Free vs Freemium vs Upfront games (Gaming)

by Korny , Dalton, Ga. US. Earth, Sol System, Monday, March 05, 2018, 11:18 (2252 days ago) @ ManKitten
edited by Korny, Monday, March 05, 2018, 11:42

Is the model of "Free" games the best option for gamers and developers alike?

Your experience is somewhat similar to mine, but I wonder if there are levels within each type of game.

Take Jetpack Joyride, for example, which is somewhat similar to Fortnite in its monetization.
IIRC, that game was free when it came out on iPhone, and you could play it as much as you wanted without limit. There was an in-game currency that let you buy powerups and cosmetics, so you really didn't have to spend money. But there were microtransactions that would permanently impact your experience, such as paying $2 to permanently double the rate at which you acquire the in-game currency.

The game was fun enough that I didn't have an issue with paying a one-time fee for an improved experience, and though I quit playing games on my phone ages ago, I didn't regret what I paid. I've played several games like that over the years, and while those one-time fees do add up, the convenience in each game was such that I felt like it was a worthwhile investment. I've never paid a subscription, though, especially not for a timed-access to cosmetics.

As far as I know, Sammy's only similar experience is with Neverwinter, where the MMO is free, but you can buy more carrying space, which is one of the things that can get annoying to manage. She bought $20 of storage space, and proceeded to never have another inventory-management issue for the three months or so that we played the game.

Warframe is similar in this regard, where storage space is one of the only hurdles that players will encounter, and that you can opt to pay money to increase (though you don't have to, since the game's premium currency, Platinum, can be traded freely between players). This is somewhat offset by the free hundred platinum that you get (and if you're on Playstation, you get an extra hundred Platinum or so).

But to answer your question about the best option for devs, it's hard to say that each format is without its own faults and merits, even on a per-game basis.

Look at Overwatch and Lawbreakers.
Both "Upfront" games. Both hero shooters with free DLC, sustained by loot boxes.
Overwatch is a Billion Dollar Franchise, while Lawbreakers (which costs half as much), averaged 4 players a day in the past month.

Warframe (and all of its expansions) has been completely free since it first released in 2013, and has been entirely supported by the 32 million registered losers that buy the premium currency, while countless other hyped-up "free" games such as Paragon and Gigantic are dead.

It's really tough to say, but I was having a conversation with Malagate (or Galvan_Eyes, depending on your platform) last night about the future of games in a "post Destiny 2 screwup" world, and we came to the conclusion that a "piece-meal feature" world where things such as maps are free, but optional features (such as a photo mode) are bought and supported straight from the devs themselves, was the ideal solution. An extreme example of this already exists: players wanted DE to sell a Premium cosmetics bundle in Warframe, so DE posed the question to the community: What do you guys want in the bundle, and how much should it cost?
Seriously. Even Jim Sterling was taken aback. So yeah, the developer put the power in the players' hands, and it's all in the name of supporting a free game.

PS. Screw Freemium games.