Making money with "free-to-play" games

Free-to-play games are looking more and more like open source products as commercial entities behind the development and operations figure out ways in which to add value and monetize their user base.

In the open source world this typically consists of a split between "Community" and "Enterprise" versions of the products. For casual and free-to-play games, the split tends to be associated with some kind of premium offering or a payment mechanism like micro-transactions.

David Chang, Executive VP of Business Development and Marketing at online game publisher Gamescampus discusses the challenges of "free-to-play" in a recent editorial.

In terms of a solution, I propose calling our games "MTS Games" (Micro-Transaction Service) or even MTG (Micro-Transaction Games) if you prefer. I think this label, while a bit technical, gets rid of the "As seen on TV" quality stigma and cynicism that "free to play" engenders (it really can't be free--can it?) Equally important is to define what an MTS game is (and what it is not). An MTS game would be a game that: An MTS game would be a game that:

1. Requires no purchase to download and play the game
2. Does not have a level-cap or content-cap beyond which you need to pay
3. Is at least partially monetized by sales of in-game goods

By calling our games MTS games, I hope to separate our games from the cynicism associated with the "free to play" label. I think the definition above also addresses the bait-and-switch concerns as well as an MTS game as defined above would not require any purchases to play.

There are obvious parallels with commercial open source efforts, including the challenges associated with the word "free." It's perfectly acceptable to charge people for software (and really anything else) that they find value in. The important thing is to make it clear what is free and why you might want to pay.

You can follow me on Twitter @daveofdoom

[deanbvfx]

I think this could be the way for games to go if developers want a way to combat piracy.
Blizzard make millions (billions even) from selling a subscription to WoW, a model that works very well in Asia.
EA are working on the Play4Free model with Battlefield: Heroes, making the game free and selling costumes as MTS. Sony sell costumes and furnishings in PS Home quoting the 20:80 rule, 20% of the customer base for the other 80%.
It may not successfully work with some games, but I'm sure creative businessmen and marketing dept's could come up with a few ideas. I suppose Battlefield: Heroes may be the first full scale test by a large company, so all eyes will be on it to see if it flops or flies.

[Inconnux]

The problem with these 'free' to play games is that all the decent items cost money... sure you can play for free, but if you want to compete, then you will have to pay. In the end, if you are serious about the game, you will pay more than if you had a base subscription fee.

[Jeaniia]

Take a look at Three Rings game of Puzzle Pirates... the f2p aspect is actually quite recognized and appreciated, to the point where a person tries to support the game the best they can because they care, verses the "have to".

In Puzzle Pirates, they have the free and subscription oceans (servers). The monetary 'phrases' in the game are PoE (Pieces of Eight) and Dubloons. Dubloons are like tax on the items you purchase, and are on the f2p servers, not the subscription ones. But, all oceans are free to go on other oceans... if a 'sub' player goes on a f2p ocean, they will have to deal with the dubs (dubloon) currency, and f2p players won't be able to purchase items on sub oceans... but they can visit them. However (original tangent..the puzzle pirates game itself is an interesting topic in many ways ^^) people can purchase dubloons via the 'game' market or buy a batch with their 'rl' funds. I know I have personally just to try to help support Three Rings in a 'thank you' manner for providing the game to everyone. So do they make money? You'll have to ask them... but they've been on the horizon for quite a few years. Are they better or worse? It doesn't have to do with the pricing itself, it has to do with the game.

I will say one thing though... I'm more likely to purchase a game from a company who doesn't incorporate ads and '3rd party' software to make their money, even with trial game downloads. I play games from Big Fish Games, and am now a subscriber... I don't trust many other sites. People support the freedom to choose. That's how a company makes money.

[wopschallgeraldine]

lets have some fun