Free-to-play mobile games are pretty rubbish. Here is why.
You can have any character you want as long as he's brown haired and in his thirties |
Originally the popularity of the free-to-play was due to several Massively Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Games (MMORPG), such as Neopets and Maplestory as well as their ease of access. Practically anyone with a computer could play. Things got even better for free-to-play with the creation of Runescape by Jagex, a web based RPG with great graphics and sound gameplay. These games are still amongst the most widely played of the free-to-play games out there, and what they lack in sheer graphical fidelity and immersion that mainstream 'AAA' titles might have they make up for it in being wide reaching, affordable and not requiring advanced technology to run them.
It was no surprise then that the mobile gaming platforms of iOS and Android lapped up this model and soon a whole host of developers churned out so called "free-to-play" games like there was no tomorrow. This has led to a mass of games which are all identical in but name and graphical style. How naive was I to think that Jurassic Park Builder, The Simpsons : Tapped Out and Tiny Tower would have anything but identical gameplay. (I would mention many others as well but sadly I have no space here to list them all) They all follow the same format of building things, early on they emphasise the fact everything you do takes time (real time) and that you can speed things up with the use of money (real money). This inherently has nothing wrong with it, if your user is impatient why not give them the option to speed things up a little bit? That itself is fine, but when it gets to the point that a game is pretty much unplayable because you are sitting and waiting for the game to let you play then I think it is unreasonable. I got to a stage where the time it took to build a new floor was something along the lines of two real life days (48 hours), there is nothing else to do in that game other than collect rent and change the uniforms of your staff. There are no tactics, no thought. Nothing that can go wrong other than your lack of efficiency. It's matter of order building, collect money and then wait. Rinse, cycle and repeat. This can be said for every single of those games in those formats and is what I call preventative gameplay. Where a game actively tries to stop you from playing.
Another notable example is CSR Racing, a game in which you participate in drag races against other AI controlled cars. Each race requires a certain amount of fuel and you start off with around 10 units of fuel. Each race results in credits which you can then spend upgrading and buying new cars so that you can win bigger and better races, thus rewarding you with more credits. The main gripe I have with this game is the 10 units of fuel limit and the inability to just play races for the fun of it. If I use up all my fuel I have to pay real money to restock or wait through the timer. It's not like I can even play skirmish races that don't result in extra money but allow me to hone my skills. Of course, developers have to recoup their costs somewhere but I don't think it's fair for a game to advertise itself as free-to-play when in reality it's free-to-play (for a bit). It's not impossible to take this model and make it work.
Look at all those races I can't play |
Take for example World Of Tanks, a free-to-play tanks battling game much in the same way as CSR Racing has cars in it's garage you are instead filling up your garage with tanks. The main notable difference I find with World Of Tanks is that it does not restrict you from playing the game. At no point does it actively stop you from playing and ask you for money. Each tank battle nets you credits and before you head out into the next battle you need to repair and rearm your tank with credits. The amount you earn from a battle, even if you lost is usually more than enough to recoup the costs. I'm pretty rubbish and my tank finances are still in the black. Now is this model so hard to do? One of the incentives that the wargaming.net team always said was paying allows you to progress faster through the game. Double XP/Credits plus rarer tanks (which don't necessarily mean superior). Even other mobile games like Zombie Gunship don't stop you from playing just to ask for money.
Not a single fuel indicator in site |
There are many notable games out there that follow this free-to-play model that I would be more than willing to invest money into and have already done so in the past. Games such as Hawken, Age of Empires Online, Planetside 2, World of Tanks and Firefall stand at the forefront of my mind. Even notable games such as APB and Star Wars : The Old Republic switched from being subscription based to the free-to-play model and have been just as successful if not more so than in the past.
I think showing the player what they could get for subscribing but not forcing them too is always good. |
The thing to note is all these games I have mentioned are PC games. Even Runescape and MapleStory are PC based games. Where are all the mobile games? Who knows my friend. Currently on my mobile device I have these free-to-play games; Zombie Gunship, Curiosity, Jurassic Park Builder, Showdown, Checkers and Wordament. Of all the games in this lot the only one I would put money towards are Checkers and Wordament and for those two I can't even work out how.
Do I think free-to-play is bad? Of course not, just certain ways companies and marketers push it out there harm it's effectiveness, sometimes even to the detriment of the game itself. This is what I think needs to change in free-to-play mobile games.
Email : markmmiller@hotmail.co.uk
Xbox Live : Dr Death MK 2
Steam : 7thsanctum
Follow @7thsanctum
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAn old blog is devoted for the struggle and all sharpness for the field. The passage of the town and programming homework help is valued for the changes. Particle is blamed or the mid and width of the rum ours for the candidates of the field.
ReplyDelete