I was wondering how long it'd take someone to link that.

For those who cannot be bothered watching videos, the arguments presented go a little something like this:

• The current trend in F2P models is unsustainable.
• An obscene amount of income for F2P games comes from a very low amount of 'whales'.
• F2P games are competing against eachother for just this limited market.
• Apart from being morally reprehensible, it won't work in the long run.
• Instead of selling things at ridiculous prices to a few people ($100 novelty guns come to mind here), F2P games should instead try to make a steady $5-$20 a month from a wider audience. This would be more sustainable and make everyone involved less terrible people.

My immediate thoughts on that last point is that it's how I perceived the energy system to work before the sprite update. I would buy $20 energy packs every time I needed energy for anything. People who didn't buy energy (but would still need it), would indirectly fund OOO by buying it from whales who would be happy to spend far more than the average amount a month on it.

Then there's the $5 elevator passes, those represented a steady income from non-whales too.

Also, the video had a point I think a lot of people on these forums need to take to heart:

• No game developed by a company can truly be free to play.
• It's just a flexible model where people who cannot afford as much can pay less and people who will happily spend more can do so. In theory, this is a model where everybody wins. In practice, the model's abused by players and developers alike.

My immediate thought is...

If it takes that video to prove that OOO is doing something wrong, then your reaction time is way too slow. This has been an issue of discussion for a very long time.

My actual point being, don't throw these links or any random expert opinions like it means something. I hate it when you guys throw all these generalized concepts and don't contextualize it, then think "hey OOO you should really do better because Portnow says so" and it's almost like Portnow's theories and opinions are now absolute and any deviation from it is wrong. Of course not.

Not defending OOO here, but, it's pretty ugly to see people feel super entitled to whatever content OOO churns out. (Not that I'm quoting from the video even though the video says so) If you don't like it then go away.

@Video / F2P gaming:
Haha, that's kind of nostalgic. I was a programmer in an F2P-social/mobile game company, and part of the reason I left (aside from low pay, not having enough time for my own life, etc) was because of the disagreements I had with direction/philosophy.

The EC video captured the "whale hunts" pretty well. You're essentially making games that look like they're for everyone but are inherently designed to twist money out of people who have weakness to it. That feels so sickening.

Heck, this really happened at one point:

> "This game's too easy and not making money. Let's try to 'move the needle' (try to get people to pay money) by... making it impossible to win unless they pay real money after a certain point".

That was a genius idea /sarcasm. Our designers disagreed, I disagreed, but eh, heil the higher ups. By the end of the weekend, the 'needle' did indeed move: not in terms of more paying players or payments: over 90% of the players quit. If there were ever a moment that I think killed the game, it was that.

Gamers aren't money-slaves. Gamers are crafty people who will abuse what they can find, and they will call you out and abandon you if you mistreat them.

--------

Anyway, SK/3rings doesn't really seem to be too far down the 'evil' side of things. Promos? Psh, they don't trample in front of F2P players (yet - I'll gladly call them out on it if I really feel that). Heck, removing the energy-to-play system was IMO, a peace offering and compromise saying 'no' to the F2P social game spear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0

1:40

SK might be dying if we lose those whales as we're seeing by peoples' quitting sales.

And eventually, it's gonna spiral down to people just disappearing altogether. Not even a trace or mention of leaving.

@Silverdeoxys:
SK totally fell into the first category for me.

"You've all probably played one: games where the most interesting challenge is to see how far you can get without paying money. Games where it's way more compelling to figure out all the ways you can get all the fancy gear or compete with all the paying players without spending a cent. Games where all the challenge disappears where you pay."

I actually got into SK because I was busy with school and the energy system was like my own MMO limiter (In the past, I was a lot more of an MMO addict), but oh man, when I realized you could afford energy as a free player and keep playing... that was the descent XD. And now, I play Lockdown, still a F2P player, still laughing at everyone who complain about how it's only for rich paying players and outmaneuvering players who people accuse of Autotarget. That's part of the satisfaction for me as a F2P player: proof that skill > gear.

But what's weird is the amount of people who complain that SK is turning P2W, when historically and in the big picture, the game has taken a huge step AWAY from it.

@Sonosuke:
And eventually, it's gonna spiral down to people just disappearing altogether. Not even a trace or mention of leaving.

I went on vacation for a month (essentially like 'quitting'), mostly unannounced (just told a few people in-game that I was leaving the internet for a bit), and nobody noticed. I'm a no-name, you're a no-name. Bopp's a no-name to well, players who don't go on the forums. But really, new players are the lifeblood of the game. Try playing with T1 newbies and don't overpower everything for them. I do it from time to time and their excitement reminds me that the game is still fun - I'm just an old player who's played it too much.

Sonosuke, as I explained in my earlier posts, there ARE new players coming in all the time. I see new players every day in Haven.

Are there as many coming in as there were six months ago? Or more? I don't know. I doubt that you do either.

False, in so many ways. As long as the game is in existence there will always be new players, but it won't be as largely exponentiation as its original release date. That's viable to say to how the apparently "new player income" count is too.

@Sonosuke

Obviously, that will happen with every game ever made. Enough with the hurr durr statements, we need solid FACTS

In Sega's annual report, they didn't mention any specifics about SK. Anyone else got any leads?

WHALE....

Love that term.....

They're what the game industry calls people who pay a lot of money (or very often).

They're the "big fish" that F2P games try to bankrupt of their money.

Spiral Knights example:
- Someone who gets especially excited over a promo then spends $50 trying to get some rare item.
- Someone who buys $20 energy monthly.
- Anybody who's reached their spending limit in the game.