Online Games - Get Hooked For Free

Thanks to Wired News for their story discussing online games trying alternatives to subscription fees, including extended free trials, in order to ensnare gamers. The article points out: "Online games are adding millions of new players each year, but business models haven't adapted to accommodate the new playing population... casual gamers wary of shelling out monthly subscription fees are the driving force behind this growth." Nexon's Shattered Galaxy is the featured example, with Paul Philleo from the company also mentioning another development in online titles, that of (alleged) specialization: "We're not trying to operate like Asheron's Call or Ultima Online. We're going for a new, niche audience."

Comments

Great

[tsa]

That's very interesting. Now I can finally find out if I suck just as much in succeeding in a virtual world as in the real one.

Once they start paying me...

[quinkin]

Once they start paying me I'll be interested.

Q.

Re:Once they start paying me...

[Doctor Cat]

If you want to make money playing online games, check out what Julian Dibbel's been up to (the guy who wrote the article "A Rape In Cyberspace about a billion yeas ago) here.

There's also a couple of sites where you can play games like Beyond Castle Wolfenstein against other players for cash. And Worldwinner.com and some rivals let you play things like Tetris, Minesweeper, Solitaire, etc. for cash. Woo.

Me, I'd rather keep *making* the games for money. And our game has been free since 1996, this is old news to me!

This is no surprise

[TerryAtWork]

MMORPG Games are already carefully designed to hook you with cigarette-like addiction properties.

It's immoral, really.

Re:This is no surprise

[KDan]

You're joking, but I think we'll see this become a real societal problem in the near future. Better-Than-Life was a visionary idea in Red Dwarf - it's going to happen for real. If you already consider the sorry state some people get into after basically investing their entire lives into things like EverCrack, if that starts happening to a significant percentage of the population we will see it put at the same rank as hard drug usage.

Daniel

Re:This is no surprise

[TerryAtWork]

I mean no disrespect but I am not joking. I read a paper somewhere on the net where they pointed out how to design a game specifically to hook people by giving them proper amounts of gratification at proper times. They get an endomorphin blast at this time, like a gambler who hits the jackpot. And then, and this is critical, they crave more.

I was so appalled by this I stopped reading the paper, and can't find it again (not that I really tried hard)

But let me tell you, I regard this behavior as genuinely evil and extremely lucrative. What are we going to do?

Re:This is no surprise

[KDan]

Hell, well then it's even worse than I thought. My dad had been hammering on a long time ago when I was still a kid, saying that computer game makers should be held accountable for the time they waste in people's lives, by hooking them on stupid games, and for all that time I didn't take him seriously. I still don't for those single-player games, which are not all that addictive when you consider the newer multiplayer stuff. But then I got addicted to MUDs for a while and I understood what he meant more fully.

Imho, the way this will probably be solved is through requiring game makers to impose a time limit on how much time people under a certain age can spend in a day/week/month on one of these games. It shouldn't be very hard to implement for all these monthly-subscription games, since those have to know who their players are anyway (would be harder for, say, plain MUDs which are so much more anonymous).

But a good way would, I reckon, be to limit the time one can spend overall on online games. Under 15, say limit it to 3 hours a day. Under 18, 5 hours a day. Under 25, 7 hours a day. After 25, if you're not responsible enough to control yourself yet, too bad. These limits would already allow huge amounts of gaming, but prevent the zombification of people who end up turning their lives into a "wake up, play, go to bed when exhausted" cycle...

But given the way laws happen these days, it seems more likely that they'll just go overboard and try to forbid these games altogether, and probably fail miserably... bah.

Daniel

Re:This is no surprise

[handsomepete]

I'm not sure it would ever be possible to put an artificial limit on something like this for people over 18, and I wouldn't expect companies would have the slightest bit of interest in enforcing it or implementing it. Besides, if you don't have a concept of moderation by the time you're 25, you've probably got other problems too. :) I understand the sentiment, but I'm still going to have to go with the tried and true "it's the parent's responsibility to monitor their own children" comeback.

