Last night we had an interesting chat in #giefalpha about DB, and the world thinking it’s probably free-to-play.
Around a year ago, just before we started work on Dirty Bomb, Anti and I put some effort in to defining our core philosophy on making a brand-new dedicated PC shooter. For those of you that don’t know, Anti was once a top Tribes player, then joined us as a Production Tester on ETQW, was Associate Producer for three years, and is now Designer on Dirty Bomb.
We believe competitive multiplayer team-play is more thrilling than single-player. We believe in fulfilling players by advancing their actual skill. We believe in long-term player engagement, developing games that are played for months and years. We believe in competitive games as a service, and we’re dedicated to the perfection of team-play.
We have a decade of critically acclaimed multiplayer releases and commercial successes, but we must learn from our big mistakes too. We have titles that were played for years, and some with player bases that decayed in months. We’ve demonstrated our dedication to multiplayer team-play, and proven our focus on engaging our fans, but not every title was the perfect team game. We have achieved a loyal, influential and engaged fan base, and they’re not afraid to tell us what they think, and we’re committed to do better, for them. For Dirty Bomb on PC, we have complete control: we’re the financier, developer, publisher, distributor, and retailer.
Dirty Bomb must provide a balanced playing field and a fair contest, challenging players, against or alongside real people. Players should only succeed as an individual, group of friends, or team, by competing in battles where skill and tactics alone determine the winners. Players should always understand why they won or lost, or by being part of a social community that shares knowledge, continually learn from other player’s skills, and achieve status and recognition for their own credible successes and contributions.
Players who join the alpha will have a voice, help sculpt what the game becomes, and ensure our focus on areas important to them. We believe players should not have to pay to gain access to our Alpha. They’ll be able to sign up for FREE, and we’ll invite them as we gain capacity. The idea is that money will never buy a gameplay advantage in Dirty Bomb, and there will be no Pay-to-Win mechanics. We’ll ensure core classes, maps, and clan support will always be well-balanced, and free.
Dirty Bomb is not a traditional free-to-play/pay-to-win game. We believe the core game should be free, including all necessary character classes and maps, clan support and basic tournament play. Everything gameplay affecting must be unlockable without paying money. Anything unlockable must be balanced equally against what’s freely available. Money cannot buy a gameplay advantage.
Instead, we’re launching a Founders Club for fans wanting early access, cool swag, and public recognition for their support. On release, and perhaps beforehand, players may be able to buy additional new characters that perform core classes, but with additional weapons and abilities. These will add fun, and be different, but not be more powerful. A suite of free and chargeable additional game services will also be available. We’ll go in to more detail on these later, but they’re awesome.
[QUOTE=Locki;411312]
On release, and perhaps beforehand, players may be able to buy additional new characters that perform core classes, but with additional weapons and abilities. These will add fun, and be different, but not be more powerful. [/QUOTE]
The idea of “characters” sounds to me like class variants with set abilities/weapons (like characters in a fighting game) instead of personal customization. If so, I love this. I personally feel that loadout customization has made class-based FPS less interesting in recent years, due to the balance restrictions they require.
I think it’s surprising that you believe clan support should be free, since that is often considered to be a premium feature.
I fully support (and am thankful for) your philosophy.
Also, in your chat you mentioned how clan support does a lot to keep people playing. That is very true. The games I’ve spent the most time in and loved the most, were games where I was part of a clan.
I truly believe that a game that fosters not just high-level clans, but amateur and casual clans as well, will build a very big fanbase. A clan system that has built-in inviting, challenging, tournament creation, and ranking makes it easy for regular people to team up with their friends and (hopefully) play other teams around their same level. And that is where people get really sucked in. As a beginner clan, getting wins over those other beginning clans, using tactics you have actually discussed and practiced, is greatly satisfying. You want to practice more, play better clans, and before you know it, you’ve spent 500-1000 hours in the game.
Sounds like a good way to go to me; so long as pay-for-gain is right out, and pay-for-vain is in, balance can be maintained. It seems like the number of alpha players is still too few to get many games rocking as yet, but I’ve learned to be patient with these things. You’re walking a gutsy fine line in the FTP arena, but the price is going to bring in a lot of players right out of the gate if it’s publicized enough. The alpha build still runs a bit wonky on my machine, but I have been trying to endure for the sake of ensuring a spiritual successor to W:ET…
if it leads to long term support for the game then its good. i have no issue with paying money for something i enjoy. and the possibilities of getting more content continually.
will we be able to pay to come to sd towers and make coffee all day?
