Jimquisition: Free To Wait

[JCAll]

I dunno, Jim. Phoenix Wright is a game as Tapped Out is a game. Sure, the reason Tapped Out uses the FreeToWait model is because it's based on the Simpsons television show and because of that the "game" fits the show. The way the "game" works is by having each Springfield citizen animate differently for a designated amount of time. True it's not very much. Okay, it really does suck. However I like it: I like the animations, the dialogue, the pixels...etc. So, I think it can be salvaged. Just add a game to it and you're done.

Phoenix Wright is just a point and click adventure. No different from something like Monkey Island.
Tapped Out is a money pit and I see no comparison between them.

 

[Joshtopher_Biggins]

Some words

Because if just one person who didn't realize this doesn't play the game because of what he's said, he's done the world a favor.

Free2Wait is a model that preys on people that don't know any better. There's no real gameplay, so no skill is ever involved with the game, meaning that literally anyone and their grandma can play it. They start out with very low paywalls that are about a dollar or less, so that they feel okay with spending some money on the game to wait less, plus the game was free to begin with, so where's the harm in that?

I caught my mom playing a free2wait game for awhile, and she spent over 2 hundred fucking dollars on it. if you just ignore this kind of thing, more people will keep playing the game and companies like EA win. since when has ignoring the problem ever been a good idea?

This is literally the same logic as slots. They nickle and dime you slowly, with occasional light rewards, sometimes maybe giving you a net gain, but almost always totally a loss overall. They just found a way to do it to minors and other people from the comfort of their own home, sometimes without them realizing. It's just vile.

Yeah good point. But I think maybe it's a better idea to educate these kinds of people about f2p scams instead of shouting to the world "Hey game x is terrible! Here's a bunch of footage. Definitely don't play it." If we go around finding every individual scammy f2p game and excessively publicly criticise it we'll never fix the problem. You asked me when has ignoring a problem ever been a good idea, I would argue that the problem is that these games aren't being ignored. Educate your mother and others who don't know any better to be wary of free games. Let them know about games (f2p or otherwise) that are actually good.

 

[EndlessSporadic]

The fact that Jim is so upset as to not even give an outro is saying quite a lot.

If anything, I am more pissed at the people who support this garbage.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I haven't played that one. Although I have played a couple of games on Kongregate that use that business model. Although calling them games is being more than a tad generous since there is absolutely no gameplay whatsoever. This one called Time World is the worst. While technically you don't have to pay anything, all you do is sit on your ass and do nothing while you wait for your buildings to upgrade or your ships to be built or some other damn thing. And even when you get into the story the battles consist of sitting there watching ships shoot at each other with 0 involvement on your part. And of course you have the option to pay real world money to recruit additional heroes and presumably speed up building/research times and whatever. Ugh!

For what it's worth I completely agree with you. What I am doing to try to help is use the model of free to try in a fair way, in the hopes that people no longer tolerate shitty games that do those things.

I think that pure rage at F2P hurts things because there's plenty of devs that feel the same way, and all it does is keep them from trying to help solve the problem. Instead they just keep making games for the big pubs for $60, refuse to put out demos, and now microtrans is infecting full price games--now THAT is something to rage at.

Devs are making evil F2P games because they can, and people are playing them. With enough quality alternatives (several have been mentioned in this thread) eventually (hopefully) people will reject that crap and demand fair games.

It's kind of a "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" situation. The model can be great for gamers when done right--for example if someone doesn't like AirMech after playing it, no problem! I didn't take your money, no hard feelings either way. As a gamer myself I hate purchase regret, and really like the fact that I know people who do spend money in our game are doing it because they want to support us.

For reference, here's AirMech. Early access, but as F2P you don't have to pay to play--remember back when beta tests were free? http://store.steampowered.com/app/206500/ Doing F2P right means you're operating a demo essentially. Players can grind if they really want, or put down the price of a normal indie game to get all the gameplay bits, plus all the perks from lifetime VIP. Sorry if that sounds like too much self-promotion, but I'm really proud of what we offer and honestly do welcome any criticism of how we can become the perfect example of how to do F2P "right".