Just to add something to the conversation, here's what I think. If, at some point in the future, videogaming becomes a real noteworthy addiction (where the number of people afflicted can be roughly equated with any other mainstream addiction), that's probably where we'll see the government try to put a stiffer hand on things and, as you said, they'll go after banning first (and probably fail), taxation second (and probably succeed), social programs third, etc. etc. etc. So, the point is - what can be done to educate people about these sort of issues now to prevent the inevitability of that later? Are there effective counter-measures? Is there any non-sensationalistic press about this? (read as: a story backed by actual facts as the grandparent poster pointed out as opposed to "Kid Dies From Playing Everquest") Is it a physical addiction? Mental addiction? Both? Are the only games to worry about MMORPGs or should we worry about kids playing Counter Strike? All questions that need well reasoned fact based information before people will even consider looking at it seriously.

Here's one I've always wondered: What would happen if Everquest cut off home access and opened arcades across the country where people could pay for time to play? Would people give up on it and find something else or shell out?

Re:This is no surprise

[Radius9]

Something you seem to be missing with your example of "giving them the proper amounts of gratification at proper times" is that if you don't do it this way, the game just isn't fun. The game is supposed to be a challenge without being frustrating. If you let the user win all the time, then there is no challenge, and the game is no fun. If you make it too difficult, then the user never wins, and there is no challenge. So the challenge is to make a game that is just easy enough that you can beat whatever puzzle right at the point where the user is about to give up. But making a parallel between drugs/gambling and video games is flawed in that, I as a video game developer, make no additional income if the user becomes "addicted" to my game. A drug dealer/casino makes additional money the more you play. Each game costs something. As a video game developer, I make money only once, when the user buys the game. After that, I no longer make any money from the user, so to be honest, from a business perspective, I don't really care if the user continues to play, or becomes "hooked" on the title I am working on. And sure, if I get the "hooked" they may buy my next game, but that is 2 years down the line, so its easy enough using marketing to get them to buy the game regardless. Consumer memories are short. Anyway, that's just my view on it, but then again, being in the video game development industry myself, my view may be distorted.

Re:This is no surprise

[KDan]

Don't be so literal. That's only a thumbrule, hence my mention of possible weekly/monthly limits. For instance, it might be that the system requires you to follow an average of 7 hours a day, allowing a 10% overrun per week (ie a max of 7x7 = 49 + 4.9 = 54.9 hours a week) and then enforce the total for the month (ie no more than 7x31 hours a month no matter what). There's plenty of possible variations, which will still allow you to spend a weekend of continuous playing but which would prevent you from spending a month playing continually.

I am 23. I have in the last few years reached the point where I can pretty much control myself in terms of online gaming. A large part of that control is knowing which games not to play (for instance, mmorpgs, which, given my rabid addiction to MUDs and my easy addiction to crap like Diablo 2, which is a poor substitute for a MUD, you'll have to agree, would be fatal). I think 25 would be a good age to place a limit at - because let's be honest here, if at 25 you're inclined to spend more than 7 hours a day on average playing Everquest, over large periods of time, then you need help. Go out, meet people in the real world, get a job, etc..

Daniel

Re:This is no surprise

[KDan]

Companies would have no incentive to do this. But if it becomes enough of a societal problem, people will request that the government enforce some restrictions and force companies to abide by those restrictions (enter a whole new world of underground unrestricted gaming, but anyway...). But true to form, the moronic people who so often get elected in a representative system like the US so-called-democracy will most certainly go for the most stupid solutions such as banning or taxing things, like they do for drugs and alcohol. Which is a shame because online gaming can so much more easily be controlled...

Daniel

Re:This is no surprise

[Slurm-V]

Well, no. MMORPGs usually have monthly subscription charges - so the longer (in months rather than more as in hours) you continue to play the more money is made. 200,000 players at 15/month (a la EQ and SWG) makes for an additional incentive to provide 'addictive' qualities in-game. There's a brief description of the 'Skinner' characteristics of EQ here.

You are correct that the actual game programmer might not be directly advantaged (except by continued employment and company stability) but the suit who writes his paycheck will be - providing more than enough incentive.