I don’t think the Founders Club should be called “Founders club”. If I understand correctly you pay a subscription to receive early access and full access to the game. (Founder sounds more like somebody who was there from the start of the game / SD - a really exclusive title)
Also don’t call it “premium” and I’m on the edge about “VIP” since you’re not really important, you just bought a service.
I don’t really know what you should call it so by all means disregard this post since it’s not very constructive.
EDIT: “Illuminati”
My opinion on the whole F2P vs retail vs whatever it is you’re doing is - SD should figure it out, I think they are far more qualified and informed to make the right decision than we are and their philosophy sounds great. (from a players POV)
Obviously it’s nice that we’re allowed to raise ideas or question decisions, but I don’t think any of us have actually gone out read up on all the options. So all of our opinions should be taken with a grain of salt.
Yeah, sounds good. Personally i’d be ready for these additional pay parts from day 0, as soon as the game mechanics and UI are fine. The only thing I am not ready to see is the SDK being a pay thing. The more people will get early access to freely use the tool to make custom content - the more diverse and long living will be the community and the game itself. It will be able to sustain itself for years. The good example is ET and even ETQW (where even the monstrous limitations of custom content didn’t stop the delighted people to gather around the custom scene for 6 years!).
It’s great that SD is actively exploring a new F2P model and focusing on doing things in both an original way and also looking back at what worked well in the past.
As I said in IRC I really appreciate being included in the Alpha, I’m not as good a bug tester or gameplay commentator as others here but I hope I can contribute and I’d be lying if I said I don’t get a kick out of being part of a game’s development.
If I can be a sourpuss for a minute. Can I ask that when making public your plans it’s done with some moderation and variation. Sometimes SD has been prone to driving home a message a bit too hard and then failing to live up to the expectation. In the case of F2P I’d just say that it may be better to let others conclude it’s a great model by giving them details on how it’s going to work rather than saying it’s going to not be P2W and then have people feel differently in that interpretation.
On that subject could you expand on the Founder’s Club (I’ll go with Stealth that maybe another name either fitting of SD/WC/FT or DB may be better). Will there be an ability to make a single payment to say unlock all classes and weapons permanently? I keep hearing subscribe, not sure I’m fond of the idea of paying for a year and them everything is gone.
[QUOTE=stealth6;411328]I don’t think the Founders Club should be called “Founders club”. If I understand correctly you pay a subscription to receive early access and full access to the game. (Founder sounds more like somebody who was there from the start of the game / SD - a really exclusive title)
Also don’t call it “premium” and I’m on the edge about “VIP” since you’re not really important, you just bought a service.
I don’t really know what you should call it so by all means disregard this post since it’s not very constructive.
My opinion on the whole F2P vs retail vs whatever it is you’re doing is - SD should figure it out, I think they are far more qualified and informed to make the right decision than we are and their philosophy sounds great. (from a players POV)
Obviously it’s nice that we’re allowed to raise ideas or question decisions, but I don’t think any of us have actually gone out read up on all the options. So all of our opinions should be taken with a grain of salt.
2 cents[/QUOTE]
As far as the naming convention of what a ‘Founders Club’ will eventually entail, I think there’s plenty of time to hash out something that meaningful to those who contribute that doesn’t condescend free to play players. LOTRO and DDO have ‘VIP’ and nobody is crying about it there, but I can see your point.
On the whole F2P about whether SD should figure it out – of course! I don’t think they would ever say “Well, even though we really feel strongly against this, we’ll do it because there are enough people crying about it.”
I think we’re in a unique position to influence their decisions, sure, because ultimately we’re their customers. So now is the time to bring up what sort of things you enjoy spending money on in free to play type games, what sort of things you would never consider purchasing etc.
I’m a really big fan of SD’s philosophy about this stuff, though. Ultimately it sounds like they want to make and play games they love… and believe me when I say that isn’t the case everywhere.
Looking forward to people’s suggestions of how to monetize the game, for sure! I’m obviously a little biased, but I’ll totally pay for SDK support, or an in game skin t-shirt that says “Sit the **** down stupid.” et al.
I don’t like Founders Club simply because this is a limited group by definition. Late comers won’t ever be able to be a part of this and that already lowers the ceiling on what they can achieve from the start of the game.
