World of Tanks Dev Makes Entire Catalog "Free-to-Win"

[Fanghawk]

World of Tanks Dev Makes Entire Catalog "Free-to-Win"

Wargaming.net is removing all paid advantages from its online games, and won't be implementing them for future releases.

Over the past few years, many online games have experimented <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/124438-Shadowrun-Online-Creators-Detail-Its-Free-To-Play-Model>with free-to-play microtransaction models, offering fans combinations of paid and free content. <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111259-Team-Fortress-2-Goes-Free-to-Play-Meets-the-Medic>It's worked well for many developers, but in some cases it's led to "pay-to-win" scenarios where free players get crushed by paying customers and their premium weapons. It's not much fun for anyone looking to experience a game, but some creators are slowly understanding the error of their ways. One recent example is World of Tanks developer Wargaming.net, who announced it will be removing all paid advantages from its games and keeping them out of upcoming releases.

"Wargaming is a company delivering free-to-play online games, and we strongly believe that you can't provide a truly triple-A free-to-play experience without absolutely making sure all combat options are free of charge to all players," VP of publishing Andrei Yarantsau told Gamasutra. "We don't want to nickel and dime our players -- we want to deliver gaming experiences and services that are based on the fair treatment of our players, whether they spend money in-game or not."

This isn't to say that World of Tanks, or the upcoming World of Warplanes for that matter, will drop microtransactions - Wargaming still wants to make money on its games after all. Instead, the developer calculated that it can collect substantial revenue from non-advantageous content like custom vehicles or personalization options. "We don't want World of Tanks players to feel like it's an experience that only a select few can afford," Yarantsau added. "Quite contrary, we want the game to embody accessibility and fairness to all players, paying or not."

Source: <a href=http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/193520/Wargaming_kicks_paytowin_monetization_to_the_curb.php>Gamasutra, via <a href=http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-06-04-wargaming-focuses-on-free-to-win-strategy>Games Industry International

Permalink

 

[King Kazma]

Awhile back they made it so that any player could buy the AP shells for regular in game currency. While the costs are prohibitive, the average guy could still afford to put a few in his tank each round and have an advantage with them if one of the tougher tanks comes along.
Still the costs are horrible. I can't afford them with my Tiger, w/l ratio is about 50/49, and a horrible 38% survival rate. Alot of times I only break even. Than again Wargaming sees to be biased against us German players. My KV-1 makes free money wether I die or not, so long as I hit a guy once and didn't use any repair kits or anything. I mean, I can easily profit 10k with it, but unless I have a match I smash the enemy my Tiger is lucky to make 5k profit. But thats us German's, always bitching cause we have the short stick.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Eh, so they're going the Team Fortress 2 route. I originally tryed WoT and didn't like it, but I might try it again if their making it less grating to unlock new things.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

This is excellent news.

I love WoT, but having someone be light years ahead just because they paid is always pretty silly.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Interesting idea, but I stopped with World of Warplanes because it became duller with every update. A removal of pay to win features is great, but to get to the high level gear is so grind-tastic that even with paid time it's a barrier to entry in itself.

How long before Zynga buys this one?

Never, they spent all their money on OMGPOP and now they're suffering from the dentist bills.

 

[Nurb]

It's a good move because they're suddenly in competition with the devs of War Thunder, which plans to introduce tank, infantry, and battleship combat in with its war plane game

 

[Alfador_VII]

Eh, so they're going the Team Fortress 2 route. I originally tryed WoT and didn't like it, but I might try it again if their making it less grating to unlock new things.

TF2 route? Does this mean hats for tanks? Or just custom camos.

 

[Bleidd Whitefalcon]

Eh, so they're going the Team Fortress 2 route. I originally tryed WoT and didn't like it, but I might try it again if their making it less grating to unlock new things.

TF2 route? Does this mean hats for tanks? Or just custom camos.

...I'd totally play a game where tanks had top hats or other fancy headwear

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Eh, so they're going the Team Fortress 2 route. I originally tryed WoT and didn't like it, but I might try it again if their making it less grating to unlock new things.

TF2 route? Does this mean hats for tanks? Or just custom camos.

Hat wearing tanks sound like the greatest thing ever. If they add that I actually might play it again, as long as they don't add "Tank Co. Supply Crates"

 

[Lazy Kitty]

So how will they make money now?
Ads?

Edit: Never mind, I missed the last part.

 

[Sansha]

This is good news.

They already dropped the Gold (the currency you buy for real money to get the best toys in-game) price on the best ammunition (armor-penetrating or AP) and consumable food for your crews (which boosts their abilities and thus your tank performs better), so really it was only a matter of time before it fully encompassed the game.

World of Warplanes is a bad idea, it really is. I'm disappointed they didn't try Warships after Tanks... guess I'll have to wait.

 

[Therumancer]

I have mixed opinions.

Let me be honest, I'm one of those people who utterly hates the entire "Free To Play" and "Microtransaction" model but winds up putting a pretty good amount of money into such schemes simply because it's increasingly become a matter of tolerating it or going without gaming. As someone who is disabled and literally has no life today, gaming being one of the few things that keeps me going. Truthfully I've been increasingly concerned it will get to the point where I cannot afford it.

HOWEVER, when it comes to microtransactions the bottom line is that if I'm generally only going to play for something if it does something I find useful or valuable. For the most part I could care less about cosmetic upgrades, and things that work just like other things in the game but look different. IMO those kinds of items are only fun as a status symbol to be earned in a game. For the most part I'm content once I have a character that I think looks decent and don't feel any overpowering need to have 20 different outfits with matching mounts and static pets. My experience is that most serious players largely feel the same way. Such content being easily ignorable is a big part of why so many people suggest that this is what microtransactions should be. In a perfect world I suppose that is the case.

If a company wants money from me it's going to have to offer functionality, which is exactly why companies put in draconian inventory caps and barriers to ease of play (or just fun) since if they don't put things into the game that people feel the need to pay for, most people are pretty much going to wind up paying nothing.

On an odd level while I'm not particularly fond of "Perfect World Entertainment" I think they kind of hit upon the right idea for this kind of thing, which is to say that selling power for real money is the way to go, assuming the game itself can be completed and enjoyed with what the game gives you on it's own. They also hit upon the idea of allowing people to obtain the microtransaction currency by playing a lot through their Dilithium/Questionite/Astral Diamond exchanges, which tends to ensure that anything can be obtained by a dedicated player who puts in enough time and money and paying real cash largely amounts to expanding your options and saving a lot of time. The only thing missing from the system IMO is that it relies on people putting microtransaction currency into the market, while I've long suspected Cryptic winds up seeding the market to make sure Zen is always available, I think there does need to be a flat "top end" exchange rate that isn't player dependant allowing a time to payoff equasion to exist at least on paper.

See, the point I'm making here is that if I'm going to give someone money for a game, I want something in return that is going to be worth it, something I can actually play with, gain a benefit from, and tinker with in the game. If a new spaceship or whatever entertains me for 40 hours or so in screwing around with the possibilities it's otherwise unavailable gimmicks give it, then that might be worth $25 (I don't get a real item, but basically I figure that's the cost of a game, and if I'm having fun it doesn't much matter if I'm playing a new one or one I already like). On the other hand buying a pink unicorn for $25 that doesn't do anything but carry me around like any other mount of it's level, or say a tophat with lightning rods around the brim which people are just going to zone out as they run around and do whatever doesn't matter... who the heck is going to pay real money for that, unless they are supporting the game for the sake of supporting the game (which I have done in some cases). At the best I might in theory do it once, but once I have something that looks awesome WTF do I care about anything else they make?

To wrap this up and put it into context, it will be interesting to see what happens to "World Of Tanks", personally if they actually do what they are saying, I'd imagine it can't end well. Pretty much every game that has set out to keep it's cash shop "cosmetic only" has had to find other things to sell. In many cases it comes down to them just selling the new content, but in others I've seen things like them having to cap inventory to sell space, or intentionally create massive grinds for the sole purpose of selling boosters to make those grinds less of a chore (ie the "annoy people for money" strategy). If you look at the cycle of some of the smaller free to play games that have come, died, and gone you can sort of see what I'm talking about.

I could be wrong, but unless they are hiding something here like many games do, I cannot see World Of Tanks supporting itself entirely based on cosmetic content. I'm not big on tank-wars so I haven't played, but honestly I'll be honest If someone was to say "hey, pay us $25 to hang some fuzzy dice from your cannon... another $15 for whitewall tires... how about $50 for a snazzy pack that turns your tank into a low rider with fins and fire down the side...." I can't see dishing out the money for it, unless I was a hell bent on supporting the game for some reason and wanting it to survive. World Of Tanks might have those kinds of fanatics right now (the game is huge) but I don't know if it's even possible to have enough of them to support an MMO without something else going on.

... and as I said, I suppose many would disagree, but I'd much rather deal with "pay for power" as long as the game is doable on a basic level, than "pay not to be annoyed". I actually care less about someone selling premium weapons than I do about the garbage ToR pulled with their "pay for inventory, pay to equip artifact equipment, pay more if you want event equipment too, pay to unlock hot bars..." Oh sure they made all of their basic content free but did everything to make playing it an exercise in frustration if you didn't put money into it. Since the game was already beatable I probably would have preferred it if they simply started selling overpowered triple bladed lightsabers or something.

 

[Zer_]

Awhile back they made it so that any player could buy the AP shells for regular in game currency. While the costs are prohibitive, the average guy could still afford to put a few in his tank each round and have an advantage with them if one of the tougher tanks comes along.
Still the costs are horrible. I can't afford them with my Tiger, w/l ratio is about 50/49, and a horrible 38% survival rate. Alot of times I only break even. Than again Wargaming sees to be biased against us German players. My KV-1 makes free money wether I die or not, so long as I hit a guy once and didn't use any repair kits or anything. I mean, I can easily profit 10k with it, but unless I have a match I smash the enemy my Tiger is lucky to make 5k profit. But thats us German's, always bitching cause we have the short stick.

The Tiger is best played as a Support tank to be honest. Compared to the other tanks in the tier, the armor is relatively weak. It has a sick gun with a good fire rate, though. It's accurate as all hell too.

 

[SpAc3man]

Brilliant change of policy. I stopped playing because playing for free crippled the game and stopped it from being fun for too long. The only microtransaction games I have ever stuck with are TF2 and Dota 2 where purchases don't offer any advantage. Glad to see more devs following Valve's example.

 

[devotedsniper]

What does this mean exactly? No more gold ammo or premium accounts?

In some ways I'd be happy if premium went away (you know i wouldn't need to pay anymore), but does thats normal accounts would start earning more? I have to say If they don't increase the cash for it then t8+ could become unplayable, my t10 TD doesn't make much money in matches we win (even if i get 4-5 kills) and this is with premium, without it I pretty much lose money everytime.

I will miss gold ammo, I only ever carried 2 on me but it was great for those tanks 3-4 tiers above you, you know cause matchmaker is pretty useless if your in a platoon.

 

[Strazdas]

I play world of tanks. The way they are introducing it is making the gold items available for regular credits. and it does not matter than there is extreme lack of regular credits. you can drive a tier 10, kill 9 enemies singlehandedly take the victory and still recieve negative credits because your bullets cost more than you gain. you are forced to grind credits, which is best done with gold tanks that costs A LOT of money.
Not to mention that "premium account" essentialy makes it 1,5x so its basically a "drop rate boost" that they are trying to avoid.

How long before Zynga buys this one?

Zynga cant afford it.

Awhile back they made it so that any player could buy the AP shells for regular in game currency. While the costs are prohibitive, the average guy could still afford to put a few in his tank each round and have an advantage with them if one of the tougher tanks comes along.
Still the costs are horrible. I can't afford them with my Tiger, w/l ratio is about 50/49, and a horrible 38% survival rate. Alot of times I only break even. Than again Wargaming sees to be biased against us German players. My KV-1 makes free money wether I die or not, so long as I hit a guy once and didn't use any repair kits or anything. I mean, I can easily profit 10k with it, but unless I have a match I smash the enemy my Tiger is lucky to make 5k profit. But thats us German's, always bitching cause we have the short stick.

winrate of 50% is horrible to begin with, so it does not look like you are a very good player, thus you wont be able to afford it anyway. Tiger is EASY conmpared to the big tanks. Survival rate of 38% is fine. most battles you die anyway. Only campers who provide 0 use for the team have high survival rates.
And no, germans are not inferior, you just have to know how to play them.
But yeah, KV1 is a beast of a machine, best tier 5 out there. 10k is something you should easily profit with ttiger though. KV should bring in 20-30k (non-prem) per battle. Hitting enemy once and dieing is HORRIBLE gameplay.

