crossfire is the highest grossing f2p game in the world

(shaftz0r) #21

i feel like my 20+ years of gaming gives me an automatic badge to be critical :slight_smile:

(mortis) #22

The only f2p that I play on a regular basis is Dungeons and Dragons online.

Those revenue statistics for the FPS games blew me away though. Hundreds of millions of dollars? Wow!

(Loffy) #23

My reaction when reading that table (thanks for it btw) is that Nexon is there, and they are mentioned not just once but twice in that list. I had no idea that this publisher/distributor was that a significant player on this financial arena.

Looking back, doing projects with id software must have been thrilling for SD. And today, this project (and coming ones?) together with Nexon must be equally fun/challenging/thrilling for the creative people in the SD tower.

I wish you all the best success. If Extraction ends up on that list above, and it results in some sweet revenue, just continue to deliver online team-based multiplayer shooters. And we have told before in this forum that we also support any single-player project as well.

(Ruben0s) #24

Yea nexon in Japan/Korea is really big. I read that nexon america had a revenue of 13.8 million.

Revenue from North America was a blip on the radar for Nexon, which only generated 1.4 billion yen ($13.8 million).

(spookify) #25

I think I tried Crossfire way back and it was so spamming and noob friendly I quit.

(INF3RN0) #26

It’s basically free CS… but it is heavily pay2win biased. Non-pay gear wise, it’s a pretty decent skillful game (not original at all). Good example of how the pay2win model ruins f2p.

(shaftz0r) #27

hey guys, it could be worse

read the entire article if you want to see how not to run a publishing company

(light_sh4v0r) #28

This is kinda relevant:

(Mustang) #29

Play first pay later is absolutely the best model for any game, as a developer it says you’re confident in your product (and if you’re not how can you expect your players to be), as a player it gives the opportunity to be able to find the game that best suits you without making so many bad purchases just to get there (why is it that computer games as an industry refuses to run any sort of refund model, whereas every other long term purchase in retail does*) and it usually results in a much larger playerbase because gamers will go by their own judgement rather than “oh this game only scored 6.9 on metacritic, better luck next time”.

But free-to-play/microtransactions isn’t the only way to achieve this, my personal preference would always be for a demo (all characters/weapons/abilities unlocked, but only 1 level available to test) or a trial (everything including levels unlocked, but on a 30 day timelimit and perhaps only able to play other trial players). Of course a trial would be ideal and probably draw in the highest number of players, but there are numberous tricks to reset or bypass timelimits that demos are usually an easier solution.

However microtransactions seem to be the thing all the cool kids are doing these days and I suppose if they follow some rules (always let the players test what they’re about to purchase before purchasing it, don’t be pay-to-win by offering an advantage or charging for reloads, don’t pop-up asking me to buy something every 5 minutes, if you’re game is engaging enough then I’ll click the “Shop” button when I’m good and ready, don’t split the community with DLC or maps or some other silly decision, and on anything that is more than just cosmetic offer a way to unlock though play rather than through wallet) then I can live with this brave new world. Although it would be nice if there was still a “buy everything now and for all time with a single payment” option retained.

  • The real cause of piracy?
(Loffy) #30

All this f2p/microtransactions is as new and confusing to me as the vanishing apeture ring on lenses for SLR cameras due to digital technology. Eery and perplexing, yet I understand that it is the future. Adapt and overcome :slight_smile:

(DarkangelUK) #31

It’s a psychological thing for me. For some reason I don’t mind shelling out a one off price of say £30 for a game, but I get all uppity when I play a cheap/free game and then require to make small purchases to progress in that game, even though those smaller payments may amount to less than £30 in total. I need to get over that train of thought. On another note though, the whole ‘rent to play’ thing will never fly with me ever again. 3 years running I paid for Quake Live totaling almost £60, there’s nothing in there I wasn’t getting from Quake 3 which I already bought twice as well (Dreamcast and PC), I didn’t renew this year and don’t plan to again.

(shaftz0r) #32

yupyup.

10chars

(Glottis-3D) #33

i cannot see myself paying a 50+ euro for a free game, that is 10+ years old. and doesnt have LAN support.

as for Ex i really hope that amount of money that i spend on it will be not more than 50 euros. (ability to spawn servers and play competitions)

(DarkangelUK) #34

First time I paid I was playing QL a lot, like just about ever day so I guess it was worth it then, 2nd year I was still playing often, few times a week, 3rd time I think I renewed just out of habit then realised it was just a waste of money when you’re lose every perk if you stop paying. I’ll do a subscription game again.

(shaftz0r) #35

i paid for a couple years to support the game. after that i realized that i just wasnt getting enough out of what i was paying. if i were a hardcore dueler i could see the justification, but i really only frag CA

(attack) #36

ye the good old demo

i think to lower the launch price of a game, would also work .
more players would pay 20 euro for a game than 60 (look at minecraft and …) .

i would like to see in xt the option, to pay one time 50 euro to unlock the full game and all coming features.(skins excluded)