My own take is that the developers probably weren't purposely trying to make people emulate lab rats with food pellets - but CRPG games since, say, Wizardry had been evolving in this direction. The closest to a Skinner model so far - EQ - was such a financial success (for this and other reasons - social being high amongst them) that other companies are scrambling to incorporate their own versions. Eventually, though, the possible player base will max out, whereupon, with all those potential lab rats out there playing someone else's game - the purveyors of addictive pellets are going to have to really smarten them up, hopefully with actual content and not just eye candy.

Bleh...

[flonker]

The Wired story is just about free trials for online games.
Nexon's Shattered Galaxy ... is now available as a free download from the company's website, and for the first three months, players won't be required to pay ... nonpaying players won't have access to certain features, ...
<plug>If you want a real free online game, try Crossfire</plug>

Re:Bleh...

[Yokaze]

> Click link
You enter the Web-site. You are seeing various links.
> Read description
You gain 1 experience about RPGs. Your motivation rises.
> Click Screen Shots
You are seeing several links for different clients for different platforms.
You gain 1 experience in linux gaming. Your motivation rises.
> Click GTK Client
You are hit by 16 colours and several pixels. You are dead.

Another suggestion
I haven't played it, but I like their client features:

Support for nearly all platform: Windows (XP, 2000, ME, 98), Linux, Macintosh
And their game feature list, point one:

A Role Playing Game!
(Their exclamation mark)

I will not mention that it is published under the GPL. Damn, I failed.
I wonder, if I managed to destroy a promising game by publishing this information on this site.
Maybe I can stop it, by mentioning that it is pre-alpha.

Re:Bleh...

[flonker]

Personally, I like the way Crossfire looks.

There is a derivative project, Daimonin, which is "prettier", but it's still in beta. Real beta, as in actually working, not sourceforge beta ("w3 wr0t3 s0m3 c0d3z, f1n15h 17 4 u5.")

ah, the old bait-and-switch.

[pb]

The first hit's free, kid.

Everwars

[BMonger]

I just recently started playing EverWars... it's a free web based game... basically a monthly stat run but it keeps me mildly occupied at wotk...

shitty website

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad the Shattered Galaxy website sucks so much. There's no way I'd pay for a game where clicking on the "game info", "account info" and even "support" links take me to a "page not found"...

Bad signs...

Hattrick

[Scarblac]

My favorite game is a online soccer management game, Hattrick.

They have the right model: playing it is absolutely free and will remain free. Besides that, you can become "supporter", for about 20 Euro per year. Supporter gives you some extras - a guestbook and logo at your team's page, very handy bookmarks, lots of statistics - but nothing that will help you with the game. Supporter is fun, but doesn't give an advantage inside the game.

Hattrick has about 150,000 players and is expanding rapidly. Around 10%, perhaps a bit more, are supporter. This is enough for them to make a small profit.

I'm glad Shattered Galaxy is free

[cgenman]

...because it isn't finished.

Seriously, it is a game with 5 resource types, only one of which is available in-game. You can purchase units, except that they don't cost anything. Units have available slots for special attacks, except that they don't have any special attacks. You can upgrade units, if you can get the severely bent interface to work.

Really, It's painfully obvious that this game isn't finished, yet they were (are) trying to sell it to the hungry masses. I wonder why they are doing so badly? Top that off with horrible graphics and controls, randomly generated level designs ripped straight out of Starcraft's playbook, Action-oriented gameplay that pauses for several seconds every time someone enters an area, and a design that shouts "Diablo in space, with 6 characters!", And it is no wonder they need to give it away. Honestly, at this stage in their development I'd be ashamed to charge anyone for it.

While the concept of a MMPORTS is appealing, this version falls far short of the mark. And sadly, it isn't the only MMP game that does. Second Life? Sims Online? If you want to know why so many are doing so badly, first look to how badly so many are made.

