"Free to PAY" - an experiment to honestly monetize the game

What emotions does the term free-to-play have you?



There is nothing vicious in the monetization model itself. Moreover, in the general case free-to-play is more convenient for both the player and the developer. Problems begin when the game requires more money than you are willing to spend on it or makes it too intrusive, clumsy, dishonest.
')
Large companies can not afford to risk the money invested and experiment with monetization. They simply implement what works, even if you have to make a deal with your conscience.

But what if you are a small independent developer, with a small budget and moderate ambitions? If you do not want (and can not) make an endless game-like-service? If you hate advertising and first of all you want to make a good game, but do you consider the possible income from the game more like a nice bonus?

In my new game I realized something new, in three words it can be called Free-to-pay.

The essence

I propose a radical, risky (and someone will say "naive") approach, the essence of which lies in the title: "free-to-pay", that is, the player is free to pay, but the game does not try to persuade him to do this:
- All content is initially available for free and tied exclusively to the in-game economy
- Only a fan of the game and nothing extra: no energy, artificial timers, peyvolov and premium content
- No ads
- But when the game is over, we politely ask the player to pay.

Arguments

Yes, it sounds utopian, but I have arguments:

- I am sure everyone has such a situation that after meeting a high-quality product, the thought “Well done, guys! Where can you put money here? ”. My goal is to become "these guys." But if we show ads, obsessively hint at paid content, or make a mediocre game, then this kind of magic will not work.
- in games 2-5% of players pay, you will not force all the rest to pay with any tricks. In this case, the same tricks you can easily scare off the payers themselves. And so - everyone is happy.
- because we ask money only at the end of the game, you can be sure that the player is loyal and he likes the game
- there is no point in piracy, so you do not lose a single potential player
- micropayments in the game will remain so as not to infringe upon the rights of players who want to “pay, not to play”
- there is an opportunity to reach those players who usually do not pay in games, but they consider this situation to be fair
- when you feel a human attitude towards yourself from the developers, you want to tell your friends and colleagues about the game, you want to support, pay back, you want more such products!

Innings

But, of course, this in itself will not work. It is not enough just to make a free from start to finish game and expect at least some payments. You need to convey your thoughts to the player, hint that you are going to meet him, but you are counting on reciprocity:
- To say at the beginning of the game that everything is free and without advertising, but “we will come back to this issue when you pass the game, ok?”
- Remind at the end of the game that it would be fair to pay for the gaming experience you like.

Yes, it is obvious that potentially with the same amount of traffic, I will earn less than if I pressed on the players and squeezed all the juices out of them. But it’s just as obvious that making tight monetization makes it difficult to count on a large audience, word of mouth and the love of the players. If you need to choose between the number of players and the size of the average check, then I choose the first.

Why does this work?

So why do I find this approach acceptable in my case?
- I am small and independent, I have a modest budget, which is not afraid to risk
- from there follows flexibility, the ability to experiment
- the game can be fully completed in one and a half to two hours, which means that there is a good time to talk with the player "heart to heart"
- obviously adult target audience (game feature)
- Unlike large studios, I have other criteria for success, different scales; there is no goal to earn a lot, to earn at least something is already a success
- audience response is more important to me than commercial success

Forecasts

So far, I can not say that it will work and most likely my arguments did not convince you. I purposely wrote this pack right after the start of the game, when it is not clear whether this approach justifies my expectations. The more interesting! You can make such a bet, test your insight - I suggest everyone make their own forecast in the spirit of “shoot / not shoot” and check their predictions in a month or two, when it becomes clear whether the described strategy worked.

I also wanted to open access to all statistics, so that anyone could see in real time whether his predictions come true, but the Game Analytics I use does not allow this to happen (I wrote to them in support - they promised to think it over).

For now - place your bets, gentlemen:

UPD: a month has passed since the launch of the game, the results of the experiment can be found here, in a new article: megamozg.ru/post/14408

UPD2: 4 more months have passed - we managed to beat off the costs due to video advertising. Read more here: megamozg.ru/company/anvilgames/blog/18710