Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
November 1, 2014
arrowPress Releases
November 1, 2014
PR Newswire
View All
View All     Submit Event





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


 
Steam Dev Days: Microtransactions According to Valve
by Seth Sivak on 02/12/14 02:14:00 pm   Expert Blogs   Featured Blogs

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

 

In-app purchases have now been around long enough as a monetization strategy that they're now an established practice in the game industry—although the industry seems to have a love-hate relationship with them. We knew when we started building World Zombination that we wanted the game to be an MMO and that would mean we’d have to consider free-to-play as our strategy. It turns out that opting for this model puts us in good company: Valve (among other great companies) has fully embraced it. The team at Proletariat—and the industry at-large—can learn a lot from how Valve approaches free-to-play.

I attended the Steam Developer Days in January, at which Valve spent considerable time discussing three topics: the Steam Box, virtual reality, and microtransactions. Much has been said in the industry and media about the first two topics, but microtransactions haven’t been as thoroughly examined. Microtransactions are especially important to us, though, considering we’re making a free-to-play game.

At this conference, Kyle Davis spoke about in-game economies in Team Fortress 2 and DOTA 2, focusing on the five rules Valve follows to build new microtransaction-driven mechanics and economies. This post will cover each of these topics and discuss some of the ways we plan to apply them to World Zombination.

1. Microtransactions should provide persistent customer value

This is the keystone to an opt-in economy and it weaves itself into the other topics below. The idea here is that when a user pays for something, that object has lasting value beyond just the relief of a temporary pinch. Many free-to-play games capitalize on these mechanics, and they usually focus on consumables used for convenience. In the simplest terms, this is the old arcade strategy of putting in another quarter to keep playing, with no lasting value to the player since the state of the game will be erased when the game ends.

image

 

When in comes to in-app purchases, we want the player to remember—and feel good about—their purchase in a few weeks. Many games do this well; League of Legends is a great example. Once a Champion is purchased, the player owns it forever. In general, most consumables break this rule, but the outcome of using that item can have lasting value as well, which leads into the next idea.

2. Microtransactions should provide positive externalities

“Positive externalities” simply means that if one player purchases something in the game, it should make the game better for every player, not worse, which is a wonderfully elegant way to consider every in-game transaction. For this reason, we won’t use common pay-to-win mechanics in World Zombination. This idea is where consumables can really shine. The example given at Steam Dev Days was a booster in DOTA 2 that grants the player who purchases it an excellent buff and then every other player in a game who is playing with that user also receives a buff, but a smaller one.

image

 

I absolutely love this rule, and it’s something we have been focusing on with World Zombination. Our crystalizing example comes from one of our founders who paid for his WoW guild’s voice chat server and webhosting. He paid for it because it helped everyone in his guild and didn’t feel selfish. Making a purchase for your guild/team/friends is a very powerful idea that every game should consider. 

3. Everything should be tradable

This is a difficult rule to follow in many cases because certain mechanics and games simply aren’t set up to allow this, but a good argument can be made for the value of trading. When everything in the economy is tradable, it provides obvious long-term value benefits because even if a player changes their play style or rolls a new character, they can trade off their hard earned stuff. In the case of Valve, this is done even across multiple games, so if a player is done playing DOTA 2, they can trade their stuff for items in another game.

image

 

Kyle used the example of crates and keys in Team Fortress 2. Crates contain a random drop of items but can only be opened using keys that are purchased for real money. Some players will never spend real money, so they’ll have crates sitting in their inventory forever. Though the majority of players have never opened a crate, most players possess an item that came from a crate. This shows how important trading is to the player base in a way that most microtransactions are not.

4. Value should distribute randomly

This may seem obvious, but when used properly, it can really engage a community around an economy and stretch content much further. When applying this rule, it’s important to consider how this impacts issues like trading. If everything in the economy is tradable, it’s much easier to have random drops because players can still get value out of them. Without trading, this becomes more constrained and means that content is more segmented depending on the structure of the value presented to players.