Oh I see. AirMech is a game you've personally worked on. Well to be clear I'm not against free to play as a concept. I like the idea of having games I can play for free and, if I want to, buy extra bits that enhance the game but aren't strictly necessary. Like I enjoyed playing Star Trek Online for a while till I got bored and I had no problem plunking down a bit of cash for some novelty items like a unique ship or uniforms. That's how I think F2P should be done. Provide a more or less complete gaming experience which can be enhanced with microtransactions, but make it so those who choose not to buy into the micrtransactions aren't missing out on anything substantial (IE no Pay to Win).

 

[Remus]

Agree on all points, and I especially loved the Homer lip sync at the end, making the point with a game that's one of the worst examples of this kind of pay-to-win gameplay.

 

[Adam Locking]

So why don't you just not play the game? Instead of immediately realizing it's a pay-to-play pile of crap and uninstalling it you went and told everyone about it. Now a bunch of people are going to download it and if even one of those people spends money in it you just did EA a favour. You're supposed to ignore it and let it die.

It already has free advertising due to it being near the top of the app store (thanks to its borderline-fraudulent rating "system"). People who regularly look for new games are going to find it, Jim's giving them the heads up before they do.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Is this really a scam? It not like you can't see what it is and it's sneakily taking money from your account. If people are buying it they are getting something out of it personally or they are just stupid. Either way how much money they spend on these things is on their heads and I don't see why we should care.

You should care because as long as incredibly stupid people buy into this crap then more of this crap will continue to be made. And in the worst case scenario it'll come to a point where you'll have no choice but to buy into it yourself because it'll be the only thing available. That's why.

 

[KR4U55]

At first I thought Jim lost it, then he did a reference to Sherlock then, OMG, a british dude did a reference to a british show popular over the pond! Frikkin' hilarious!

I hadn't really given my time to any of those games. I don't want to wait 24 hours for pseudo-gameplay and I don't want to pay to do anything!

Similarly Star Wars: The Old Republic is F2P, but it is insanely frustrating to play as a F2P user or even Preferred Status. The game's pretty solid, F2P locks titles, unifying colours and the number of arenas, flashpoints and stuff you can do in a day, but it becomes stupid when it also locks Crew Skills (crafting) and powerful loot from being worn! (purple loot is unavaliable for F2P users) You can't buy powerful pieces, buy you can't use them if you don't pay.

 

[Arawn]

3:10 pretty much sums up any F2P (free to play) game, not just mobile or tablet games. I mean those PC F2P and console games too. You're given money that's almost useless by the truck full, and covet the token that one must pay to acquire. For the most part I'll play most F2P games up to the point where said bought currency is REQUIRED to progress. At that point the game is over. It's almost a game I play within in such games; how long will it let me pay before making me buy pretend money. For most the shadow looms over me fairly quickly in others it's the elephant in the room that blend in with the grey paint; I know it's there, but don't care since I can't see it. The games that do F2P (in this case free to pay) well make the game itself enjoyable even though some content it hidden behind that pay wall. These forced waiting games pretty much build the wall brick by brick as you play slowing trying to coax you towards their storefront.

 

[viranimus]

Thats what you get for playing a game with microtransactions. Would you go walking alone down dark alleyways around 225th street in NYC at 2 in the morning and expect to not be mugged/stabbed/raped? Then why hang around F2P games that you know will be funded by microtransactions? Everyone knows that is how the operate. Plus the more they are successful the more they will push that envelope. Even starting an account with a F2P, you are just asking for it, and as long as you do, they are going to be more than happy to oblige.

 

[Chicago Ted]

I'll call it Free2Wait (F2W) to make it simple, but there are a few I have on my phone that I play from time to time. In my mind, this is just one of those situations where, like almost all practices, it can be used horribly, and in this case, it seems that there's been a bit of a market flood of it.

Anyways, the four F2W games I have on my phone currently are You Don't Know Jack, ScrambleWithFriends, TinyTower, and TinyPlanes. In each of these games, waiting until you can play next can serve as a major limit to the game. But it doesn't at all bother me. Why? Because I play these things when I commute. Everyday I normally have to take a 20 minute trip to my University. Most of that time is spent on the train. When I get on it, I'm not looking for a game that'll be wanting me to sink a good chunk of time into. I want something quick and simple to pass the time for a bit, and each of these deliver. Whether I'm answering trivia questions, playing boggle, or managing my virtual skyscraper or airports, I can normally get one of these set of tasks completely done in the time that it takes to get from point A) to point B), walk away, then have something to do again either on the way home, or the next day to keep me going.

