Candy Crush Dev: Microtransactions Are The Future of Games

[Hero in a half shell]

Edit: Oh, great, so they changed the content of the article in response to pressure from King's CEO. Way to censor the internet. Well, it doesn't matter. We all saw the article as it was originally written, and we all know that F2P developers of games that are coming out now took their cues from that version of the article. This is just a thin layer of P.R. paint over the top of it. The entire business model is built on coercion, with the notable exception of a handfull of games, such as LoL (until they started selling rune sheets, that is. Sigh.)

Right enough, at least the "gamers will fall in line" line has been taken out, maybe more, and without the usual "Update" or "Edit" label by the Escapist.

Censorship indeed, I hope someone took a few screencaps or something.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

1. Who the hell are you to say this? Where's your qualifications? Oh, one good small F2P game that any competent developer could do? Woah, look out then guys. He totally knows what he's talking about.

2. There will ALWAYS be a good variety of games both with and without microtransactions. And seriously, do I really have to tell anyone why? Just look at the history and current state of gaming. If anything, the variety of games out is actually EXPANDING.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Free to play isn't a bad model in of it self. Of the games I play most often, three of them (TF2, Hearstone, and DOTA 2) are all F2P. There are some more I would love to play, such as Planetside 2, but can't because my computer doesn't have the RAM.

What is the difference between these games and Candy Crush? They are not trying to monetize frustration. No "oh, this level sure is hard, it would be oh so easy if you just paid to get past it," or "wow, some ultra bombs would be nice for this level, wouldn't they?"

Dota 2 gives me all the playable content, FREE. I can be any hero, any time of the day I wish. All they ask me to pay for is for hats or gloves or announcers that change NOTHING of the game-play. Just like how Farmville eventually fell apart, King games will find their customers leaving in droves for the next cow clicker.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Free To Play works well for certain types of games. Hearthstone, for example, is a pretty good free to play game.

But the idea that Free to play can even apply to many genres is stupid. How could you possibly make a free to play Mario or Megaman game, for example? It would break the core of the game. And what about a Metroidvania? It just doesn't work. In fact, most core game genres don't really work as FTP games.

This guy might as well have said "I don't know anything about game design and I really, really want to be hated by gamers."

Simple. You do it the way most F2P games get made:

- Step 1: Start with a good game.

- Step 2: Break its kneecaps.

- Step 3: Sell crutches.

- Step 4: The crutches need to be bought again every time you play.

See? Simple! We call this the Dungeon Keeper Formula, and it's THE FUTURE OF GAMING according to these guys.

There is a way to to port a "Mario" or a "Metrovania" into a, sort of, free to play model.

Let players play the first world/castle/area/whatever your calling each part of the game, free and sell the rest. It effectively is a demo, allowing players to judge if they like the game and it's mechanics before they buy the whole thing. I know several games have adopted this model (although the only example I can think of off the top of my head is the iphone port of Ghost Trick).

Spoiler: Of course, most companies will go down the "Star Trek Trexels" model for frustration driven profit

 

[Vegosiux]

Anyone who uses "TEH FUTUREZ!!!11" in order to try and sell me on something, or worse, try to "convince" me I actually like, or am supposed to like what they're selling is not going to fare well once I take over the world.

 

[AdagioBoognish]

Yeah, absolutely, Tommy. All games should force the user to wait hours for lives/turns to regen, or be prohibitively difficult. All games should arbitrarily be damaged goods, then slowly restored to any sort of decent quality by the user.

Oh mah god, I want to see a first person shooter like this. Everyone gets twenty bullets per hour and a knife. Might as well take the miasma of free to play and pay to win tactics to it's most extreme.

 

[Olas]

I think he has a very narrow concept of what gaming is and what it includes. Perhaps within the mobile market Free to wait will become nearly ubiquitous, but for it to become the new standard for triple A developers is just nonsensical. If anything developers like Ubisoft are trying to push the initial cost of games UP not down to zero.

 

[Requia]

You know what? I hope he's right.

The indie gaming surge is freaking awesome, all sorts of genuinely new stuff and dead or near dead genres being reinvented. It's the normal cycle that business eventually pick up what small companies do and then use scale and marketing money to take over. I want to see a permanent the big money so fucked over by the greed of the people controlling it that this keeps going a while longer. So what if 95% of the country plays that shit, gaming was never truly popular before, the core market will just shift to indie and completely escape the executive meddling for a little while.