Eh, so they're going the Team Fortress 2 route. I originally tryed WoT and didn't like it, but I might try it again if their making it less grating to unlock new things.

enjoy your stay on low tiers. trust me they are the fun part. when things go up its about tactics, knowing good locations, counting seconds to reload. its good if you like seriuos gameplay, but i sitll play tier 1 tanks for fun sometimes.

World of Warplanes is a bad idea, it really is. I'm disappointed they didn't try Warships after Tanks... guess I'll have to wait.

yeah im not even playing warplanes. warships though id love to.

The only thing missing from the system IMO is that it relies on people putting microtransaction currency into the market, while I've long suspected Cryptic winds up seeding the market to make sure Zen is always available, I think there does need to be a flat "top end" exchange rate that isn't player dependant allowing a time to payoff equasion to exist at least on paper.

Well, eve seeds its own plexes into the market so hoarding all and crashing market is not possible.

See, the point I'm making here is that if I'm going to give someone money for a game, I want something in return that is going to be worth it, something I can actually play with, gain a benefit from, and tinker with in the game. If a new spaceship or whatever entertains me for 40 hours or so in screwing around with the possibilities it's otherwise unavailable gimmicks give it, then that might be worth $25 (I don't get a real item, but basically I figure that's the cost of a game, and if I'm having fun it doesn't much matter if I'm playing a new one or one I already like). On the other hand buying a pink unicorn for $25 that doesn't do anything but carry me around like any other mount of it's level, or say a tophat with lightning rods around the brim which people are just going to zone out as they run around and do whatever doesn't matter... who the heck is going to pay real money for that, unless they are supporting the game for the sake of supporting the game (which I have done in some cases). At the best I might in theory do it once, but once I have something that looks awesome WTF do I care about anything else they make?

and yet there are peope who buy tons of skins in LOL. heck they even buy skins on Xbox profile, basically your the one to see it and maybe if somone is perverted enough to look at your profile. completely useless as far as doing anything, but peopel spend hundreds on them. I am like you, i dont buy cosmetics, but there are plenty of people that do. and it is a viable money source. Best thing is - we benefit from it. they pay for our game while still not getting overpowered.

unless I was a hell bent on supporting the game for some reason and wanting it to survive.

Isnt having over 300 hours of fun (thats what my counter says for WOT) is reason enough to spend 50 dollars on a game to support it?
also some fanaticism comes out of lack of choice really. WOT is the only game with tank combat really, so everyone that lieks it WILL go to WOT. same thing happened with WOW, as it was the only game like that. now as more MMORPGs come out WOW nubmers dwindle.

.. and as I said, I suppose many would disagree, but I'd much rather deal with "pay for power" as long as the game is doable on a basic level, than "pay not to be annoyed". I actually care less about someone selling premium weapons than I do about the garbage ToR pulled with their "pay for inventory, pay to equip artifact equipment, pay more if you want event equipment too, pay to unlock hot bars..." Oh sure they made all of their basic content free but did everything to make playing it an exercise in frustration if you didn't put money into it. Since the game was already beatable I probably would have preferred it if they simply started selling overpowered triple bladed lightsabers or something.

agree with you there. those annoyeance for payment models are quite bad. but in TANKS thats a non-issue really, well, beside garage space perhaps, but thats cheap. like, real cheap. you can put an extra tank for like 1-2 dollars. the gameplay itself - the combat is not influenced by such things, there is no buying magazine capcity or something like that.

Capcha: decribe netflix.
i woudl if it was available in my country.