Now, I haven't played games like Dungeon Keeper, or that Simpsons one, but if they're shit games, they're shit games. It doesn't mean that just because they are bad, the entire model for them is bad. What F2W games are great for are ones where you're only going to be playing them in short bursts a few times throughout the day, before doing the same tomorrow. That way, the next time you log in, there's some new stuff for you to do to waste your time with. Ideally, the best ones should have a way for you to earn the in game currency through gameplay (In the case of TinyTower for example, by dropping people off on the correct floors) as well as an option to buy the currency directly. But honestly, that can be said for virtually every F2P game out there on the market.

Essentially, in my eyes, F2W games are like potato chips. They're great to snack on, but, if I'm wanting to sit down and have a full, three course meal, I wouldn't be looking at it to serve as the main course in the first place.

 

[thepyrethatburns]

Is this really a scam? It not like you can't see what it is and it's sneakily taking money from your account. If people are buying it they are getting something out of it personally or they are just stupid. Either way how much money they spend on these things is on their heads and I don't see why we should care.

You should care because as long as incredibly stupid people buy into this crap then more of this crap will continue to be made. And in the worst case scenario it'll come to a point where you'll have no choice but to buy into it yourself because it'll be the only thing available. That's why.

That strikes me as an issue with gamers/magpies with money.

"Well, I have to play this because it's the only thing coming out."

So the Rapture happened and everything gaming-related from the Amiga to the Xbox360 got called home to heaven. No? Well, then there are enough games out there that you will ALWAYS have the choice not to buy into it. The only reason that gamers would have to buy into it is because of decades of being conditioned to buy the latest thing as soon as it comes out. Only "incredibly stupid people" would feel that they have no choice but to buy into something that they don't want to.

Even if the Video Game Rapture happens and it sucks everything but free-to-wait games up to heaven...

Y'know, there are other things to do with your life.

 

[Spambot 3000]

It's the business model that's sweeping the world, and it's absolutely disgusting.

Business models are bad because they generate money.

Yeah, man and you know what else, why does everyone give those snake-oil salesmen heaps? They're just making money!

 

[Therumancer]

Good one Jim, if only we could have Jimquisition every day.... It's usually pretty cool even when I disagree with it.

That said I think a lot of the problem is that developers need to start getting hammered by fans a lot more. At the end of the day publishers don't really care what you think of them as long as they are making money. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised if some of them literally feed on the anger. The Devs on the other hand are the ones who take the money from the publishers and do what they are told. What's more is the developers who consciously make the choices to sell out to companies like EA or Activision and put the IPs they have control of under those banners and management. Without the compliance of the talent the publishers have absolutely nothing.

See, at the end of the day the argument against getting on the case of the developers more assertively is that these guys need to work, in order to survive. At the same time though, the pursuit of money is no more noble for them than it is for the publishers, typically the devs do what they are doing because of the sweet deals they make with publishers at least in the short term. A company like EA can offer to pay developers more money and let them live more comfortably than if they remained independent, basically amounting to the devs willfully deciding to sell out, and screw all of us fans and customers in exchange for their own direct benefit. Besides which, there is a point at which doing a specific job becomes unjustifiable, unless your life is literally in danger, you can always go find another career, or simply choose to not screw people over for your own benefit. On a lot of levels I have more sympathy for Nazi camp guards (who have been hunted down like dogs after World War II). For a lot of the camp guards the bottom line was that their "just following orders" came along with the simple fact that they were military and not following orders meant they could be killed and the families made to suffer harsh penalties for it. In some cases one could argue the Nazis actually forcing jews into an execution chamber were facing a very literal "him or me" situation. With a game developer it's not like Bobby Kotick is going to execute you with a shotgun out behind the Activision offices, and force your wife and kids into what amounts to slavery. Pretty much the worst thing a developer faces is having to go to unemployment, and perhaps find another career. That's not a nice prospect for sure, but when your dealing with an industry that has increasingly become less about producing the best possible product for the least amount of money and using it to run a business, to seeing how much you can screw the customers by how crappy and how expensive you can make things. Just because the publishers are paying you for it, makes you no less complicit in the end result or the effect on the industry as a whole.