Re:I'm glad Shattered Galaxy is free

[Sparr0]

An alternative MMORTS is Time of Defiance. Go, Play, Now.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Our dirty secrets

[Teppy]

Here's a method that has worked well for us, and that a lot of people seem to appreciate:

1. We don't ask for a credit card upfront. We don't require a real name, or an email address, or anything else - just download the client and play.
2. Limit of 24 hours of game time, but it can be spread over as many sessions as desired. After that, it prompts for a credit card to continue.
3. Certain content (about 15 items) required a paid account. Not enough to be bothersome, but enough so that most people run into a couple things they wish they could do during their free trial.
4. Billing is done in-game - not on a website - so when someone does run into restricted content, they can unlock it instantly by entering a credit card.
5. We pay the credit card company extra (about 1%) to not require all the name/address/blood type bullshit. Again, to make it very quick & easy to pay when the unavailable content comes up.

So, how has this worked? We've had 27.5k people log in to the game. Of those, around 17% have paid for at least one month. Most shareware (which is the closest analogy to how we do things) averages 1%.

Only 3.5% of those who try the game exhaust their 24 hours and then leave. A much smaller number than that (anecdotal - I don't track this directly) pay, but only after exhausting their 24 hours. Perhaps 1%. These last two are what I find so interesting - it says that an MMORPG can *almost* behave like a shareware game. Play for free as along as you'd like, but you get some bonuses for paying.

Re:Our dirty secrets

[Seumas]

I loved ATITD, but my poor hand couldn't keep up. Not to mention all of the campire-spamming in the beginning really ate up the fun (especially when it happened around my private little part of the world in Seven Lakes).

It was for the better though. After a month or so of playing, I realized I was spending far too much time at it.

I'd play another eGenesis game in the future, though. Or maybe a later version (or just re-telling) of ATITD - if I had the time.

I would love to see a sci-fi-esque ATITD game. The graphics don't have to be spectacular. Just keep most of the same gameplay, throw in some new elements and have at it. :)

Considering how and where ATITD was developed and under what circumstances, you guys did an amazing job. And I've rarely seen any IRC channels for *anything* (let alone a game) that is as supportive and friendly as #atitd.

Re:Our dirty secrets

[Anonymous Coward]

They can't just behave almost like a shareware game, they can behave entirely like a shareware game. Check out Iron Realms Entertainment's games (www.ironrealms.com I believe). They apparently run very successful text MMOs (one of which peaks at 500+ online. Very large for a text MMO.) without forcing you to ever pay. I think you can play forever without paying, though possibly there's a limit eventually. Haven't heard of one though. Someone from their company posts to mud-dev and has said they make significantly more/player than the $12.95/month model by selling in-game skills and items and other things.

(I'm not a coward, just lazy.)

Re:Our dirty secrets

[LondonLawyer]

"I would love to see a sci-fi-esque ATITD game."

Dune?

Re:Our dirty secrets

[Seumas]

You thought planting and harvesting flax was a bitch? Just wait until you have to harvest spice!

Heh.

Guess I should have mentioned the game...

[Teppy]

A Tale in the Desert. This is why I should stick to programming, not marketing.

Shattered Galaxies ongoing freebies

[loneblogger]

I played shattered galaxy beta for almost 2 years, and in the last year I played it it hardly changed at all, except for minor balancing issues. Then Tactical Commanders was released, which was practically just Shattered Galaxy with different unit names. Than Tactical Commanders is released again by another company. I just can't help but feel they are struggling to make money. The game was a lot of fun to play, but I doubt I'd pay for it. I had the same experience playing Endless Ages. It was just far too much fun to play, and I devoted non stop hours to it, but when they asked for money, I stopped on a pin. But I'm tight, and that's just me.

PlanetSide

[Mostly Monkey]

I've heard good things about this game and would like to try it out, but with it costing $50 for the box on top of the monthly fees (although I think the first month is free) has prevented me from buying it. Why charge full price for a game that you still have to pay monthly fees for?

Free MMORPGs have been around since the 1970s

[mkweise]

Free, open-source MMORPGs had already been around for a decade when commercial interests first took interest in the market. The only thing Ultima Online & Co. really added is the graphical interface.

Neverwinter Nights.

[Xner]

There are quite a number of persistent NWN servers that are quite fullfeatured and professionally maintained, with a lot of interesting poeple to play with.
Considering the fact that any DnD nerd worth his salt already bought the game and played the original campaign, it's a great way to avoid pay-per-play while having a great online experience.

You might have to switch a few servers before you find one that suits your style though.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion