Ngmoco cancels Rolando 3, says it can't fit into a free-to-play model

I agree with a lot of you guys. I'm not sure I understand why ngmoco wants to push this freemium thing on everyone.

I would kind of understand for a new franchise putting out a free couple of levels and then making you unlock the rest of the game (note: not a la carte, though).

But an established and celebrated franchise like Rolando doesn't need this. Just release it, sell it for a fixed price. Then later on maybe sell some level packs, if Rolando 4 isn't ready, yet.

Rolando 2 was a horrible disaster of a game, compared to the original Rolando which was absolutely brilliant.

This is a bad thing.... I love the first two, actually just completed the 2nd the other day... There is a lack of truly great games out there. The Rolondo games had great game play, perfect for the iPhone... Now I'm just gonna have to keep waiting for Bounce On 2.... I hope they change their minds, I did not think the price of $5-6 was out of line at all... I mean these games kept me and my kids alike entertained.

Ever since Eliminate, I have lost all respect for ngmoco. I was one of the people willing to pay for a good quality iPhone game, but when they came up with this stupid freemium thing, I doubted that they would keep up the same quality. I played Eliminate and TouchPets for all of like 5 min each. They just weren't the same because both had those constant meters running down until you couldn't play anymore. And then when they bought that company the makes the awful EpicPetWars and they began to hype it soooo much from their twitter page, I could hear the funeral bells ringing. Now that they have announced this, I realize that hope for them is lost.

Do they realize that not every game needs to have the same sales model? Some games are free to get recognition for the company, some you pay for up front, with others it makes sense to have in-app purchases. Different games require different pricing styles to make the work, not everything will fit into your cookie cutter, and just because it doesn't, doesn't mean it isn't worth doing... you just need to do it differently.

Personally, I'd buy a game that was $5 if it was good. But with Eliminate Pro, I downloaded it, tried it for 5 minutes, and that was it. I don't like the pay to play idea because it is a very slippery slope. I like my entertainment to have a defined cost. I can see with a multiplayer game where it makes sense, pay per match, but for a platform there 1 game you play, it's just longer. One price, go through at your own pace.

After using their dreaded business model on eliminate I have no interest in anything these guys do. Figures right they would do something like this now.

It does seem like a shame. I bought the first two and had a lot of fun with them. I'm still playing them. But I can't imagine buying into a pay-as-you-play model, so even if they find a way to release Rolando 3 under that model, I don't know if I'd get as much out of it as I have the first two. I understand they have to put resources where the money is, but it's too bad for us Rolando fans. I guess that means nothing's coming down the pipe to distract me from Plants vs. Zombies.

GAME ON NEIL!... ugh ngmoco.

First they blamed piracy, then they blamed lack of success.

The truth is it does not fit their "nickel and dime you to death" micropayment hell like their newer games do.

Why release a game for $4.99 when you can bilk customers for $30 - $40 with in-game purchases, or pay to play?

Such a shame. Rolando was one of the few iPhone games that I enjoyed for more than a week or so. The play style just fits so perfectly with the iPhone and it was a very well designed set of games. Shame to see it go, as I don't enjoy Eliminate Pro at all.