Jimquisition: Free To Wait

Lvl 64 Klutz

Crowsplosion!
Apr 8, 2008
2,338
0
0
contla said:
xEightBitPlayerx said:
I hope this game model dies a quick death; Who would support something like this?
It can be done well."Triple Town" on IOS was essentially it's demo. You start with a certain number of moves. When you run out you can wait for some moves to regen or pay a dollar for more moves than you start off with or pay $5 for infinite moves and 3 other maps. It's developers like Ea and Activision who take advantage of it then other talentless studios rush to copy them. I can guarantee Glu,chillingo, or gameloft are this second making a free to wait flappy bird clone, and it sickens me.
I was going to post something like this, but then I realized that Jim's point still holds water. Yes, some games offer expedited waiting for really cheap, and others with a stamina system let you play for 90 minutes+ and recharges stamina at a decent rate, but the fact still remains the games are using a hostile system for getting the player to spend money. His argument is that a good Free to Play model uses incentives to reward players for supporting the developer rather than punishing players that don't.
 

Living_Brain

When in doubt, overclock
Feb 8, 2012
1,426
0
0
There's a bigger problem than the developers: The c***s that eat this shit up, throwing their money at these corporations and f***ing liking it that way.
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
Megacherv said:
I can't say I agree with that last sentiment. Developers work at a studio doing what they're told. It's a job, they're people living in a society that requires money to survive, so they'll carry on doing what they're told. They won't necessarily like it, but if they don't do it the higher-ups that make these awful decisions will stop paying them, and then those developers won't be able to support themselves or their families. Please don't shout at the developers for this.
I'm sorry to pick you out, but you touch on a point in a way that I'm curious about. I can understand your opinion. it's one shared by a lot of people even on this very site. But this side issue that has popped in my head after reading your post made me curious about something that you didn't even touch upon, but I still want to ask the question to the Escapist because of it.

I wonder why we offer such leniency to Developers who produce game tripe just because they are told, but we as gamers as a large majority have nothing but vitriol and disdain for Game reviewers who need to eat just as bad as these developers? They were told by their upper ups to give a ten out or ten for an average game because that game paid to be plastered all over their gaming site. At large, we jump on that reviewer for not having the credibility to possibly lose his job and go hungry.

It's not like his or her company will say '... we support you for sticking by your moral constraints. We're going to get sued, but we're going to back you a hundred percent for having the balls that we didn't have when we accepted the money'. No. He or she will be fired. And probably won't be able to find another job for a while because even though people want good writers, they want people to follow the rules of the company.

And lest we forget, The game pr team didn't go to the reviewer, they went to the company. They gave that reviewing company the money and said give us a good review. But we give the reviewer equal amount if not more hate as we give the reviewing site as a whole. Why is that, Escapist?
 

Johnson McGee

New member
Nov 16, 2009
516
0
0
I'm surprised there was no mention of the "5-star rating or else we pester you" or the "only way to unsubscribe is in grey-on-black german text" crap with Dungeon Keeper as well.
 

shteev

New member
Oct 22, 2007
96
0
0
Sseth said:
shteev said:
*Are* there loads of free to play games worth playing, Jim?

I ask genuinely because I can't find any. I'd love to play some.
Are you kidding man? They are every where. Just looking at my desktop icons I've got League of Legends, Blacklight Retribution, Warframe, Path of Exile
Ok, right, sorry, I was lost in my own little bubble there for a second. There are indeed good free to play PC games. I haven't found a good mobile one since Triple Town tho.
 

GAunderrated

New member
Jul 9, 2012
998
0
0
Megacherv said:
I can't say I agree with that last sentiment. Developers work at a studio doing what they're told. It's a job, they're people living in a society that requires money to survive, so they'll carry on doing what they're told. They won't necessarily like it, but if they don't do it the higher-ups that make these awful decisions will stop paying them, and then those developers won't be able to support themselves or their families. Please don't shout at the developers for this.
I completely disagree. There is always another option. Those developers choose to make this product fully knowing what kind of company EA is and what type of game they are making. People need to be held responsible for their actions, stop blaming it on "society", "corporations", or the "government" forcing them to work these jobs.

They have every right to sell out their ethics and integrity to support their families, but that does not mean they are somehow immune to being called out for it.
 

Vedli

New member
Jul 5, 2013
20
0
0
deathbydeath said:
Jim, shut up. You have nothing but scorn for every single free-to-play game with time delays (and their developers) while there are games out there that are absolutely sublime and happen to use that model correctly and in an inoffensive manner. Have the dignity to properly inform yourself before you start spewing bile over an entire idea.

