Dirty Bomb Philosophy & Business Model - Your Thoughts?


(Apoc) #61

Thought id post my 2 cents.

So the F2P is definitely the right way as i think is the general concensus, this not only gives you a bigger playerbase, and removes barries from people wanting to play, but also it has a much more positive impact with the players and their opinions of the game/game developers. For instance, brink didnt go down great, you will probably recieve a lot more unsure/less interested players as a result. This isnt a problem when a game is free, also the fact that it is free almost garantees that the developer will continue to improve and work on the game, because they make profit from its longevity as opposed to its initial popularity. Regardless of if you are going to stick with it and keep improving it…the customer doesnt know that, and it just reassures them.

As far as charging people for in game things, as with most f2p model games. I think it is wise not to offer items that promote a pay 2 win mentality. I think the reasons are fairly obvious, in that, your removing the barriers to let people play without paying, but then putting up new barriers saying “you need to pay however to be able to play this game on an even footing”, which no one likes.
Instead the cosmetic/other items are a much better choice.

What i would say, is have a nice full store on launch. Most games build it up, but have hardly anything for sale at the start. If you have a full shop of cosmetic items etc on day 1, your profits are going to be exponentially higher. The reason being that even players who wont stick with the game, will probably have the initial 2 weeks honeymoon period where everything is new and exciting, even if after those 2 weeks they decide they dont like it afterall. That 2 weeks is your window of opportunity, make sure you have things for sale when people run at you with money. Otherwise, 2 patches later, you add items and only the vets buy them.

I would also have a range of prices on items. You dont want to shut the door on anyone who only has £3 or £4, yet they want to buy something for their character. Just purchases in general will make people stick with a game for longer anyway as they have the mentality of “well iv spent money on it so im going to play through this bad patch to get my moneys worth!”

Something to note, collections and collectable things, things that go in sets, things that can be shown off and are hard to collect all of, are all great items to have for sale. People like collecting things, one off items make for one off buyers. TF2 made their hats which were a novelty, into a collection that people spent money on to try and finish.
Suggestions that would most likely work well as buyable things:

  • Themes for equipment. Instead of selling skins for pistols etc. Sell a steampunk theme for a loadout, with clockwork defibs and medpacks made of cogs etc. There are so many themes, you could use, it would just be simple reskining of weapons etc. Possible themes - Countries (flags on items), safari, neon, futuristic, prehistoric, etc etc etc.

  • Name changes, and the ability to colour your name. But, make these very cheap. I would advise 50p. Games get greedy, and say “lets make a name change £12”…why? no one will do it! Put it at 50p and clans/groups will have nights where they all change their names to pornstars and trol servers. It doesnt hurt anyone, also, people think nothing of spending 50p on a namechange. They may do it every week, or day even. People do not have a problem paying £20 a month for a phone contract for 24 months, but they would have a problem with paying £480 for a phone in one go. Same amount of money, just one is gradual and low amounts and the other is a shock to the system.

  • The pay to enter tourney system was a great idea, i would again have low entry fees of say £5 a team, or less, depending on how many teams, etc. With you taking say 20% of the income, and the rest being split between winners.

  • Voice packs

  • Themed huds

  • I would say a great thing to do would be to have a random free gift with every purchase over £5. It would give you a random item from a pool of weapon parts. These parts have no use in game, it would be like say “the golden magazine” “the golden silencer” “the golden trigger” etc, and when you had all the parts for a weapon, in this case “the golden gun”, then you would unlock the unbuyable skin. This makes people want to buy things more, it makes it collectable, and it adds a reward for completing the collection, a reward that can only be attained through that route and a reward that others can see in game (a golden weapon model is always cool). I think this would work really nicely, and you could have say 5 collection only skins, with some being rarer than others.

  • Boosters are always a half decent bet.

Thats all i can think of atm. I wont go into any gameplay ideas, ill do that in a different thread, just giving my 2 cents from a financial point of view, since im currently writing my business and management dissertation paper on the F2P model :smiley:


(tokamak) #62
  • Themes for equipment. Instead of selling skins for pistols etc. Sell a steampunk theme for a loadout, with clockwork defibs and medpacks made of cogs etc. There are so many themes, you could use, it would just be simple reskining of weapons etc. Possible themes - Countries (flags on items), safari, neon, futuristic, prehistoric, etc etc etc.

It’s a novel idea but marketing wise a poor move. F2P is all about micro-transactions. Such small expenditures that the client is hardly noticing them. You can do packets for discount but the brunt should be about seducing the player to keep spending a small amount of cash.


(Ads913) #63

Hi Locki and fellow community friends,

I had scribbled this up on annother thread but this seems to be a better fit here.

My Hopes and expectations.

I came into SD land when Quake Wars came around didn’t really get into RTCW probably due to my ever malfunctioning 3dfx card.

Quake Wars is my number 1 game it has everything a FPS game should have. Things like In game VoIP, social networking, messaging, Clan setup, lovely big maps, Tanks planes, hammers tense situations like disarming with seconds to go. The list goes on.

When the DB teaser trailer came out I was hoping to see something with all the ingredients that made Quake wars fantastic. I didn’t see much, so I was still left wondering will I ever get back stabbed or have an epic one to one with a sniper on a hill miles away. See like most of the SD community we have been waiting for Quake Wars game since Brink. I wanted Brink to be the next Quake Wars. It was nt, it didn’t come anywhere close.

Onto DB got the invite to test it and instantly downloaded it.
After reading Dirty Bomb Philosophy & Business Model it sets the theme to what Splashy is trying to do.

For some reason I have to keep on saying to myself this is not a Quake Wars game. This game is something completely new.
I am going to be selfish, I have a big negative and it’s a concept issue. The blueprint of this game appears to be much a kin to Brink and TF2. From the Small maps, 8 vs 8 players and tracking a small armour car. No vehicles, no long scalable areas.

I will think that’s going to be a major problem for the casual public community player once they realise there not getting a Quake gumbo Deal. I know a lot of guys didn’t play Brink for the same reasons. So I am hoping they hang around and give it a chance.

Large note to future game concepts more like Quake Wars please.
I promise not to mention Quake Wars again.

Being positive
It’s a pre alpha so I didn’t expect a lot, but its looks really nice the movement is fast and the guns handle really nice. It’s cool that some things are back like good old vsays and classes.In Game Voip you guys must get that right that is a big issue in any F2P game and makes a huge difference to a game.
If the battlefield series of games had proper in game VoIP they possibly would have come close to the perfect game but they didn’t and had squads of players running in circles with uncoordinated madness.

The game as it sits is a massive improvement on Brink so early in development you can only add cool things to it. I love the idea that is free to play and not pay to gain that’s awesome. I think different game modes must be thought up, it must have some new ideas things that make guys come back for more. I hope you stick up a thread for new ideas within the game.

I feel better that I have got that out.


(Apoc) #64

I would dissagree, free to play games should have a range of priced items, because their audience isnt limited by anything as its a f2p game! If you have enough micro transactions then everyones happy, but if you have people who want to spend more and want to support the game with their money, why not have an option? It wont limit anyone, people will continue to purchase in small amounts, just the option is there, that i am sure many people would take advantage of.

If anything people the fact that some items (the minority) are expensive, when nearly everything else is cheap makes them more attractive and makes people more likely to buy. (simple marketing psychology, prestige by comparrison)


(INF3RN0) #65

Community forum polls every month or so discussing popular ideas for additional pay content. The most highly voted items get priority development.


(Apples) #66

Hello everyone : My 2 (late) cents

I fully agree on the philosophy that the core game should be the number one priority on any game, but especially for you SD as you have the possibility and the mentality to make people play your games for decades.

About the free to play thingy, well, as long as you dont pay to win its ok, as toka mentionned the cheaper your different items will be, the more and the longer people will buy them, I for one dont have that much money to invest in gaming, but a nice present for my character or team is allways a plus. On the team side, I would really love to see items that profit your whole team when you purchase them, this way you can give gifts to every member of your team and it can create a more funky community, gifts for all the server players, gifts for all your ingame friends, gifts for your clan, etc the list goes long and it works on the same principle as buying a drink for everyone in the pub… Shouldnt be a bad idea right? :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, I state my opinion here, and I’m really open for almost everything as long as these two rules apply : it shouldnt imbalance the game and it shouldnt be “necessary” to get better at the game, the items must only be there to have a better experience (in term of social experience and fun) on the game, but should never be in first layer of what makes the game enjoyable in the first place.

I know it should be a pain to implement, as balancing a game is IMO one of the most challenging task you can face as a dev, but I think it is the sine qua non condition to touch the god of games ^^

Peace


(Virus047) #67

Perfect. This alone got me really excited when I started to read this thread. All the games that captured my attention were games that had a very stable, active and highly competitive community at its core. A very balanced and fun game play. Good solid maps and interesting environments to frag on. Nice mix of skill and talent both from the players natural ability and from the experience of gaming from XP or rewards. Rewarding the players by giving them the tools they need to improve themselves by learning from mistakes is obviously a huge plus. As you said knowing where and why they lost a battle and giving them the ability to improve next time from that is awesome. Free to play is perfect IMO.

Your going to capture players and teams interest with this model. Its going to attract attention as well from other gaming communities who already have loyal and established bases whom might otherwise look the other direction towards Dirty Bomb but might now have to think very hard about NOT downloading the game and getting involved upon release.


