Nexon: The $60 Model Has to Change

[The Wooster]

Nexon: The $60 Model Has to Change

Surprise! It turns out Nexon, which calls itself "the best in Free-to-play online games," reckons free-to-play games are the future.

"I think at some point the console makers have to make a decision about how closed or open they're going to be to the different models that are going to be emerging," Nexon CEO, Daniel Kim, told Gameindustry International. "Today it's free-to-play, and I'm convinced that that one is going to continue to flourish and expand into other genres and other categories, but there may be something else completely and entirely different that comes out that again changes the industry."

As CEO of free-to-play MMO outfit, Nexon, Kim isn't exactly unbiased when it comes to this particular debate, but he's echoing sentiments expressed by numerous [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109348-THQ-Boss-Challenges-60-Price-Point] developers [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114410-Scribblenauts-Dev-The-Retail-Model-is-Broken] and publishers. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/108662-EAs-Free-To-Play-GM-Says-60-Games-Are-Exploitative]

"If your mind is just set on keeping the current model of buy a game for $60, play for 40 hours, buy another game for $60, play for 40 hours, that model I think is eventually going to change," Kim continued.

40 hours is perhaps a touch generous, but Kim continues:

"It's going to have to change. How they will adapt I really don't know, but I hope that they're aware enough to understand that the value proposition of free-to-play is not going to go away."

Kim went on to note that with the exception of Sony [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116024-Killzone-3-Multiplayer-Goes-Free-to-Play], console manufacturers are hesitant to embrace the free-to-play model. He singled out Microsoft for particular criticism.

"Dungeon Fighter is being released as a Microsoft Xbox Live Arcade version of the game. But again we had to modify the game and the business model to fit their restrictions or requirements. It's not free-to-play, it's DLC essentially," he said. "Which is not really truly how we like to service our games, we like to service our games completely free-to-play, no limits, and earn the players' business by convincing them there's value in purchasing stuff."

Source: Gameindustry International [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-03-12-nexon-pc-gaming-has-huge-room-for-growth]



Permalink

 

[Starke]

Isn't Nexon the one that doesn't let you actually buy anything, they set everything up on a "rental" structure?

 

[Nouw]

Free-to-play isn't the future, pay-to-win is .

 

[JaceArveduin]

Isn't Nexon the one that doesn't let you actually buy anything, they set everything up on a "rental" structure?

They at least try to. Vindictus had that going for a bit, and the rental prices for all the costume pieces easily added up to more than a regular MMO subscription cost. Overall fan backlash and protesting though did get it changed.

It's still a rental service for Combat Arms, but they've been slowly opening up the cash only guns to those with high ranks and (ingame) points to spare. Now all they have to do is stop messing with gimmicks and tell the hackers to fuck off and Combat Arms would be a great* game again.

 

[KeyMaster45]

Isn't Nexon the one that doesn't let you actually buy anything, they set everything up on a "rental" structure?

Depends on which game you're playing but most of them do use that system since they're localized versions of Korean MMOs which are basically designed to devour time and money like the fucking Borg.

OT: He's got a point about the $60 price model. More and more I find myself putting off buying games until they've been out long enough to go on sale. ($29.99 or less) I'm sorry to say it but few games I find are worth shelling out that $60 for. Do I want game companies to adopt the F2P model though? Hell no, I hate the F2P model since nine times out of ten it's just an extended demo that berates you the whole time to buy bullshit from their virtual store.

Oh for those care free years when I'd reserve games months in advance at Gamestop and count the days till their release. When I'd happily drop $50-$60 to play the newest N64 or Gamecube game. Now I look at the $59.99 price tag on Kingdoms of Amalur, get a sick feeling in my stomach, and check Steam every day for some hint of it going on sale for %50 off or more.

 

[edgecult]

Hmmm.. kinda curious about this really.. Single player free to play's just don't seem to make sense on paper.. have to see how that'd work out without them just cutting you out of the the last third of the game without dropping money on something. (gear or keys to get to the end) But i'de love to see xbox to poke they're way at the free to play market like psn is a bit... would of loved to play dungeon fighter online with everyone else instead of the few willing to drop money on the title.. hrm..

 

[Absolutionis]

If EA, Activision, and Bethesda are any indication, the $60 video game is here to stay. Somehow the consoles sneezes and inexplicably got some $60 PC Games in the market.

 

[kouriichi]

I dont agree that "F2P is the way of the future", but its a good idea to shoot for.
I think 30-40$ for a AAA game will be better for business then F2P in the long run.

Dont get me wrong, i enjoy my F2P games as much as the next guy. But its best if a blunt charge sticks around until a revolution really turns the game industry around.

 

[Hamish Durie]

Isn't Nexon the one that doesn't let you actually buy anything, they set everything up on a "rental" structure?

haaaaaaaaaaaaaay your right

 

[Keava]

As as future goes I wait how GW2 will turn out to be. It has potential to prove that MMOs do not need subscriptions nor abusing cash shops.
If ArenaNet manages to pull out decent profit from it, it may push the market into moving away from subscription fee's which should further open MMOs for more players.

As for Nexon, sorry, but restricting inventory space with time-limited bag expansions is not the way I want to see MMOs going. Try again.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Any future vision that includes that chick in the accompanying image is a future I want to be a part of.

I admit to spending more time looking at that picture than reading the article. Bad Root.

 

[LorienvArden]

If EA, Activision, and Bethesda are any indication, the $60 video game is here to stay. Somehow the consoles sneezes and inexplicably got some $60 PC Games in the market.

You might want to factor in the cost for "Day 1 DLC" Into the cost - so you get around 70? for AAA Games from EA in the future.

If you measure Nexon by Vindictus, I feel comfortable with their f2p approach. I've spent about 10? on the game, playing it from time to time over half a year (~60-80h).
You have absolutly no need to pay for content or gear in vindictus - you can achieve everything by playing it.
You pay for storage room (pure conveniance), dying your armor(vanity), cosmetics or advancement buffs that let you progress faster.

I think only minecraft and guild wars have netted a better money/value ratio for me thus far.

 

[MrTub]

Please I do not want pay to win. I honestly hate all the freaking f2p since if you get banned, no problem I can just make a new account and the fact that most "f2p" games is "p2w".

 

[Scars Unseen]

The model has changed. Now it's the $60 plus day 1 DLC plus preorder incentive DLC plus a few more DLC for maps, characters and whatever else they think they can get away with. But then, that's how it goes. Despite inflation, they can't raise the base price without alienating the consumer base, so they have to get creative. It's kind of like pizza places with their delivery surcharges that don't go to the driver.

 

[danyy2009]

Lol, Nexon and good games in the same sentence.

 

[Qitz]

They already have been. It's called Indy Games. You can get close to, if not more, than 40 hours of entertainment out of those for around $20.

Course, there's also the "Pay $60 for this feature, as well as $10 for this one we've disabled in the game to suck more money out of you" pay stile. Hopefully that one goes and dies in a corner, but so long as people are just going to buy it, I know it wont.

Also, lawl at "best free-to-play games." I think Turbine would have something to say about that.

 

[Irridium]

If EA, Activision, and Bethesda are any indication, the $60 video game is here to stay. Somehow the consoles sneezes and inexplicably got some $60 PC Games in the market.

It's funny, because EA [http://www.destructoid.com/electronic-arts-thinks-videogames-cost-too-much-i-know-how-weird-that-sounds-51989.phtml] and Todd Howard [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/314236/games-are-too-expensive-but-skyrim-isnt-argues-lead/] both have said that the $60 price point needs to change. And what have they done about it? Not a damn thing. Hell, EA said it way back in 200-fucking-7. And here we are, five years later, they have their own freaking store, and they're selling PC games for $60.

 

[Something Amyss]

Any future vision that includes that chick in the accompanying image is a future I want to be a part of. Hell with free-to-play at worst you still get what you paid for.

This is why I miss that sweet spot where demos were more prevalent than ever. I think F2P is probably unrealistic, but being able to try games is totally within our grasp.

The problem being, more and more companies realised that if they did that, we might realise how much the game sucks.

 

[llamastorm.games]

Isn't Nexon the one that doesn't let you actually buy anything, they set everything up on a "rental" structure?

Depends on which game you're playing but most of them do use that system since they're localized versions of Korean MMOs which are basically designed to devour time and money like the fucking Borg.

OT: He's got a point about the $60 price model. More and more I find myself putting off buying games until they've been out long enough to go on sale. ($29.99 or less) I'm sorry to say it but few games I find are worth shelling out that $60 for. Do I want game companies to adopt the F2P model though? Hell no, I hate the F2P model since nine times out of ten it's just an extended demo that berates you the whole time to buy bullshit from their virtual store.

Oh for those care free years when I'd reserve games months in advance at Gamestop and count the days till their release. When I'd happily drop $50-$60 to play the newest N64 or Gamecube game. Now I look at the $59.99 price tag on Kingdoms of Amalur, get a sick feeling in my stomach, and check Steam every day for some hint of it going on sale for %50 off or more.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm reasonably certain kingdoms of Amalur is currently on sale on origin.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

If EA, Activision, and Bethesda are any indication, the $60 video game is here to stay. Somehow the consoles sneezes and inexplicably got some $60 PC Games in the market.

It's funny, because EA [http://www.destructoid.com/electronic-arts-thinks-videogames-cost-too-much-i-know-how-weird-that-sounds-51989.phtml] and Todd Howard [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/314236/games-are-too-expensive-but-skyrim-isnt-argues-lead/] both have said that the $60 price point needs to change. And what have they done about it? Not a damn thing. Hell, EA said it way back in 200-fucking-7. And here we are, five years later, they have their own freaking store, and they're selling PC games for $60.

Well talk is cheap and since it is a recession they need to save as much $$$/???/£££ as they can.