(For the record, the good games I was thinking of were Fallen London and Eliminate Pro, and while I don't play many FTP/mobile games both of them handle the "free-to-wait" model in two different and equally good ways)

xEightBitPlayerx said:
I hope this game model dies a quick death; Who would support something like this?
Because some games do it well [fallenlondon.storynexus.com] and the developers producing that content deserve money.

EDIT: The mike drop at the end made me squee a bit. Glad that's back.
You know in future maybe instead of acting like a crying six year old you could show examples about how "free to wait" can be done well because by starting out by being rude and telling someone to "shut up" and to "inform themselves" when the vast majority of this model (to an outsider like me anyway) does indeed seem to be quite exploitative, makes you look like an hysterical moron who's opinion shouldn't be taken seriously (I'm assuming you are someone who get a little too emotional over the subject and posted something from a place of passion rather than logic). I don't type this to be mean or lash out but you really did hurt your own argument by lashing out rather then calmly showing examples of the model done right.

Secondly though I would ask the question, Would either of the games you mentioned be any worse of if they removed the timers?
 

geier

New member
Oct 15, 2010
250
0
0
Well Jim what is so bad in this game type?
It's only going to affect idiots who pay, not you, me or any other sane person.

This would be the right time for a indy studio to create a "cell supervisor, vault guard, torture chamber steward, oubliette superintendent" game. The gamplay consists of little magical beings (gremlins, urchins, devilings) that maintain said structure underground and are guided by a supernatural entity. Switch the chicken for little piglets and we are set.

It's a free market Jim. With the outcry created by EA this game gets much free publicity. Don't get to upset about idiots and their games, you will live longer.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
The sad thing is this is going to take an absolutely massive surge at the BBB or, well, your local equivalent, before market authorities prod the publishers on the shoulder and go "Y'know what? That's kind of a low blow. Stop that shit or get ready for some class-action suit awesomeness."

Until an economist actually sits down and demolishes this business model, the App Stores and Google Plays of this world will keep behaving like the freaking Wild West.
 

Citizen Graves

New member
Jul 19, 2011
55
0
0
The simple fact of the matter is simply that most people are stupid, and I don't mean this in a cynical or mean-spirited way.

That's just the whole truth behind it. Most people, normal people, are ignorant, uninformed, weak of mind, afraid and generally too preoccupied with their own life to realize it.

That goes for adults as well as for children (who apparently make up a large percentage of the consumer-base of mobile and F2P games).

Most people live the in their little rat-cage that they call life, doing their little rat-race, without ever realizing how they are being exploited.

What? You think Electronic Arts is doing something that other companies (like the Tobbaco Industry) haven't figured out years ago?

Most people are dumb and it could be argued that the morally right choice here is to protect them from their stupidity.

But protecting the dumb masses is so, so, so much more difficult than exploiting them.

And much less profitable, too.


Captcha: dream big
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
I'm perfectly aware that there are "good" F2P games out there, at least relative to the metric shittons of crap out there, but at the same time I started boycotting them years ago and have found no real reason to go back.

Even if, as I said, there are some games that do it well, F2P will always produce games that are designed around trying to milk the customer of more money. Even if it is just "aesthetics" and give you no strategic advantage, it's still simply not a business practice any gamer should support, if for no other reason than it encourages people to abuse the system.

That's why I suggest a full-on boycott of every free-to-play game of any stripe. This scam must end before it becomes to norm, and expected, and that doesn't necessarily mean that the current "good" F2P games have to go, they can just offer demos and/or a trial for the game and make all those nice "aesthetic" things you had to pay for rewards for playing well, instead of ransoming content for more money. End it all, right now, and maybe then we can avoid a crash, if there is one to be avoided, but above that, we can maintain the integrity of medium.
 

irishda

New member
Dec 16, 2010
968
0
0
Flatfrog said:
But that's obviously missing the point. These *aren't* 'cheap little one-off games'. These are *incredibly expensive* games - if you actually want to play them as games.
>play them as games
>>as games
>>>GAMES

A Dungeon Keeper game where you have to wait 24 hours to dig out a brick is not a game at all. If you want it to be a game, you have to spend money. A *lot* of money. So these so-called games are devious excuses to persuade us to part with large sums of cash under the false pretence of giving us some kind of 'free' entertainment.

As others have said, I don't think this model is entirely impossible to implement fairly. I've mentioned Clash of Clans before as an example that seems to work pretty well - my son plays it a lot in the free mode, picking it up for a few minutes at a time every day, setting some things in motion and leaving it. My Singing Monsters is even better (and is one of the few games I've allowed him to spend some money on). But Dungeon Keeper does seem to have reached a real low point. And their ratings scam is frankly downright criminal.

