went public about it herself so there’s bound to be questions asked .
Indeed there will be Suzie but why someone isn’t living with their children’s father isn’t relevant to the story. They were separated, beyond that is personal between partners and no one else’s business. Just because she went public doesn’t mean her life should be dissected.
Alan, it is relevant when she is looking for her estranged partners house. This just stinks of her trying to jump the housing list at the cost of someone else on the list who has probably been waiting the 10 years she is refusing too and now playing the sympathy card
You may need to read the piece again vocal. She’s not looking for the house. She has, in fact, said its not suitable for the family long term. All she’s looking for is a bit more time to sort out a new place to live and let her children grieve for a reasonable length of time. A couple of months shouldn’t make that much of a difference.
Also, the reason for a couple not being together has nothing to do with the housing list and is a personal issue and should be left as such.
You’re a quite heartless individual vocal……I really think some commentators here should be cast into the sea …how do some people become so hard faced
She is not entitled to keep the house and I know that’s harsh but the family at the top if the waiting list could be in more need of this home.
Read the article. She’s not asking to keep the house. She makes it very clear that she’s just asking to stay in in for a couple more months while she and her children get over a the loss.
Bereavement and moving house are two of the most stressful things you can go through, surely it’s not too much to ask that they not have both at the same time?
Who in the name of Jesus takes a picture at a loved ones grave?
Agreed, creepy looking smiles. Is that for this story or this a normal thing to do now?
Picture added for added sympathy
Seems to be. Was on Facebook a few days ago and seen a pic that was taken with a corpse at the wake – really, really creepy looking
Thank god someone said it, I get creeped out quite regularly on a daily basis from people posing for photos at a grave
People under the influence of Guinness farts perhaps?
The media does it all the time, they also film entire funerals and burials and put them on TV.
From the report she moved in to help with his illness – not because she knew he was dying, the house isn’t suitable for the family, their relationship seems to have not been conventional as in she lived elsewhere, maybe in private accommodation.
All she is looking for is some time, up until the end of January until she can save and move on – she will continue to pay the rent which is fair enough.
Have to say that some people have a cold and bitter outlook on the world.
They see the words “council house”and it’s open season.
Wants to work all of a sudden??? Moved into council house when she knew her partner was going to die. YeaHHHHH. Does she take us all to be fools?
Mary , there is people who will be fooled by this .
All of a sudden? Where’s that from? She’s got 1 lung and her surgeon says she’s not fit to work. She’ll hardly be able to do much if she needs oxygen regularly.
*Correction – occasionally, not regularly
Save for a deposit and buy a house like eveyone else or just dont have kids.
Maggie not everyone want’s to own a house
Yes they want everything free instead!
Some of the posters on this thread make me ashamed to be part of the human race…..this woman buried her children’s father 6 weeks ago….she has a serious life threatening illness…2 children could possibly be orphans any day …some posters here should be completely ashamed of themselves
Agreed Derek. It’s 2 kids who’ve just lost their father here. Letting them stay (in what they probably see as dads house) until after Christmas isn’t really asking too much. The mother is only asking for some time.
Pure heartless decision, lacking any common sense or human decency – like many posters here. Like you, this right here is the reason I don’t like people.
I don’t understand what could be so wrong in some people’s lives that they have to abuse a fragile woman and 2 small children who have lost their father and now they will lose their home ..shame on anybody who supports this decision ..
F**kheads Derek. It’s not their lives, it’s them.
If she knew he was dying she should have married him to avoid all of this.
They were both parents and should have looked after the children.
Tough situation but anybody with a bit of common sense would be looking out for the best option going forward not just ignoring it.
they were married – separated 5 years ago according to the Wexford Echo story
I heard her on the radio this morning but only got the tail ended of it. She moved in with him due to him being sick but also because the rent in her own place went up and the rent allowance went down so she could no longer afford it. Think the plan was to help out while he was sick and save towards a deposit for a new place. All she is asking for is to be allowed to stay till Janurary so her kids can grief for their father properly over christmas which is going to be hard for them and also to give her time to save.
I suppose we can take some comfort in the fact that people here are being almost as unkind to this family as they warw towards the bereaved travellers a couple of weeks ago. Equality at last!
have your say