5. Players should be able to contribute content

This rule, just like the tradability rule above, is somewhat limited by the type of game. Valve does a great job of creating tools to let players add value to games and then creating economies where they can be compensated with real money for their efforts. This creates a new level of structure on top of the base economy where players become brand names and content is created in a naturally expanding way based on supply and demand.

image

 

Current trends indicate that players are becoming more interested in content creation, with some games based solely around it. If it’s possible for us to open this channel, it could be a way to further encourage players to invest in World Zombination and deliver content in a more scalable way than our development team could likely achieve.

Now What?

Valve has managed to create thriving free-to-play games and stable microtransaction economies over many years of testing and development. A set of rules like this doesn’t come easy, and while I don’t think they can be applied to every game, the rules are helpful when making decisions about microtransactions that will keep the game fun.

When we think about World Zombination, the first two rules are the ones that really hit home. Our goal is to make sure that every time a player pays, they are getting something of value, even if they only purchase a consumable item, and that players around them also benefit in some way. We hope to create this value in the way we implement our event systems and our mechanics around guilds and teams. Free-to-play games can be good for both developers and players and, as the model matures, we will see new strategies and directions taken by different games. The bottom line is to provide value to players and make them feel great about every single purchase.


Related Jobs

Twisted Pixel Games
Twisted Pixel Games — Austin, Texas, United States
[10.31.14]

Senior Graphics and Systems Engineer
Twisted Pixel Games
Twisted Pixel Games — Austin, Texas, United States
[10.31.14]

Mid-level Tools and Systems Engineer
Giant Sparrow
Giant Sparrow — Playa Vista, California, United States
[10.31.14]

Junior 3D Artist
Giant Sparrow
Giant Sparrow — Playa Vista, California, United States
[10.31.14]

Lead Artist






Comments


SD Marlow
profile image
These are, of course, the examples of F2P done right, which is why these games are held-up as examples of that business model, but the audience for dev days was mostly "indie" and there is one major issue that never seems to be mentioned: a small team that tries to make a successful F2P game is going to spend most of their time with it, which means not creating other titles (and also, people that had one role for a year, now needing to switch to another, which might not be as rewarding 3 months in).

Also not mentioned is that Valve has been at this a long time, so the tools they use to create original content have enough of a polish to hand-over to anyone that wants to give it a try. A small team building a F2P game (or any game) for the first time shouldn't be attempting to also create an open tool-set.

Daneel Filimonov
profile image
The gist of what was presented to the indies at dev days is not to copy Valve's ideology but to take what works for you and implement it in such a way as to require less up-keep for more content. In other words, you let the player do the work by making value from their own work. Tools for this should not be difficult to make; sort of like a extension of the game itself.

SD Marlow
profile image
Yes, I've watch 19 of the presentations so far, and while it draws on the efforts at Valve/Steam, there really is a lot for those just starting out to take away from them. I just think, along the lines of "your first game will suck," dev's should expect the tools they use/create to need a re-work as well.

Maria Jayne
profile image
For me No.1 is the key to convincing me to buy something. I want to keep it, I want to have a persistent asset for my money. It may be digital but if I keep it and have access to it at all times, that makes it real to me. Something which has limited uses, timed privelidge or even a subscription requirement to become active, is very unlikely to ever look attractive to me.

David James Ballard
profile image
I love this discussion!

And I agree with all the points in the original post. Especially in the context of MMOs, taking advantage of it's organic properties is a good strategy. Create an environment that inspires investment rather than cyclical purchasing of consumables. I actually just wrote a little opinion piece on this as a reaction to Molyneux's vague references to Godus's "never seen before" monetization scheme. The post is awaiting gama-approval, but the original is on my personal blog:http://davidjballard.tumblr.com/post/76574707741/is-peter-molyneu
x-spearheading-the-future-of-f2p

I really believe we can turn f2p into something that is not evil or unsatisfying - appealing to more than the "whales" of app store/Facebook infamy. On a personal level, I will probably always prefer the traditional approach of pay money, play game, transaction complete; but I hope to be pleasantly surprised. Thanks for a great post!


none
 
Comment: