I recently made a post about a project I'm working on for-profit while I complete my degree at uni.
Apparently featuring micro-transactions in a game is a sin, or having the words "Space Station" in your project's title makes you an immediate target for SS13 trolls.
I guess I figured I'd mention it because I was excited to use BYOND's new credit system, but apparently it isn't.. what, practical? Humane? Whatever.
My idea was to feature the same system I was going to implement into War Bots, where you could buy parts for your robot using money (fun fact, I found the source for War Bots), except you would be able to buy equipment utilizing two types of in-game currency, one earned via gameplay, and another earned in events and micro-transactions.
Personally, I prefer micro-transactions when implemented fairly to subscriptions, because a subscription means you have to show a certain amount of dedication to playing a game that you may or may not know much about. For instance, for an iPhone game, typically I'll play it, and if it allows for in-app purchases I'll dabble, and if I am impressed, I'll continue, spending anywhere from $1 to $20 per game (the most was like $30 it was a really fun sandbox game)
What do you guys think? What's the preferred method of generating income from a game?
(Or maybe the question here is was my game just under attack for being a space themed game. I suspect it's both.)
EDIT: Wait, I'm currently reading another thread about this.
Lets just leave the question at "What's a good way to generate a profit from a game"
ID:1905396
 Jul 27 2015, 11:08 am
|
|
Ill Im wrote:
Lets just leave the question at "What's a good way to generate a profit from a game" Most of the data that's been released shows that microtransactions can be incredibly profitable, and in many situations more profitable than paid or subscription models. You don't really need to see the data to come to that conclusion though; there is a reason why huge studios like Valve and Blizzard are releasing free to play games fueled by microtransactions. The answer for what model to use when you're a small-scale independent developer isn't as straight forward. It really depends upon the type of game that you're going to release, and the potential size of your audience. This article provides good insight into the basic factors that small devs should consider: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/191047/ Paid_vs_freetoplay_Advice_from_notable_mobile_studios.php The main question that you should ask yourself is this: "Do I know of a successful game in this genre that uses microtransactions?" ...if the answer is yes, then you're probably pretty safe taking that approach. I personally believe that a free to play model is the best approach for most BYOND devs regardless of genre. Your first concern is getting people to play your game, and most BYONDers won't pay up front to do that. Nowadays, I think that you'll have more luck with microtransactions than you will with optional paid subscriptions. Proelium sold several thousand dollars worth of optional paid subscriptions back in 2002, but micro transactions are a better way to keep your most dedicated players funding the game. To your other question: Ill Im wrote: Apparently featuring micro-transactions in a game is a sin, or having the words "Space Station" in your project's title makes you an immediate target for SS13 trolls. The SS13 community is rife with trolls; ignore them and do whatever it is that you want to do. I don't know what your space game is like, but if it's similar to SS13 then I'd offer you even more encouragement. If you make a game that appeals to that player base that you can actually monetize, you stand to have a lot of success. I've been saying for a long time that the SS13 player base is ripe for the picking by another BYOND game in the same genre. In the NSFW words of Tony Montana, SS13 is like... | |
The SS13 community is rife with trolls; ignore them and do whatever it is that you want to do. I don't know what your space game is like, but if it's similar to SS13 then I'd offer you even more encouragement. It's a microcosm of the larger gaming community as a whole. Dwarf Fortress players harassed a steam game that had Dwarves in it based on the premise that it was "ripping off" Dwarf Fortress despite the fact that the game in question was a side-scrolling action game, and not a simulation. The gaming community in general has a loud vocal minority of aggressive trolls and serial outrage overblowers. Of course, this is less a reply to Silk than to the OP because Silk's probably got the most experience with needless and persistent harassment and hatred from a small number of trolls proceeding to repeatedly pose as numerous users and slander him all over the web for frankly little more reason that happening to be somewhat popular, working hard, and occasionally, I'll admit not exactly being his own best PR team. (Though, let's be honest, he's doing a damn sight better than the rest of us, and he's basically pulled himself up by his own bootstrings so a few inelegant interactions are expected and forgivable.) As for the original topic, I can't argue with microtransactions being a good way to generate revenue, but I really don't think they are good for the consumer in a lot of cases. If your game feels like a cash-grab, it's time to rethink your microtransactions. If your item mall eats the majority of your time in feature development and asset creation, you are going to alienate your playerbase. If your store contains a majority of "purchase-only" items, you need to rethink your model. If items bought from the store confer even a marginal in-game advantage over players who don't have them except in time, you are going to hurt your game's overall design and balance. Avoiding pay2win is in my opinion not just a good thing, it's an obligation. Games should focus on the consumer first. If the game is parceling off the player experience behind a paywall, you aren't giving your players any reason to support you. In fact, you are entitling your players to an experience worth their money. Instead, I argue that you should focus on giving them an experience that makes them feel obligated to support you, rather than trying to make them pay you for the privilege of enjoying your game. If you are selling ways to bypass grinding and money management, you are going to make the experience worse for everyone else. Things I've learned from F2P games: * It's okay to sell expansions for in-game monies, but make certain