When I read that Angry Birds 2 was made with Unity I was excited to try it out. Just to see what they could do with it. I hadn’t played an Angry Birds since the original. The sequel looks absolutely gorgeous, but beneath the shiny graphics lies the most cancerous game design I’ve ever seen:
“Pay us or you will lose this gift we just gave you”
“Pay us or you’ll have to wait an hour”
“No internet? How can we cram all this shit down your neck? You’re not allowed to play for an hour.”
“Here’s some shiny gems. Not nearly enough for anything. You should pay for them if you actually want enough for them to be useful.”
“Spread the cancer to your friends and we’ll let you play some more.”
That’s what the game sounded like to me in just the first 15 minutes. Heroin simulator 2015.
If you want to be a money grabbing dickbag feel free to design your game like this, but it’s certainly not something you do for your players. For all I know all mobile games are like this now, but I at least hope that the indie developers on these forums still make games for their players. The only mobile game I play and have played for the last year or so is Desert Golfing. 1 or 2 bucks and you have a pure and simple gaming experience with no bullshit.
It’s fine for kids wanting to waste an hour or two. I don’t think any f2p game is ever worth any serious time or intended to be really. I’d be quick to knock them if nobody else was doing it. But everyone’s doing it.
I agree Hippo. I couldn’t ever take a f2p game serious. I tried the route just once to see what the hype was about, guess what? Not even a download hardly accept for people I told about it. So wasted my time. Was it a serious game I made? Nope, just wanted to see what the hype was all about, and I figured out, if you aren’t already a big time established company where people love your games, or if you get a lucky over the night world changing game, it just isn’t worth the time to put into it.
Because then you get issues that TwiiK mentioned, I can’t stand that crap and will never take that path. Even with my free to play game, I never charged anyone money for anything, I’d give users a choice to watch an ad to get in-game money faster, but it was never forced to watch an ad either accept at the beginning of the game so I could at least try to profit something without forcing it down peoples throats later when playing lol.
But Crossy Road is f2p as well and that did very well? I remember trying that for about an hour without feeling frustrated at all. I didn’t even realize the game had ads because they were only there for those players actively seeking them. But for me it just wasn’t a very interesting game I felt.
But my point is that it’s possible to make a good f2p game designed for your players. On PC I’ve played games like Heroes of the Storm and League of Legends for hundreds of hours without spending a buck and enjoyed them immensely.
I’ve yet to make a mobile game, but I have some prototypes laying around. My preferred method would be a free game with ads (like a demo), and then an in game purchase to buy the game and get rid of the ads. Steam on PC offers refunds now so I have no problem with buying a game I want to try and then refunding it if it wasn’t something I liked. The App Store doesn’t offer refunds as far as I know so buying something and then instantly disliking it would be frustrating I imagine. Therefore gamers should be able to try your game for free in my opinion.
I thought about doing IAP’s and stuff, but honestly, I don’t know if I could ever do that to people.
If someone is gonna spend 20 dollars on a game, it should be a complete and fare game that everyone can equally enjoy.
Now I mean I don’t mind the addition of purchasing map packs and stuff. But to do like Battlefield does, makes it practically impossible to do anything unless you have better weapons, is not fair plainly, unless it mixed ranked players alike that way you at least have a chance without getting just lucky.
But then again I wouldn’t want to charge for map packs either, unless there was already a massive assortment of levels.
(E.G. - 20 / 30 levels) at least for multiplayer.
I just don’t agree with releaseing a incomplete game just to get people hooked then have to buy the rest later in pieces. It’s cruel and not right. I mean it’s different if you are doing an early access on steam or something, because then people willingly know they are purchasing an incomplete game.
I mean I guess I could rip people off, I just don’t have it in my heart to do that. I know the struggle of having no money, last thing I’d want to do, is ruin someones family because they are addicting to spending money just to make me rich. Yeah I know money is important. It’s just me personally, I couldn’t do it, nothing wrong if you or anyone else is doing it, I just personally can’t, if that makes sense? lol.
Welcome to free to play. Been like that for years. Once a game becomes popular, more monetisation can be crammed in without alienating the player base. Its not the first game that did it. Its not the last. Its not likely to stop until someone legislates against it.
Yeah, countries in general are scrambling for laws to catch up with digital commerce. Its made challenging by the fact that the trade doesn’t respect international borders. Digital goods can’t exactly be opened by a customs inspector as they enter the country. And pursuing lawsuits against foreign entities is a nightmare. Especially if the act isn’t classified as a crime in their home jurisdiction.