(EnderWiggin.DA.) #68

http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=29347635
An interesting cross section of gamers and their thought on free to play in this thread. Some people are turned off completely by the f2p model. The interesting question to me is how can Splash Damage convince these players to give DB a try based on the DB Business Model post?


(kamikazee) #69

[QUOTE=EnderWiggin.DA.;413902]http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=29347635
An interesting cross section of gamers and their thought on free to play in this thread. Some people are turned off completely by the f2p model. The interesting question to me is how can Splash Damage convince these players to give DB a try based on the DB Business Model post?[/QUOTE]
I’m going to pick one…

To be honest, this is my fear as well. While the install cost is effectively zero, the fact that it’s free from the start makes people question the value and makes them afraid that it’s more of a lure than a gift (Is it free as W:ET was or is it a glorified demo?).

Other games have ruined the “F2P” badge, so SD will need to seriously market this game (a lot) and make it clear that the game itself WILL be complete. Now marketing can’t be quantified except in cost, but I wonder how big the difference would be between marketing for TF2 BEFORE it was free and the marketing needed to make people play DB for free. The brilliance of the TF2 gambit is that people would play it from the beginning when the game had a set value and keep sticking to it, which only reinforced it’s worth as a F2P game. Of course, since SD has already declared to keep the initial cost at €0, I guess that means it’s the slow and long community-building road…

Either way, I think they need to be very upfront with what is and isn’t included in the game, which services are extra and how long support lasts. Avoiding the “free to play” label will be hard, but maybe the mapping tools or custom could make it look more “free” to make a difference.


(Mustang) #70

This is the primary reason that, if it were me, I’d go the “pay what you want” model with a suggested price of something in the £20-£30 range but allow them to pay £0 or £100 if they want to.

Then people feel like they’re getting a full game at a bargain price rather than a free game that’s lacking in content.


(Mattc0m) #71

Having a premium service, based on a monthly fee, I think is the real key. You mentioned a Founder’s Club–I think this a great idea.

Honestly, I feel that everything should be 100% accessible in-game for all players. Right from the get go. I just don’t think most people are comfortable with paying for guns, skills, armor, and the like in microtransactions. For cosmetics and the like, sure, that’s cool. I can get behind that. But players feel that the game is unbalanced if certain people have access to those, and others do not have as much access.

But I think people feel much more comfortable that everything that goes on within the game is 100% vanilla. This is not just a viewpoint from a competitive gamer–it’s very much a mindset that has been born as a reaction from the time-a-dozen free-to-play games that have saturated the market. You never feel like you completely own the game and you’re playing a watered-down and cheaper version of the game.

Sure, games like Planetside 2, Tribes: Ascend and Dota 2 have adopted the F2P model and are getting traction using primarily microtransactions. They limit content for those who don’t pay anything. And these games have proven that games can be successful in the F2P model. The issue is that those games have big, established communities with a long-standing gameplay mechanics–and as long as game stays the same, they will attract an audience. And so far that has worked.

The issue with Dirty Bomb is that it’s a new game, it’s F2P, and it untested. F2P FPS games are so quickly and easily dismissed as Pay2Win. Everyone says their new, F2P games are not pay to win. But ultimately, at the end of the day, players who are paying a fair amount of money are generally are playing a different, better game–with faster rewards, more choices, and a better experience all together.

In my mind, keeping the actual gameplay separated entirely from the pay wall. Have a paid membership that is based around access, content, and functionality outside the game. For instance, here are a few ideas.

Founder’s Club - $6/month membership

  • Get access to new maps hosted on “Founders Club” servers a week before general release.
  • Get access to new weapons for two weeks before general release
  • Get 10% bonus “experience gain”
  • “First in line” for server queue (for matchmatching services)
  • Bonus icon / color for in-game chat rooms (if those will exist)
  • Clan-wide advanced statistics (anyone can make/join a clan, get basis statics, but advanced statistics are for paying members only)
  • “Tag” friends or set them into custom groups (all other friend list functionality should be there)
  • Automatically take demos, end-of-round screens, and game summaries and store them for as long as a member is registered. They lose access to the reports, screenshots, and demos while not actively registered (though will not be deleted). Members can choose to highlight certain game reports / demos / screenshots on their profile, too.
  • Other features that introduce new content earlier (but only for 1-2 weeks), make the game more social, make clans/communities more functional, give more functionality out-of-game.

Have the ability to purchase bundles / make group purchases. For instance, a clan could pay $20/month for 5 people. This encourages networking, growth, and community-building. Competitive teams could even offer to pay for membership fees for their players.

Make the game 100% identical for everyone. Same customizations, same skills, same guns, etc. It should feel like you are playing the same game whether you are brand new, playing for five years, paying money for items, or going at it entirely free. The game should not feel different, not just in terms of “paying to win” but you also feel like you are missing out by never completely owning the game. That’s a frustrating experience, and often one of my biggest gripes with F2P games (especially shooters).

