4 ms·

Making Rocket League F2P meant that skilled players could register as many new accounts for themselves as they wanted and "rank up" their buddies in competitive

Making Rocket League F2P meant that skilled players could register as many new accounts for themselves as they wanted and "rank up" their buddies in competitive matchmaking. This completely ruins the competitive aspect of the game since it's far too common to join a game and get completely crushed by some grand champion playing on a brand new account, teamed up with his friends. Another problem it enables is trolls: People make new accounts then join games to ruin the fun for everyone else. Account got banned? No problem: Make a new one. Repeat. The ranked play aspect of the game was completely ruined after Epic bought Rocket League.

ketzo 5y ago
Those are problems, true, but literally every modern competitive ladder deals with the three problems you're describing: smurfs, boosting, and trolls. Overwatch dealt with all three even when the game cost $40! In return for those problems, the game gets an instant, massive increase in players. Monetization usually increases, since modern mtx are usually much more effective than either subscription or one-time-purchase models. I'm not saying there are zero problems with going F2P. Obviously there are. But just as obviously, since so many studios have chosen to go that route, the benefits are worth it for the company. If the revenue benefits are worth it, they keep developing the game, keep running the servers, keep fixing bugs, rather than just letting the game die. That seems pretty good.
- krageon 5y ago
  > Monetization usually increases, since modern mtx are usually much more effective than either subscription or one-time-purchase models. Are you posing this as not a problem? This makes a game the digital equivalent of cancer: There's a lot of it, it grows fast, but nothing about it is worthwhile or good. It just exists to prey on everything around it.

ketzo 5y ago

Those are problems, true, but literally every modern competitive ladder deals with the three problems you're describing: smurfs, boosting, and trolls. Overwatch dealt with all three even when the game cost $40! In return for those problems, the game gets an instant, massive increase in players. Monetization usually increases, since modern mtx are usually much more effective than either subscription or one-time-purchase models. I'm not saying there are zero problems with going F2P. Obviously there are. But just as obviously, since so many studios have chosen to go that route, the benefits are worth it for the company. If the revenue benefits are worth it, they keep developing the game, keep running the servers, keep fixing bugs, rather than just letting the game die. That seems pretty good.

krageon 5y ago
> Monetization usually increases, since modern mtx are usually much more effective than either subscription or one-time-purchase models. Are you posing this as not a problem? This makes a game the digital equivalent of cancer: There's a lot of it, it grows fast, but nothing about it is worthwhile or good. It just exists to prey on everything around it.