Of course I'd also like to say that I blame IP holders for some of these problems as well, half the point of say "Trexels" or "Tapped Out" are the licenses attached to them. Viacom (which ultimately holds Star Trek) and Fox (who I believe controls The Simpsons) should have more standards about what kinds of products they allow their IPs to be used for. Without those IPs the central draw to these soulless cash grinds wouldn't exist... and really it seems the worst ones are nostalgia based properties aimed at aging nerds. Sadly not much could be done about "Dungeon Keeper" because EA pretty much owns that IP flat out, as opposed to the other two "infamous" games I mentioned where the IP had to be licensed.

The point I'm getting here is that we as gamers need to stop just going after the publishers whose basic attitude is "huh, what was that? I can't hear you over the sound of the dozens of machines counting all my money..." but going after the developers who decide to work for those publishers, instead of treating them like rock stars and passing the buck. After all these guys can't really justify screwing you over for money, which is what they are doing, pretty much any of them could choose to go indie, or take up a new career like being a Barista at Starbucks or whatever. The old excuse of "well if we didn't do it, someone else would" wouldn't matter if anyone in the same position gets the same treatment. I mean honestly, if you actually took money to make "Dungeon Keeper Online", you obviously knew what you were doing, and as a developer you share responsibility, you can't just pass the buck for that one upstairs, it's not like the publishers were going to murder you for saying "no", all you had to do was hold out, let them fire you for refusing to basically be complicit in scamming people, and then collected your unemployment for however many months while looking for another job either as an indie developer or in another career.

I know a lot of people won't agree with this, as I've said it before and few do, but honestly I think publishers are not a group that can really be attacked. What's more simply not buying games is of limited effectiveness, especially with the lowest human denominator involved. Jim always goes off on the hatred of "real gamers" for the "filthy casuals" as he puts it, but let's be honest... it's the casual gamers that have created this kind of garbage which is why people haven't wanted them involved. It's games like Farmville that sold the model, and at the end of the day no matter what thousands of serious gamers, and fairly smart people say, there are going to be ten times our number of casuals lapping this stuff up, which is why at the end of the day EA hasn't actually done much about "Dungeon Keeper Mobile" and "Trexels" and "Simpson's Tapped Out" are still running. Indeed if enough AAA games are crashed we might just wind up destroying that part of the industry (as much as I support not buying some of the horrible AAA titles out there for their own reasons), you'll just see the industry push even further in the direction it's already going, which is casual-oriented shovelware, since really it's become a goldmine. A lot of hostility towards the "casual" and "casual games" was more or less that exactly this kind of thing was going to happen. It's why there were so many gamers hating on things like Farmville and that entire demographic (which arguably started this) and appalled that companies like "Zynga" were being mentioned alongside real game developers and efforts were being made by the gaming media to welcome this crowd into the fold and shelter them... and well... here we are... "pay to wait" has now become an industry standard. It's actually become a problem where the "everyone is a gamer, even if they just play Farmville" crowd is beginning to come around and see... "hmm, yes, now that it's everywhere I do see why this isn't a game... watching a timer slowly move, and being offered the option to remove the timer with real money is not a game".

I'd have to check some old Jimquisitions and see if he actually defended Farmville players and such in the past (I know he's defended casual gamers), it will be interesting to see if his attitudes change, and if we see Jimquisition becoming less casual-friendly. Of course at the same time, I don't expect Jim has made the same connections I have, we do tend to think a bit differently. On some levels I'm in "I told you so" territory over this whole thing though I rarely just say "I told you so" like I just did twice now.

 

[xrogaan]

Well, there is absolutely nothing to stop them from trying. I don't believe there is a law against this kind of scam. And if there is one, good luck to define what is a game and what is not.

The best cure would be to be smarter. And I hardly see it coming.

 

[geier]

Were that we lived in a world of infinite resources that would be true. But alas this is not so, and when this pay to win scenario bubble bursts, as people like Jim keep telling it will, it will hurt the entire industry. If you see a person standing next to you using 100 tons of TNT as bonfire, will you just say: "oh well, that wont affect me"?

Also money siphoned out of our misguided gamer brothers/sisters will not only bloat the bubble to come, but will also mean less money on games you too would probably like to see succeeding. Also free publicity really only can be good so far, I don't think that EA likes the "free publicity" of having been voted worst company in america for example.

