#Free-to-Play Could Take Rematch to the Next Level

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

rustic raft
#

Hey everyone I just played the Rematch beta and I have to say this game is insane. I love it and I fully support the devs to keep pushing forward with it.

I wanted to share an opinion, and maybe some of you will agree:

I think Rematch should be free-to-play and make money through an in-game shop (like skins, goal explosions, celebration etc.). Here’s why:

More players = a better game for everyone:
When a game is free, more people try it without hesitation. That means: Faster matchmaking, More competition, Bigger community and More fun overall
People want to support games they love:
Look at games like Rocket League, Fortnite, and Valorant all free-to-play with optional purchases. Players still spend money because the gameplay is fun, and the cosmetics are cool. Rematch could follow that same path.
It helps the game grow faster:
A paid game can slow down growth because people aren’t sure if they’ll like it.But if the game is free, more people will try it without risk. If they enjoy it (and I think many will), they’ll be happy to spend money on cosmetics and other optional content. This approach could help grow the player base and even increase your overall revenue.
Potential for competitive and esports scene:
If Rematch gets a large, active player base, it opens the door for tournaments, ranked ladders, and maybe even esports. A free-to-play model helps build that strong foundation.

I’m not saying the price is bad but free-to-play might give the game a better chance to reach its full potential. If the gameplay is solid , people will support it.

I really hope everyone here agrees with this idea. But if you don’t, I’d love to hear your reasons and point of view let’s have a respectful discussion so we can all understand each other better.

sinful shadow
#

why do this when we can use the price as a guardrail for hackers and smurfs

rustic raft
# sinful shadow why do this when we can use the price as a guardrail for hackers and smurfs

A price might slow down some bad players, but it also turns away legit new players or those who simply can't afford it who just want to try the game. Big games have proven you don’t need a paywall to protect the game just solid systems.

And even with a price, some cheaters will still pay if they really want to ruin games. So the price alone isn’t a real solution it ends up blocking new or casual players more than actual hackers.

hearty smelt
#

Free to play will make the game a cheater heaven
No risk in getting banned
Same with trolls

And if it was free, the cosmetics would have to be ridicolously expensive
Even in valorant, a free to play game, the devs got flamed very hard over the price of the optional cosmetics

25 dollars is not expensive whatsoever for the game
Especially because people will be playing it for hundreds and thousands of hours

daring sail
queen lintel
hearty smelt
shadow narwhal
#

that's not 100% true. In val a lot of player started to flame devs because packs when from 50/70 to more then 100€. Fortnite is free, has a lot of players, skins are cheap, but cheaters are not so common. You cant set the price high just to counter cheaters, just create/use a solid anti-cheat sistem

raven field
#

ye thats super easy right

sinful shadow
#

Literally all of the games you name with a good anti cheat likely have far bigger studios then the team making this game

hoary pelican
#

I think the obvious counter-example to this is Rocket League (which is interesting, because you used it to support yours). Rocket League started out paid! And for quite a decently long time, too. And it didn't die during that period. The biggest issue with free, from the developer's perspective, is that if the game dies before it "grows", the entire game is a huge loss. And with something like Rocket League showing that being paid isn't a game-killer, it simply is the much safer route to go into it being paid. If the game truly starts to die, they can, again, pull a Rocket League.

sinful shadow
#

It’s not happening and it’s not going to be free

hoary pelican
#

I personally think, though, that they do need to pay attention to their regional pricing. Steams default pricing is "okay", but there absolutely regions that need special attention paid to and have their price lowered.

sinful shadow
#

We have absolutely 0 data on reservation prices for each region

hoary pelican
raven field
#

and also adds an avenue for ppl to sell cheap burner accounts :/ I just dont want cheaters man. Every game I play gets destroyed by cheaters these days.

