#Free To Play

30 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

nocturne girder
#

Make the game free to play. I don’t know if you can influence the pricing policy of the future game, because you are developers, not publishers, but nevertheless I would like to ask whether you considered the free to play model as the main one and why did you abandon it?

More and more often I come across games, that upon release became paid and not only scared away the audience, that was gathered during demo testing, but also failed to gather a new audience, because promoting the project required funds that some companies/indie companies did not have.

I say this not from the point of view of attracting an audience, but from the point of view of profit.
Free-to-play model can bring more income than other models nowadays. For example Warframe/POE.

In any case, I hope you don’t abandon the project and the game becomes popular.

wispy summit
#

but what would you even buy?

sour phoenix
#

Free to Play means microtransactions hell which can scare off another half of the hypothetical audience
Warframe and PoE are MMOs with regular scheduled updates, seasonal stuff, shops for cosmetics, etc. They run on a completely different finance models than a roguelike game that doesn't even have a roadmap yet

subtle iron
#

I think this game should go on the same direction as BG3: Pay once, get the full game. Get free updates when the devs do them. Good for both sides, no need for predatory microtransactions and pay to play aspects that make so much of the recent games money sinks.

If "Free to play" means the game has gacha powercreep systems where new characters are unbalanced on purpose, battlepasses that are borderline mandatory and endless grinding that can be skipped with money, i hope it's paid.

Comparing to similar games, I'd even say the best way to monetize the game would be like Risk of Rain 2 did. Pay for full game, then pay for big dlcs with maps, essences, memories, characters. That would be very nice.

noble wraith
#

microtransactions in a roguelike wouldnt work

little remnant
#

that requires an experienced dev team and a business model to support it. the devs for this game are a couple people with minimal experience. and their business model won’t support it

nocturne girder
# sour phoenix Free to Play means microtransactions hell which can scare off another half of th...

I don't know how the multiplayer will be implemented in this game, but I know that we already have the ability to play online. So I don't know how much it will differ from POE

A one-time purchase of the game assumes that the game is ready. There will be no major patches released for it or the gameplay process will be changed globally. Product support may simply end after 2-3 months of release and fixing of some bugs.

The free-to-play model means that the game will be constantly updated with new products for purchase. Auction, trade, skins. Usually such projects become long-playing. The player will be sure that when he enters the game, a new patch with updates will be waiting for him.

Shape Of Dreams looks like a project that can be developed into something bigger with the help of Free To Play. I wouldn't want such a beautiful game to become another roguelike that will be forgotten. That's all.

sour phoenix
# nocturne girder I don't know how the multiplayer will be implemented in this game, but I know th...

The multiplayer is already implemented in the game. It's a coop game for up to 4 players - similar to Deep Rock Galactic and Helldivers. You can do a mission solo or you can do it in coop, there's no open world to walk around grinding for resources, no gear RNG, no mounts or whatever.

Idk what kinda games you've been playing but one-time purchase does not equal "game's done, no updates". Even Stardew Valley got free updates years after the game's release. If we go back to rogulikes specifically, Cult of the Lamb got at least two major updates since the release (I don't remember how many they had in total though). If we look at 4 man coop games, DRG gets regular seasonal updates with special missions, cosmetics, and such - and it is a one-time purchase game. Helldivers gets regular updates as well, though mostly balancing from what I've heard.

#

I don't think f2p is what's going to decide whether the game lives or dies

shut niche
#

I’m not sure how to word this other than saying that this is a very short-sighted suggestion.

Indie games live and die by the passion of a few. A successful paid indie game can easily sustain a small team for years to continue producing free content updates or paid DLC. However, for every success story there are a hundred that fade into obscurity.

F2P Live Service games are usually built on a large capital and a sizeable team to sustain persistent content development in order to make returns on that continual investment.

noble wraith
#

Years later still getting content

#

Or terraria, years later and still updated even without dlc

neon breach
#

Never in my life did I think I would see a person actively stating that they would prefer a Live Service model.

little remnant
#

some games are simply better as live services

#

IE wow, ffxiv

#

etc

#

this is not one of them

lusty raven
#

I don't know their economy, but money doesn't grow on trees.

near compass
# nocturne girder I don't know how the multiplayer will be implemented in this game, but I know th...

Unfortunately there is not industry standard of what a "complete" or "incomplete" game is, at least not anymore. And it has nothing to do with F2P or EA or whatsoever, it is all up to the dev company.

For example:
RoR2: Paid full game. Paid DLC. Great business model.
V Rising: Paid full game. Recently got a free update added a lot of content. Paid DLC are all cosmetic.
Valheim/Palworld: Paid EA. Slow but has big free content update every year or so.
On the other hand you also got game like Icarus: Paid "full game" which has barely half of the contents they promised in EA. Those missing map and contents are now locked behind paid DLCs which cost more than the base game. And they sell DLC for cosmetic/pet too. (I love that game but hated their business model)

Like Kaeox mentioned, a successful launch could easily sustain a studio for years, look at Valheim, Schedule I, Palworld, etc. F2P game usually tries to milk the players' wallets is probably one of the worst/evilest model in the gaming industry (that's why they can make so much money). The demo already beats many paid/EA indie games on the market. Just treat that as the F2P version and the full game is the paid contents. Last but not least, "Nothing in the world's more expensive than 'free'".

noble wraith
neon breach
#

Hard to have an MMO that's not live service.

#

That being said, I've actually had a lot more fun on private servers after the death of an mmo (or during it's life, whatever floats your boat).

little remnant
native stream
#

its a roguelike

#

you can't just print content to keep the revenue