Obviously some of the blame has to go on consumers too. We are far too unwilling to spend money on mobile games, making 'free' games the only workable business model. But I'd like to see more companies offering a simple 1-2-3 alternative: 1) Free demo; 2) Low-priced subscription or other incremental payment system; 3) higher-priced complete unlock. That seems to me a far more fair and transparent option.
I'm inclined to believe that's the crux of the matter right there. People want to treat these games as they have with other games, but, if you decide it doesn't have to be like that, then what power does their "buy this for extra time" have on you? These are two different game models, and it only seems unfair if you go in with Jim's locked perspective of "this is how you play games and this model roadblocks that".

Yet, your son, who's playing the same model as Jim, probably doesn't feel this is the worst thing to happen to gaming ever, because he doesn't treat THAT game like you would with other games. I myself like to play Avengers Alliance (even though the PVP is bullshit), yet don't find myself frustrated because "Oh, I'd have to buy more energy to keep going or just wait half an hour."

I'm not giving a game like Dungeon Keeper a pass here, though. It doesn't sound like a very good game at all. But let's keep this in perspective. Lots of people paid ACTUAL money to find out Colonial Marines wasn't good. With Dungeon Keeper, approximately no one paid money to find out it was shit. If they wanted to spend money after the fact is on them. By that margin, I'd dare say the FtP model is better than the standard one. EVERY game is a demo that never expires and goes forever, and you can decide to spend money on it at any time.
 

Yuuki

New member
Mar 19, 2013
995
0
0
As long as consumers keep fueling this model and keep it profitable, it's here to stay.

Also I really hope EA stays on this track and wins most hated company in US for the 3rd year in a row. We're only 2 months into 2014 and they have already managed to fuck up so many things! That is what you call dedication.
 

deathbydeath

New member
Jun 28, 2010
1,363
0
0
Vedli said:
You know in future maybe instead of acting like a crying six year old you could show examples about how "free to wait" can be done well because by starting out by being rude and telling someone to "shut up" and to "inform themselves" when the vast majority of this model (to an outsider like me anyway) does indeed seem to be quite exploitative, makes you look like an hysterical moron who's opinion shouldn't be taken seriously (I'm assuming you are someone who get a little too emotional over the subject and posted something from a place of passion rather than logic). I don't type this to be mean or lash out but you really did hurt your own argument by lashing out rather then calmly showing examples of the model done right.
... You call me out for opening a post with an insult/petulant comment and yet you do the same thing that I did. High five, bro. (Clarification: The first three words were written in something like an exasperated sigh; if I were speaking it, then I would have used the same tone and phrase to address my uncle when he gets drunk and starts ranting about the gays again)

Vedli said:
Secondly though I would ask the question, would either of the games you mentioned be any worse off if they removed the timers?
I have no clue how Fallen London would work if you removed the timers, but it would most likely cease being fun and cause players to get extremely bored extremely easily. Eliminate Pro, on the other hand, would remain pretty much exactly the same, except the devs wouldn't be able to make any money from it. I suggest you try them both; they are free, after all.
 

deathbydeath

New member
Jun 28, 2010
1,363
0
0
geier said:
Well Jim what is so bad in this game type?
It's only going to affect idiots who pay, not you, me or any other sane person.
Actually, it kinda does. In the Dungeon Keeper 2014 example, the game is essentially unplayable in the long term for whoever refuses to shell out cash to make it move at a reasonable pace. It's not like Team Fortress 2, where you have viable alternatives to not paying.
 

CarbonJames

New member
Feb 10, 2014
8
0
0
Gamers need to embrace this model, not reject it.

Why? Because big pubs are screwing you. They are pulling back and not giving you demos of games like they should anymore.

I'm an oldschool dev. I remember Doom shareware. I remember demos. That's what F2P can be.

Do not rail against F2P in general. Get mad at shitty F2P that exploits players. But there are those of us that see it as a way to lay all our cards on the table. My game, AirMech, lets you play the whole game for free. You like it? You can "buy" it, unlike most F2P games. You'll get all the gameplay updates for life.

The way we make it better is by making more fair products so that players can reject the cashgrab manipulative bad examples.

Even things like Early Access, it's actually going in the wrong direction. Now you pay even BEFORE you get access to the finished product. Proper F2P says "here, check out our game, if you like it then you can buy it" and not put you on a hamster wheel where $100 doesn't even get you anywhere.

You can fix this. Spread the word about positive examples, then players will see there are alternatives.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
For the hassle, annoyance, and disrespect EA's new Dungeon Keeper has towards its players, I expect them to pay ME to play their awful cash-in desecration of a once-beloved property.