#

im so done with it

sinful shadow
#

The game will certainly have sales to capture the consumer surplus from those lesser off

#

But discriminating price based on regions is rough man and how do they even go about implementing that? Does steam have a feature for this? You’d need to tell me about it and outline it

hoary pelican
#

Yes, Steam has that feature. It is trivial to set up. The non-trivial part is figuring out what the difference in price should be, and where.

sinful shadow
#

From what regions are you even talking about btw

hoary pelican
#

As an example, some developers would lower the price for, say, Brazil and Australia, in comparison the the US pricing, due to the discrepancy in purchasing power.

sinful shadow
#

Im sorry im sure you’re acting in good faith but there are just too many monkey brains on here that don’t understand the concept of a games developers seeking to make money or even simply break even, and asking for specified servers in every teeny tiny region

#

Okay thanks for outlining it

#

Are we gonna poll people on the minimum price they’d pay or something

hoary pelican
#

How the devs go about figuring out prices is for them to decide, honestly. Some look at stuff like GDP. I'm not an economist, so I can't really say for sure what are the good ways to figure stuff like this out.

sinful shadow
#

Honestly PAYG systems sound super interesting but it just gets abused

sinful shadow
#

Metric

boreal mango
hoary pelican
#

To be clear, Steam by default already "adjusts" pricing. That is to say, if you directly convert the currencies from one region to another, you'll notice a difference. steamdb even has the prices for all regions, so you can see what they cost where. I just know that Steam's default is very conservative.

boreal mango
#

for 90PLN (the cost of the game in my country) i can buy a few days worth of food

sinful shadow
#

But valve does refresh those prices regularly

boreal mango
#

while 30$ or 25EUR is simply, not that much for richer countries

sinful shadow
#

And iirc in the blog they mention a while back that there is a purchasing power adjustment

strong vortex
#

I agree but not gonna happen

#

Not now

hoary pelican
#

Yeah. I just personally think it's not enough in select regions. Like @boreal mango said. In my currency, it's at best 6 meals (more realistically 4-5), not days worth of food.

hearty smelt
rustic raft
# hoary pelican I think the obvious counter-example to this is Rocket League (which is interesti...

Totally fair point Rocket League did start out paid, and it worked out. But the gaming landscape today is really different from 2015. Back then, people were more willing to buy unknown games. Now, with so many free high-quality titles, new paid games have to fight harder for attention.
You're right that free-to-play is a risk but so is launching as paid with a small player base. A game like Rematch depends heavily on Fast matchmaking, A healthy competitive scene and A large, active community
That kind of momentum is much harder to build with a paywall in place from the start.
Rocket League was very lucky it had console deals, early hype, and basically no direct competition at the time. Rematch doesn't have the same market conditions. Starting as free-to-play might feel riskier, but it gives the game the best chance to explode fast, especially if it’s polished and fun .

And yeah you can switch from paid to free later. But sometimes by the time devs make that decision, it's already too late and the player base is gone. That’s the real risk.

daring sail
full cosmos
#

Rocket League was paid for 5 years, but still it was developed under a much bigger company than Sloclap which is an indie studio.

I don't want that game to be free. It has a unique idea with a solid implementation, it costs a price.

I don't mind that game to be free in the future though like in 3-5 years, but even in this case I'm sure it'll die if it happens.

rustic raft
# full cosmos Rocket League was paid for 5 years, but still it was developed under a much bigg...

Totally fair and I respect that. You’re right that Rocket League had major backing, and Sloclap is a smaller studio, so they’re taking a bigger risk either way.
But from my point of view, that’s exactly why free-to-play could be the smarter long-term move

When you don’t have a huge publisher or marketing budget behind you, letting the quality of the game speak for itself by giving players free access might actually be the best way to grow fast and stand out.

I get that you want the game to hold its value But imagine how much stronger its future would be if it launches with: A massive player base, Tons of community hype and Content creators jumping on it And then, over time, monetization through cosmetics

Also, I don’t think going free later means the game is dying it can be a growth strategy, not a desperation move. But if it starts free and delivers on quality early, that first wave of hype could make all the difference.

fossil berry
#

What major backing did Rocket League have at launch? I though Psyonix was also a small indie studio.

rustic raft
# fossil berry What major backing did Rocket League have at launch? I though Psyonix was also a...

Yeah you’re right Psyonix was also a small indie studio when they launched Rocket League, so it’s fair to compare. But what really made the difference for them was that they launched the game free for PlayStation Plus users in its first month. That gave them millions of players instantly, which helped the game explode in popularity.

And yeah Rematch kinda did the same thing with the 3-day beta. It was free, open on all platforms, and a lot of people tried it. But here’s the thing: that kind of boost only lasts if there’s no paywall afterward.

Once the beta ends and it becomes paid-only, a lot of those players just don’t come back especially if they’re unsure or can’t afford it right away. That’s a big risk for a multiplayer-focused game that needs a strong, active community to survive.

So I’m not saying the game has no value it clearly does. But I think keeping it free-to-play (with solid monetization through skins and cosmetics) gives it the best shot at long-term growth.

small drift
#

I honestly hope this game never becomes free. I’m sure some of you had games where own goals were scored non stop as a means to end a match. With a free game means more kids will do this whenever they feel with no repercussions.

raven field
#

bro is using chat gpt as his personal argument advisor or wtf?

"You're right that rocket league had major backing and sloclap is a smaller studio"
"You're right psyonx was also a small indie studio when they launched rocket league so it's fair to compare"

This game is going to gamepass right? what's the issue. I agree with danulqua thoughts on releasing it f2p in the future if absolute necessary but at that point something has gone wrong somewhere because the game is not expensive in the first place, there's no reason ppl wouldn't want to pay for a good game in the future (regarding people complaining this game doesn't have the content or polish to warrant the cost rn)

rustic raft
# raven field bro is using chat gpt as his personal argument advisor or wtf? "You're right t...

Lmao yeah, I just like thinking things through before I post trying to make solid points, not just throw out hot takes. And yeah, also working on improving my English along the way.

Game Pass helps, sure but it’s not the same as full free-to-play. That opens the door for everyone, not just Xbox/PC players.

I get that some people feel the game is already worth $25 or $30 totally fair. I just think it could grow way faster without any barrier. Either way, I’m rooting for it.

#

No hard feelings just sharing my view. Hope you get it.

raven field
#

fair enough for being honest. Ai can be a powerful tool if used well and to develop beyond your available means. and ye fair enough. I hope the game is a massive success to the point that the price point becomes a great deal. More content, interesting events, tournies, great free cosmetics etc.

ye i do get you, I just have only bad experiences with f2p comp games that's all

vale root
#

People mentioning that Rocket League used to be B2P fail to realize that it was released two years before Fortnite. At the time f2p games weren’t really a thing (or at least weren’t that common) and no one expected an indie company to publish their game for free.

Wether you like it or not, Fortnite changed the gaming market by introducing revenue through battle passes and cosmetics and a lot of companies followed suit, because it is a working pricing strategy. In general, as a company, you’d rather have recurring payments rather than one time payments and often times end users will end up spending more money that way rather than through a one time payment.

We know the devs have already implemented a battle pass and a cosmetic shop. However, how many more people would be willing to buy them if the game was free? Assuming the pass is around 10 bucks, which is standard pricing for them. In 3 passes you would already have more than what one person would have payed the game initially. By making the game B2P you’re reducing the number of customers you reach and the potential to make the game take off and get a solid playerbase.

inland apex
# rustic raft A price might slow down some bad players, but it also turns away legit new playe...

Fortnite, Rocket League they both started paid.

Some people don't remember but Fortnite Released first with only Save the World.

Its normal for big games to start paid cause its a lot to do and investment needs to come quick.

Maybe after 2y or smth when the game is much more polished, they have a good revenue, and they already have a lot of players, they will turn it free so more players can join and they would focus more on the shop like fortnite did.

sage jungle
#

I want to chime in, as someone who has been around the community for a long time and as someone who understands how studios function behind the scenes.

Free-to-play games do not make as much money as you think they do. A report from the American Government states that in free-to-play games only 26.1% of players spend money.

So you have 10x the server costs but only 26.1% of the income. Free to play is not a sustainable option for studios unless they're backed by Epic Games. Even Ubisoft, a gaming giant that has been around for decades, almost crumbled under the failed f2p endeavour with XDefiant (along with some other factors).

Money in the door straight away is key to survival. Relying on people to maybe buy a $5-10 skin/battlepass is like working in a restaurant that doesn't pay except for tips.

shadow narwhal
#

The beta had a lot of problems and bugs, no customizable settings and comands, only a few graphics settings, bugs with hud and many more. Is almost impossible to fix all these problems with only ~15 days. Meaning the game will probably still have some bugs. 25€ + in-game pass + microtransactions for costumes. I've played a lot of free games with microtransactions and spent a lot but all of these are making me believe that this game is not in a very good spot

sage jungle
shadow narwhal
#

What's the point of doing a beta with and old version?

sage jungle
rustic raft