Honestly, I doubt any government would help the situation by passing laws outlawing F2P. The market is more powerful than individual governments. If you want to get rid of F2P, you need to release an awesome game and make truckloads of money without using F2P. Then other developers will try to copy the way you made money. The reason so many games currently use F2P is because that has made solid revenues for some companies.
Generally speaking, a free game is much more likely to get tried by a user, since there is no monetary risk involved. Millions of users strongly prefer F2P because of the free aspect of it. A lot of users played the original Angry Birds without paying for the game or clicking on the advertisements. Users love a freebie. If F2P was outlawed, those users would be furious. They would blame governments for taking away their freebies.
There has always been some notion of try it before you buy it in the software marketplace. A lot of games used to be marketed using the shareware method. The original Doom had a completely free shareware version that encouraged users to buy the full version. The full version included more maps and weapons. Shareware was very successful back then. F2P is merely the latest variation on the idea of shareware, and there will likely be more variations to come.
I am not saying F2P is a good thing. All I am saying is the way to destroy F2P is through competition in the marketplace, not through government intervention. Come up with a more profitable alternative to F2P that users and developers will both prefer, and then F2P (in its current form) will be gone.
Its not F2P specifically, some games are perfectly valid with this model. Its the skinner box elements that go along with it in some games. Many of these techniques are akin to those found in gambling addiction. There are other consumer laws that could be brought into force with DLC if a game is considered ‘not fit for purpose’ as sold.
Its probably possible for a government to give Google or Apple enough trouble to have some products pulled in certain geographies. Witness Google’s recent privacy policy change to deal with EU regulations on Google play. And if you aren’t on the app store you might as well not be in business.
So there is some hope. Its just the speed governments move is glacial when compared with the speed of the internet and the tech industry.
This is why I don’t play mobile games. I don’t even bother looking for good ones anymore because I assume all games are like this now.
With that said, and with all transparency due, my most successful game to date was free with IAP, but it wasn’t shoved down your throat. That game was released almost five years ago now and is still going strong. Players could play for free forever if they wanted to, but if they wanted extra things then it was available.
I must be the only one here that like f2p…
I played for more than one year Puzzle and Dragons and spent probably around 150 eur and don’t feel cheated at all, the game gave me lots of freebies and made me pass lots of boring times so it deserved it.
I spent my first 5 eur after many months and sure the lottery type gatcha push you to spend more, but honestly I don’t think there are many people “ruined” by IAP so much to deserve new laws …
On the contrary I despise the current trend of premium games that is aiming to an always rising tier, now it’s common place 4-5 eur, where 2 years ago a 2 eur game was considered expensive.
I despise it because I spent more money on games that turned out boring and didn’t play for more than 5’, than what I ever spent on f2p.
And please don’t give me the old excuse of comparing with console games because there is several reason they are more expensive:
1-Many more people than the usual 3-5 people indie game have worked on it.
2-There is marketing, distribution costs, physical medium cost,etc.
3-The potential buyers for console are like 1/100 of smartphone and tablet.
Everything could be better if people would do like few levels free and then pay to unlock the rest, but it seem even this trend is disappearing and now you must cash out to just try a game and see if it suit your taste.
Too little confidence in your title?
“Run with the money” is the new motto of premium.
I think the first person to create this type of game by mistake typed ‘r’ between ‘f’ and ‘e’. And that’s why ‘fee to pay games’ are mis considered as ‘free to play’
This all comes down to the publisher / game creator. The problem is that the F2P model has proven to be profitable so everyone is jumping on the bandwagon but in the vast majority of cases it’s very poorly executed. There has to be a balance in the value you provide. It’s not really free to play if you force people to pay in order to reach a specific level of progression.
One of the best examples of a game that executes this very well is Tribalwars which, for those who aren’t aware, is a F2P browser game. You can absolutely play, and successfully, without paying anything. Buying premium points which are fairly inexpensive gives you extra features making it easier to manage your villages and troops but you can accomplish the same goals without them just not as easily.
I played that game for a couple of years. I was sitting in World 9 with over 300 villages, sending out hundreds of simultaneous attacks mixing fakes and reals to overwhelm people and prevent village stacking. Eventually I got bored with it, but I probably spent over $100 in that couple of years and just like @00christian00 I don’t regret any of it. It was well executed.
Contrast that with something like “Cut the Rope” where the main character gets “tired” and you have to wait to play again (or buy stuff to unlock it) which was tough for my 3 year olds to understand.