that a sizeable chunk of content is free. LOTRO did a great job at this. * It's NOT okay to allow players to sell item-mall items directly to other players. Item-mall items should be no-trade, otherwise it destroys your in-game economy and makes the player economy impossible to participate in because you can't control just how much money is in the pool. (This problem killed RO2) * It's NOT okay to make players sit through tedious tasks unless they play the game. Being able to bypass grinding for certain rare drops for in-game cash is fine, but make certain that the actually earned rare drops confer some advantage over the purchased ones, like being able to sell them on the game market or having noticable cosmetic differences. In other words, I'm saying reward players for NOT paying you money, because the people who are likely to pay for something aren't likely to enjoy the grind anyway. Your dedicated players are the kind of people who will bring more people to the game to play. People who pay for in-game items don't tend to be the people who are highly social in games. (WoW did this rather well) * It's not okay to sell a chance at an item. Prize bags and mystery gifts with a bunch of crap nobody wants and a 1% chance of getting the gift you are advertising is fundamentally bad for the consumer. Gambling addiction is a very real thing, and players are very likely to not make informed decisions about what they are spending on your game if randomness is involved at all. (RO2 was cancer in this way) * Rewarding your regular buyers is great! Rewarding first-time buyers is great too, but you should not under any circumstance incentivize spending more than $10-15 a month per player. Aura kingdom has a monthly top spender program where they reward players who exchange THOUSANDS of dollars in a single month. This is bad for your players and bad for your image. In fact, I think if you've got a player spending $100 or more in a month on your game, you should probably send them an e-mail personally and thank them for their generosity, but also caution them against overspending. It's good to point out that players should make informed decisions before spending a good chunk of change on digital items. (Aura Kingdom was disgusting about this) * Further, I really think that subscription models are really great. They allow you to reliably project income into coming quarters and do more longterm planning for expansions and new content. Offering bonus tokens for monthly subscribers and ongoing benefit tiers based on how long you've been subscribed, I think is a good way to encouraging more people to stick with a monthly stipend. Basically, for every month they are subscribed, they get an extra 5% tokens on top of their normal stipend, as well as an extra 5% tokens on top of any additional purchases. This stacks cumulatively up to 25% after 5 months (six from the first month), and the first month you subscribe on a new account, you get a subscriber bonus of 25% for the stipend and 10% in additional tokens thereafter. You can also do things like a regular tier bonus of a choice between several items for every 3-6 months they've been subscribed. This way, you are giving people reasons to support you continually in a longer-term, more meaningful way. (LOTRO again) * Giving your players some way to earn small amounts of your in-game currency for doing things like surveys is against your community's interests. Do not do this. It's filthy and only contributes to the spread of malware and leaked personal information. Offer rewards for things like referrals, sure, but don't make the referral code have to be entered on signup. Let your players lie to you about who referred them. It's fine. Better than missing your chance. I've recruited dozens of people to play games and never did get my love rocket. Also regularly earning a small amount of your store currency for various activities is a good way to foster player use of the store without the problem of the "taste" I detailed below. LOTRO does a great job of letting players earn a limited amount of turbine points per character, so it's entirely possible to purchase almost all the expansions without paying a cent. * Lastly, one of my biggest issues is something called the "taste". If right off the bat, the game tries to entice you into buying stuff by talking about the store or giving you one-time-use store items to get you hooked on using them, I really think that it's good business sense, but it's really bad PR. I disagree with the taste being a one-time thing. I'm fine with gentle reminders, but if a game gives me a cash shop taste, I'm out. This is what unscrupulous drug dealers do to get you hooked, and it's just dirty. (EVERY FUCKING F2P GAME EVER) | |
suck the player dry, best solution.
100$ for some coffee beans that do nothing 1000$ for something that does something | |
DanteVFenris wrote:
suck the player dry, best solution. I'm so quoting this post so I can later plaster it on your Kickstarter page and ruin your credibility. Now who is going to have millions of players? ;P | |
Ter13 wrote:
DanteVFenris wrote: Those players aren't important I'm aiming for a different audience. Little kids who don't know any better and abuse their parents credit card. It's a golden audience to abuse | |
This is where my inspiration is from http://m.ca.ign.com/videos/2013/04/24/ iphone-garbage-super-monster-bros-by-adventure-time-pocket-f ree-games
| |
I personally have always enjoyed games where microtransactions are less a staple of gameplay and more about being able to customize and be unique. League of Legends for example sells not only characters, but character skins for real money only. I've bought several skins because they're cool, the gameplay is awesome and I don't feel pressured to buy champions or anything, but I really want to have a trophy for my favourite champs to play.
Design your game as if it were going to be 100% free. A game should be completely self-containing and not require any external sources to be playable to its fullest. Once you've done that, then work on incorporating microtransactions into it. Honestly, a game like War Bots sounds like a big, awesome kaiju battle. Being able to buy armor skins so mixing and matching equipment doesn't change your appearance might be cool. Additional color schemes for sale as well as unique special effects. I'd pay for a missile launcher that fired hearts as a player and caused them to explode in flowers!
You just have to be creative about it and NEVER center gameplay around it.