8 ms·

I don't think that free to play is necessarily the answer. And I say this as a developer of a free to play game. The key, I think, is in two things. The first

I don't think that free to play is necessarily the answer. And I say this as a developer of a free to play game. The key, I think, is in two things. The first is having more control over your ability to distribute the product in the long term, and cheaply. The retail model meant that old games didn't have any opportunity to continue to get sales. Digital distribution means that old games continue to be available, and they can continue to make quite a lot of money. The ability to distribute titles yourself means that you don't need to do a big hit all-on-day-one launch to make a sustainable living. The second thing is the ability for some players to pay more money than others. The free to play model is great at this, but it isn't the only way I think that this can happen. We have the ability for someone to pay $1000 to become a "Diamond" supporter which gives someone the ability to design a unique item (with guidance from us for balance reasons). They do not get given a copy, it's an item that is now available for the entire player base and enriches the game by providing more content for the players. This kind of piecemeal support for specific purposes is an interesting area that I think could grow in the future. The overall message I guess is getting away from the need for a big launch then slump, and moving to something that grows and is sustainable for the long term.

notintokyo 14y ago
Big spenders or "whales" are much ignored when considering how to make money with a game. There really are people out there that are willing to spend thousands a month on a social game. You could even think that all the other players merely exist in the game to entertain that small slice that really brings in the money. In my own apps with virtual currency I could see this only in a small way as the incentive was low to spend a lot, so this is more based on the experiences I have heard from fellow devs.
- ripperdoc 14y ago
  I believe it has been widely recognized that Zynga, GREE, etc earn most of their revenues from "whales". And I think it's an ok practice. But in order to get the money from the whales, it often seems that the rest of the players (the 99%, if you wish), have their experience hampered by constant dangling of offers in front of you. As a player, I'd rather pay a small sum once to avoid the virtual currency - and find other ways to create whales (e.g., as suggested, more like content creation, sponsoring and some vanity items).
  - mbenjaminsmith 14y ago
    >> As a player, I'd rather pay a small sum once to avoid the virtual currency - and find other ways to create whales (e.g., as suggested, more like content creation, sponsoring and some vanity items). Except that I bet you wouldn't. Most players when asked say they would prefer a "fair price, pay once" model. Yet in aggregate they act very differently. If that weren't true we wouldn't now have a market where: 1) Seemingly most people complain about F2P 2) F2P is increasingly the most successful model I think the people annoyed by monetization efforts are a relatively tech savvy, vocal minority. >> it often seems that the rest of the players (the 99%, if you wish), have their experience hampered by constant dangling of offers in front of you. I don't think that's really the case. Again, vocal minority. But let's say it is. Speaking as a game developer now, we don't have to present the same experience to every player. A "cheap" player may be nearly a lost cause for direct monetization but valuable for word of mouth. If they're not buying we can actually scale back on the amount of ads presented and instead gently persuade them to, say, post their high scores on Twitter. If you're the type of player that likes to brag, then a prompt with a pre-filled Twitter post won't annoy you at all. It's not hard to figure out which player is which and it's not hard to adapt in-game marketing efforts to suit that player.
    - MrMember 14y ago
      I can happily say that I've given up on free to play games. The vast majority of free to play games out there are fundamentally flawed. At their core they weren't designed to be fun to play, they were designed to milk the player of money, or pester them until they give in and pay or give up and quit. Sure, there might be a few free to play games out there that break this mold, but I'm at a point in my life where money is expendable but time isn't. I'd much rather spend money up front to play a game that has a good chance at being designed for fun than waste time trying to find a diamond in the free to play rough. I believe there will always be a place for paid games, but if the market shift towards free to play continues I'll have no problem giving up video games entirely. Will the 'AAA' free to play games like Hawken, Mech Warrior Online, or Planetside 2 be fun to play? Perhaps, but I'll never find out.
      - 14y ago

notintokyo 14y ago

Big spenders or "whales" are much ignored when considering how to make money with a game. There really are people out there that are willing to spend thousands a month on a social game. You could even think that all the other players merely exist in the game to entertain that small slice that really brings in the money. In my own apps with virtual currency I could see this only in a small way as the incentive was low to spend a lot, so this is more based on the experiences I have heard from fellow devs.

ripperdoc 14y ago
I believe it has been widely recognized that Zynga, GREE, etc earn most of their revenues from "whales". And I think it's an ok practice. But in order to get the money from the whales, it often seems that the rest of the players (the 99%, if you wish), have their experience hampered by constant dangling of offers in front of you. As a player, I'd rather pay a small sum once to avoid the virtual currency - and find other ways to create whales (e.g., as suggested, more like content creation, sponsoring and some vanity items).
- mbenjaminsmith 14y ago
  >> As a player, I'd rather pay a small sum once to avoid the virtual currency - and find other ways to create whales (e.g., as suggested, more like content creation, sponsoring and some vanity items). Except that I bet you wouldn't. Most players when asked say they would prefer a "fair price, pay once" model. Yet in aggregate they act very differently. If that weren't true we wouldn't now have a market where: 1) Seemingly most people complain about F2P 2) F2P is increasingly the most successful model I think the people annoyed by monetization efforts are a relatively tech savvy, vocal minority. >> it often seems that the rest of the players (the 99%, if you wish), have their experience hampered by constant dangling of offers in front of you. I don't think that's really the case. Again, vocal minority. But let's say it is. Speaking as a game developer now, we don't have to present the same experience to every player. A "cheap" player may be nearly a lost cause for direct monetization but valuable for word of mouth. If they're not buying we can actually scale back on the amount of ads presented and instead gently persuade them to, say, post their high scores on Twitter. If you're the type of player that likes to brag, then a prompt with a pre-filled Twitter post won't annoy you at all. It's not hard to figure out which player is which and it's not hard to adapt in-game marketing efforts to suit that player.
  - MrMember 14y ago
    I can happily say that I've given up on free to play games. The vast majority of free to play games out there are fundamentally flawed. At their core they weren't designed to be fun to play, they were designed to milk the player of money, or pester them until they give in and pay or give up and quit. Sure, there might be a few free to play games out there that break this mold, but I'm at a point in my life where money is expendable but time isn't. I'd much rather spend money up front to play a game that has a good chance at being designed for fun than waste time trying to find a diamond in the free to play rough. I believe there will always be a place for paid games, but if the market shift towards free to play continues I'll have no problem giving up video games entirely. Will the 'AAA' free to play games like Hawken, Mech Warrior Online, or Planetside 2 be fun to play? Perhaps, but I'll never find out.
    - 14y ago