I disagree. Yes, when the bubble explodes it will take down many studios and many people will lose their jobs. But in the end it will only affect the big budget games, or the bloated mobile market. Don't forget, the games market had already one crisis.
Imagine: A indy studio creates a Dungeon Keeper clone (like i said in my first post) and every site/reviewer that tore the mobile Keeper game a new one tells the fans about it. Not as a ad or for money, just to show the gamers a good example of how to bring a PC game to a mobile device.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I'm a bit conflicted. I play Warframe, which in my opinion is largely a very fair free to play game - you can make and find practically everything you need, and the cheapest thing in the game as far as the in-game currency is concerned is slots, allowing frugal players like myself to still play virtually unimpeded, at least until a discount. However, it does have plenty of that time shit. Warframes take 84 hours - 3 and a half days - to build optimally, weapons generally take 12 - 24, and clan research takes 3-4 days. Additionally, the warframes and weapons are fucking expensive to buy outright, but naturally when they released a new warframe that required clan research, individual part research AND assembly, a bunch of people I know bought it anyway. Frustration is not a good game mechanic, and there are other ways to encourage people to buy currency.

And really now, who's to say that buying a magical sword with $5 of real money you earned on the job is any less meaningful than obtaining a magical sword you earned by using 3 hours of grind to kill 10,000 digital orcs beforehand?

In the first case, it's not a reward for playing the game, it's a reward for having money. You could have found $5 on the ground and it wouldn't have made a difference. You can't assume there was work behind that $5, and even so, it has nothing to do with gameplay. You don't deserve a better sword in a game for having money, you would deserve it for putting time and effort into the game with the sword you have.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

However, it does have plenty of that time shit. Warframes take 84 hours - 3 and a half days - to build optimally, weapons generally take 12 - 24, and clan research takes 3-4 days.

You can still play when that shit's going on, right? Then yeah, it's annoying, but at least you can still play the game.

Unlike freakin' Spiral Knights, where the slowly-regenerating resource for forging was the same as the resource you needed to go into the dungeons. :s So if you forge anything, you can't go dungeoneering the rest of the day. It gets worse when the high tier stuff takes MORE than the regenerating resource cap.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Is this really a scam? It not like you can't see what it is and it's sneakily taking money from your account. If people are buying it they are getting something out of it personally or they are just stupid. Either way how much money they spend on these things is on their heads and I don't see why we should care.

You should care because as long as incredibly stupid people buy into this crap then more of this crap will continue to be made. And in the worst case scenario it'll come to a point where you'll have no choice but to buy into it yourself because it'll be the only thing available. That's why.

That strikes me as an issue with gamers/magpies with money.

"Well, I have to play this because it's the only thing coming out."

So the Rapture happened and everything gaming-related from the Amiga to the Xbox360 got called home to heaven. No? Well, then there are enough games out there that you will ALWAYS have the choice not to buy into it. The only reason that gamers would have to buy into it is because of decades of being conditioned to buy the latest thing as soon as it comes out. Only "incredibly stupid people" would feel that they have no choice but to buy into something that they don't want to.

Even if the Video Game Rapture happens and it sucks everything but free-to-wait games up to heaven...

Y'know, there are other things to do with your life.

Ok let me rephrase that. In the worst case scenario you'd have no choice but to buy into Free to Wait if you wanted to play anything new.

 

[Megacherv]

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.

Sure, there is that, I just don't agree with the level of vitriol that he's slinging their way. The developer probably won't be very happy with what they're doing, and they may be currently looking at another job already, but they still need money at that point in time and finding a replacement job can take time depending on the role in question, and once they've found it they have to make sure they've got the job first before quitting. Even then, if they've got a comfortable paycheck and they're in debt (which a lot of developers will be in a lot of, for example, after going through University), they're going to want to feel better not having to live in the fear of becoming bankrupt. Remember that these are people, humans with emotions, they won;t necessarily like what they're doing but they're doing it knowing that their lives will be fine.

Furthermore, you can blame it on the 'corporation', because they're the ones making the business and design decisions. A programmer, for example, won't be the one who decided that it should be F2P, they'll simply be the ones implementing it.

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?

That's actually an interesting point, I'm kinda glad you nudged me about it. I will sat that unless it's Greg Miller, I don't actually know who reviewers actually are, I often see them as a corporate entity when I come across their reviews. It's odd.