There’s an unethical trick you can do with titles. You can give paying players a golden star next to their name or a different colour or whatever to show they’re a VIP or whatever. You can inflate this picture by making any player show more paying players than there actually are. Showing any unpaying player more stars next to names than there actually are gives him the idea that this game is worth paying for. Questionable but lucrative.
-There’s only one advantage I see to F2P and that’s a low entry point and an inflated playerbase. That’s a gameplay advantage. Marketing wise there’s just always a problem with offering a product for free, and that is that people will inevitably believe that they’re getting something inferior. And I suffer from this too. Even while playing enjoyable F2P games, games I even put money into, my gut still says that, because I didn’t pay for an actual product, I’m playing something that just has to have lower production values.
Even a low price, 15 euros or something like CS:GO or Shattered Horizon made me feel better about playing these games simply because I bought something. It’s not an unbridgeable obstacle but it’s a sentiment you need to be aware of.
Once the game is polished enough it’s worth continuing the alpha as a marketing device. MMO’s and F2P’s games, IE games that frequently require you to devote time into it to get anywhere, benefit hugely from a long alpha and beta period. People believe that playing this will give them a headstart in the rat race that is about to ensue when the game is finally released.
There are three things you can charge for in an F2P game. Gameplay content, cosmetic content and time.
On time and content:
-If the amount of time is tangible then you’re thinking about boosters that increase your ingame currency acquisition for a period of time. Or you’re letting players buy content straight away, like entire classes. I think that ultimately buying classes right away isn’t fulfilling. It doesn’t give bragging rights, it gives no feeling of accomplishment and it gives nothing to play for. So in this case I believe xp boosters are better.
-Most games have a tangible amount of time to obtain unlockables. Valve uses probability as a timesink. The beauty about Valve’s system is that it allows players to trade in between, this makes the content appear more valuable and makes players more willing to pay for exclusive content. This works very much like trading card games. Because cards are so easily tradeable people can convince themselves that buying individual expensive cards is okay because they can always resell it later on. Having a probability of finding stuff during playing is addictive. It engages the reptile brain straight and I’ve heard some really sad stories about people that got carried away with collecting TF2 stuff.
People HATE temporary stuff. Battlefield Heroes mainly had this. You had to pay (or play a lot) for being able to wear a specific suit for a few days. It wasn’t yours, no you basically leased it and then you were bag to rags. Please don’t do this. It ruins that ecstatic feeling of obtaining something that’s truly yours.
So between xp boosters and tradeable chance items (a combination sounds terrible) I think that ultimately the chance of finding tradeable items (and classes) is what keeps people fascinated /obsessed more easily.
On cosmetic:
Two main categories. Individual self-expression and showing off. Some people like to display their fashion sense and some people just like to show off rare clothing. I think in a game like this, with rather short lives and quick engagement the interest will quickly skew towards simply showing off. There’s no point in a subtle but tasteful costume if your opponent won’t spend more than two seconds looking at you. This means that you can toss away the whole idea of Brink where you can spend ages on your character’s looks and care more about flashy, ostentatious and wacky things so players can stand out and brag.
And then finally, and I think this is way too late down the track for DB, but perhaps one day in an F2P game based on the scale of Quake Wars, so just ignore this for now:
People can pay for flexibility. This is something I already suggested on the main forums. Imagine playing Quake Wars but with countless of different ways to specialise your character. You have the base layer that allows you to put weights on where you want to go down the trees the fastest (can still do the rest but that will be slower) And then you have campaign layer in which the xp you gather determines together with the base layer the rate at which you develop your character. Players can pay for the privilege of having more weights!
This means that free players can place one or two weights on particular trees and thus have a limited effective direction. Paying players can put more weights on these talent trees which allows them to divert from their chosen path during a campaign. It IS a gameplay advantage but a subtle one and one you need to work for and one that can be compensated by simply knowing what you want. It’s not a gameplay advantage in the sense that someone will be stronger or grow faster during a campaign.
I have a lot of not-entirely formed thoughts on this, so I’m just going to ramble and see what comes out.
I think the ‘service’ aspect here is a really neat idea; SD games have suffered in the past from the inability to fix things after you see them becoming a problem. By approaching the whole thing as a service rather than a product, you make it clear that you’re going to keep developing, even after release. That makes me much more interested.