Just my two cents,


(EnderWiggin.DA.) #72

[QUOTE=kamikazee;413927]
Either way, I think they need to be very upfront with what is and isn’t included in the game, which services are extra and how long support lasts. Avoiding the “free to play” label will be hard, but maybe the mapping tools or custom could make it look more “free” to make a difference.[/QUOTE]
This is basically my thinking as well. And not to promise too much. Or at least not make promises they can’t keep. If DB is truly not going to be pay to win, that needs to be communicated well along with the details. I thought this was kind of an important quote as well.

/shrug. FWIW, I would prefer a “pay once” option in the $40-60 range. At least to get access to most of the important stuff.


(SinDonor) #73

[QUOTE=EnderWiggin.DA.;414042]
/shrug. FWIW, I would prefer a “pay once” option in the $40-60 range. At least to get access to most of the important stuff.[/QUOTE]

I am in this same boat. If my upfront $40-$60 can buy EVERYTHING gameplay related (like weapons, maps, modes, etc), then I will pony up the money. If the rest of the stuff to buy is purely cosmetic, like 2 months down the road they release a player skin pack for $5, that’s fine by me. I’ll buy it if I want to.

I just want to make sure my upfront $$$ is going towards the important stuff.


(Mustang) #74

[QUOTE=Mattc0m;414039]Having a premium service, based on a monthly fee, I think is the real key.
<snip>[/QUOTE]
Hell no!

I have no problem with paying for my games (i.e. on purchase, to fund development, for expansion or DLC), but monthly subscriptions are a big no-no.

I know a lot of people over here (UK) that feel the same so this will definitely alienate many in your potential userbase (myself included).


(tokamak) #75

http://wiki.worldoftanks.com/Gold_Economy

The only weak point in this system is the premium content. Premium is stuff that can exclusively be obtained through purchase. Premium in WoT leads to small advantages and is pay to win. However, this stuff is so expensive and just not worth to use it in anything else than official tournaments and not in the normal game.

The Premium tanks are often more collector’s items than anything else. Though their maintenance and xp-acquisition is higher so they’re also very efficient tanks to farm stuff with. The only thing I really hate is the Chinese Type-59 which I think is too powerful and a sign of the company selling out. A team composed of predominately Type-59 tanks is often called a ‘goldcard platoon’

But you can ignore the above caveats because they’re a small portion of the economy. Most players simply put up with it. I still would advice to leave such things out of the game, if only for the sake of company image.

The rest of the system is flawless. Players get lots of opportunities to spend their gold and there are often ways to freely get gold (as a means of a gateway drug to get people to purchase more) on weekend events and contests and such. The system also ensures that a player is never done buying things. It’s nifty in the way it eases people into slowly buying more and more stuff.


A game that did this completely wrong is Battlefield Heroes. Lots of things could be purchased but only temporarily. Players ‘leased’ the content so to speak and after period of time they would have to buy it again. People hate spending money on things they eventually lose.]


I think you need a combination of time and random chance in order to obtain content. That way you automatically get to have rare classes in the game, which heightens the excitement.

Take a really exotic and highly unusual class specialisation (a bomb suit guy). This guy takes a gazilion xp to obtain, but he also sometimes drops after a match is completed (and these rewards are announced in the score board). Extra chance is there for players that stood out in the match one way or another (all positive).

More differentiation is possible to have random chance only characters and hard-work only characters, all purchasable of course. You may even throw the free players a bone and have a few classes that are not purchasable. Counter-intuitive business wise, but it will only lead to more respect from the entire player base.

Then if someone just really wants that class he can also chose to pay a lot of money for it. The knife now cuts both ways. The dude who pays can pretend he was lucky or worked hard for it, and the people who work hard for it or are lucky can feel like they obtained something that actually carries a monetary value.

Being able to trade classes like this would strengthen this emotional appeal to obtaining classes even further.

I wish I had more view on what’s to come, then I could start working on a more detailed model.


(Ashog) #76

Suggestion for a pay feature (totally seriously): tbag animation (for around 10 euro).
Now imagine how many players will go for it?! I would even buy two if they were different :wink:

And the **** like that: funny, infectious but not changing gameplay. Animations, taunts, sound packs (would grab a strogg voicepak on day1), logo sprays, cutom death sounds, etc.


(Mustang) #77

Ashog is amazing.


(DarkangelUK) #78

Teabag for the guys, Flapslap for the girls… it sells itself!


(Dthy) #79

I don’t know why, but I want this on a shirt.


(tokamak) #80

Yes, that’s EXACTLY the type of stuff people would love to pay for.