Games have become such fire and forget things; the idea that perhaps a game isn’t just box you buy and use for X hours, but rather something you get involved in that grows with time is really attractive. It’s much less of a pain getting engaged with a ‘product’ if I feel like the developer is also still engaged.
I’ve said this before a load of times, but I’m really glad that SD really seem to mean it when they say things like this. I did feel horrible with all the stuff I was saying about Brink all the way through. I think it was mostly justifiable, but it still feels awful that I was essentially pissing on a bunch of hard work.
Have my babies.
I remember during the Brink development, when it’d be thrown about so many times by posters that the comp community was irrelevant because they were the minority. I always felt that that was missing the point; the comp community will break anything that can be broken. There are some differences along comp/casual scale that are just taste, but there are also things that the more comp-side people want just because they push the game mechanics so much harder that the broken stuff squeezes out.
If the core game works in a comp setting, it also works in a casual setting. You can add some shinies in to attract attention and help new people get around, and maybe add some imba arcade silly fun stuff, but that doesn’t mean making the core game not work for comp level players. It doesn’t even need to be shinies; if you boil it right down to game mechanics, ETQWpro had multiple spread server options. You could take an ETQWpro server and set it up for basically vanilla gameplay with a few extra tweaks (ingame clock, showsighted model, higher upper bound memory limit on map scripts, preloading of custom maps). It’s like setting Street Fighter up a few turbo stars. The core game works, and then you tweak it to suit different needs.
Comp players are the kind of group that are either utterly absent, or they’re there for years. It strikes me that that’s exactly the kind of core user that you need when trying to get a F2P game working; a group of people who will be there until some other game comes along that gets the gameplay just right.
[QUOTE=Locki;411312]Players who join the alpha will have a voice, help sculpt what the game becomes, and ensure our focus on areas important to them. We believe players should not have to pay to gain access to our Alpha. They’ll be able to sign up for FREE, and we’ll invite them as we gain capacity. The idea is that money will never buy a gameplay advantage in Dirty Bomb, and there will be no Pay-to-Win mechanics. We’ll ensure core classes, maps, and clan support will always be well-balanced, and free.
Dirty Bomb is not a traditional free-to-play/pay-to-win game. We believe the core game should be free, including all necessary character classes and maps, clan support and basic tournament play. Everything gameplay affecting must be unlockable without paying money. Anything unlockable must be balanced equally against what’s freely available. Money cannot buy a gameplay advantage.
Instead, we’re launching a Founders Club for fans wanting early access, cool swag, and public recognition for their support. On release, and perhaps beforehand, players may be able to buy additional new characters that perform core classes, but with additional weapons and abilities. These will add fun, and be different, but not be more powerful. A suite of free and chargeable additional game services will also be available. We’ll go in to more detail on these later, but they’re awesome.
What do you think?[/QUOTE]
I think DB has an incredible potential as a gaming platform, even more so than as a game. Essentially, you’re developing a free to play community, where people spend money on getting more deeply involved. The game is free, and it works.
You can buy extra novelty-but-not-stupid sidegrades for fun while pubbing, and in doing so you support the game’s survival. It reminds me a little bit like the stuff we did on Nirvana; we were playing with some comp settings, but we’d also spend time doing silly hoggin’ TK fests for fun. With DB, you’re basically spending money on stuff a bit like Hoggin’*, and in doing so you help keep that core game working, and help develop more fun pubby stuff.
*I don’t mean to imply that alt classes will be crappy; Hoggin’ was amazing pub fun, even if it was very silly.
I’m going to put some stuff here I was going to put in Sockdog’s SDK thread.
I think that your goal should be to turn this whole thing into a community (which seems to be your thinking too, hurray!). As far as the SDK goes, you could make that another ‘free’ aspect of your community. You give the tools out for free, you give the game out for free, and people now have a pretty much zero-cost entry to map/modmaking. You could be doing things like competitions for maps, and giving the winners a spotlight in the community, give the winning maps an SD artwork pass or something. Set up ‘offical’ servers with maps shown to have a threshold quality with extra benefits/rewards/bragging rights to players, that give extra data and playtesting to mappers.
You have the potential here for DB to be so much more than just a F2P game. I suppose there are games that try to be more, maybe Planetside 2 with the outside game stuff; but DB could be nigh on unique if the community takes off, purely because SD are still there being engaged with the players/mappers/community.
[QUOTE=Ashog;411330]The only thing I am not ready to see is the SDK being a pay thing. The more people will get early access to freely use the tool to make custom content - the more diverse and long living will be the community and the game itself. It will be able to sustain itself for years.[/QUOTE] well said.
i started making levels because i could try it for free with half life. if it had been sold i just would not have started.
also if you charged for this, you’ll just piss people off on principal.
re: a name for a vip club. heres an idea let us decide on vote. suggestion 1/ the nub club :stroggflag:
[QUOTE=Locki;411312]…The idea is that money will never buy a gameplay advantage in Dirty Bomb, and there will be no Pay-to-Win mechanics. We’ll ensure core classes, maps, and clan support will always be well-balanced, and free.
Dirty Bomb is not a traditional free-to-play/pay-to-win game. We believe the core game should be free, including all necessary character classes and maps, clan support and basic tournament play. Everything gameplay affecting must be unlockable without paying money. Anything unlockable must be balanced equally against what’s freely available. Money cannot buy a gameplay advantage.
Instead, we’re launching a Founders Club for fans wanting early access, cool swag, and public recognition for their support. On release, and perhaps beforehand, players may be able to buy additional new characters that perform core classes, but with additional weapons and abilities. These will add fun, and be different, but not be more powerful. A suite of free and chargeable additional game services will also be available. We’ll go in to more detail on these later, but they’re awesome.
What do you think?[/QUOTE]
Im Happy with that ^^ you meet my wishes = everybody equal ingame
About the founders club… why not ! That would equal to a pre-order limited edition with a goodie included
Im just wondering if the gifted abilities could be use as an avantage in the gameplay using them as an exploit !!??
for the rest of the game services for free and for $ …again im for it full speed
Im Very pleased with your Philosophy & Business Model …Perfect to me imo
edit:addition
Just a thought ,as many like also single player …maybe if you could do a one only huge Standalone SP map as a story telling the beginning of DB or something like that ,somewhere after, as a Special optional $ download …Could be nice !?
Dirty Bomb must provide a balanced playing field and a fair contest, challenging players, against or alongside real people. Players should only succeed as an individual, group of friends, or team, by competing in battles where skill and tactics alone determine the winners. Players should always understand why they won or lost, or by being part of a social community that shares knowledge, continually learn from other player’s skills, and achieve status and recognition for their own credible successes and contributions.
Depending on how competitive you make it, could be the difference between a game with a playerbase that thrives, and a niche title.
For Dirty Bomb on PC, we have complete control: we’re the financier, developer, publisher, distributor, and retailer.
This is what makes me so excited for DB
Dirty Bomb is not a traditional free-to-play/pay-to-win game. We believe the core game should be free, including all necessary character classes and maps, clan support and basic tournament play.
I agree.
On release, and perhaps beforehand, players may be able to buy additional new characters that perform core classes, but with additional weapons and abilities. These will add fun, and be different, but not be more powerful.
This is where I can see some red flags going up. More powerful or not, if there are additional characters with different loadouts, Some players will “demand” they should have access to them from the start, free of charge. Now I’m saying I agree with them, just that I can see this being a bit controversial with some. Of course, I have no idea what the details of these characters entail, so I could be completely wrong.
[QUOTE=shirosae;411347]
I remember during the Brink development, when it’d be thrown about so many times by posters that the comp community was irrelevant because they were the minority. I always felt that that was missing the point; the comp community will break anything that can be broken. There are some differences along comp/casual scale that are just taste, but there are also things that the more comp-side people want just because they push the game mechanics so much harder that the broken stuff squeezes out.[/quote]
When people refer to the “Comp community,” many of them are not simply speaking about players who appreciate a challenging skill based game. I have seen it used as more of a derogatory term for those “hardcore” players who simply take the game too seriously, rather than simply players who appreciate competition, since even casual players can fall into hat category.
For a comparison, think of Star Trek fans. There are those of us who appreciate the series and characters, and are quite knowledgeable on the subject. Then there are those who can remember every line of every episode, and can recall every episode number by heart. The latter is what some people are speaking of when they refer to the “comp community.” One of the reasons I stopped playing in clans/leagues, was because the longer I was exposed to it, the more I saw players that (to me) treated the game more like a job, rather than a form of entertainment, which is always how I treated it, even in my “prime” - It was just something I derived enjoyment from that I happened to be good at.
