Give the game away free (not f2p)
ns2isgood
Join Date: 2013-04-16 Member: 184847Members
Join Date: 2013-04-16 Member: 184847Members
Not sure if anyone saw, but Red Orchestra 2 recently did a very cool thing last week. They gave away their game entirely free for a day on a Thursday. If you redeemed a copy that day, it's free for you forever. After the free day ended, they put the game immediately on a free weekend promo and sale Friday-Sunday. It was a brilliant move.
The hype it generated from being free carried over into the weekend promo to help promote it and push sales. It was all over a bunch of blogs, websites, reddit, etc. It stayed a trending game the entire weekend. The game went on to break it's peak concurrent player count during this promotion. Tripwire went on to later say "bloody hell" about the entire event, so it sounds like it was a huge success. If you haven't noticed, L4D2 also did a similar promotion earlier this year in which Tripwire copied. Seems like it may be a new marketing strategy.
I think this would have been an awesome move if they had done it with the Kodiak update, but the sale and DLC update barely generated any new players when looking at steamcharts.
Check it out - http://www.pcgamesn.com/tripwire-sum-results-red-orchestra-2-steam-giveaway-bloody-hell
ps: red orchestra 2 was in a very similar position like ns2 with the struggling playerbase
The hype it generated from being free carried over into the weekend promo to help promote it and push sales. It was all over a bunch of blogs, websites, reddit, etc. It stayed a trending game the entire weekend. The game went on to break it's peak concurrent player count during this promotion. Tripwire went on to later say "bloody hell" about the entire event, so it sounds like it was a huge success. If you haven't noticed, L4D2 also did a similar promotion earlier this year in which Tripwire copied. Seems like it may be a new marketing strategy.
I think this would have been an awesome move if they had done it with the Kodiak update, but the sale and DLC update barely generated any new players when looking at steamcharts.
Check it out - http://www.pcgamesn.com/tripwire-sum-results-red-orchestra-2-steam-giveaway-bloody-hell
ps: red orchestra 2 was in a very similar position like ns2 with the struggling playerbase
Comments
Right before the game released everyone who had pre-ordered before the Steam release was given a free gift copy for whatever purpose. The game had a few free weekends, and even was a part of a humble bundle so people got it for $1. Plus Tripwire had a big dlc expansion for people to buy into during the weekend so it isn't exactly comparable.
The only thing I can see is the fact that NS2 has a much steeper learning curve than RO2.
No, it hasn't.
That's not free upfront. Someone has to spend money to get a free copy. And it was a pre-order incentive/promotion to help push pre-order sales.
Free weekends won't get you much exposure, that's the whole point of this marketing tactic as the one outlined in the OP. Being on a free weekend of humble bundle isn't going to give you front page articles on IGN, Joystiq, Gamespot, PC World, Game Informer, PC Gamer, etc all on the same day. It was literally on every major gaming publication on the web.
First off, it wasn't "big" it's 1 DLC with a few maps and weapons. Second off, the DLC content is free to everyone just like NS2, you just don't have all the weapons unlocked on the maps. You can play all the DLC maps in RO2 with the stock rifle which is the best weapon anyways. So it's very comparable, silly.
It's not comparable because the DLC isn't all cosmetic stuff, it's already completely different. Unless the weapons all had the same stats which you said they didn't, then game balance would be changed because of it regardless if the weapons are even considered useless.
I think you might be confusing the words identical and comparable. I also never said anything about weapon stats, but sure!
TripwareInteractive >>> Know with famous Killing Floor and Rising Storm as you know >>> Medium size company with lots $$$$$ , they can easily marketing --- give away to atract players on Facebook , Youtube
Its not "The Same" like you think , try to creat something and sell it for people , you will see it hard >>> Big fish eat small fish >> Big company eat small studio ( Activision >> Sledgehammer MW3 , InfinityWard MW2..vv)
I wouldn't imagine that too many copies of NS2 are still being sold, so an infusion of players might actually cause more copies to be sold.
It might be even better to do something like this closer to when the Subnautica beta opens to attract more players to UWE as a whole (if there is even going to be one)
Yes it seems like a brilliant thing to do if you're trying to get people to play your game no matter the cost... instead of you know... trying to eat every day.
Also, didn't NS2 go to Humble Bundle twice?
Let's see what direction they go for Subnautica too (who can say what the tide will bring).
Less players in that play the game > less sales > no monies.
= Do something to to increase the playerbase and then maintain it so word by mouth sells the game. If announced correctly this could be a really good idea.
I sea what u did there.
On the ever so popular topic of "NS2 and F2P" to what extent should NS2 go F2P?
From the last few responses that I've seen from the UWE team, it's generally revolved around, "X effort in, max revenue out" which is understandable because they are a small team, time and resources are limited, and they ARE a business that operates to generate profit.
This topic has been stirring in my mind for a while too so here's how I see possible directions.
The easiest effort vs. profit path might simply be... have steam nix (remove) the price. NS2 = Free on Steam, forever.
Similar to this topic OP, the revenue would have to come from Reinforcement, Kodiak, whatever DLC comes in the future.
A bold risk, all the advantages and consequences come with that move. Could have a massive surge of players (of varying quality) who knows how long they'll stay, and generate enough demand of community content creators to continue down this path.
Or it could just end up being a failed desperate act, as a few other topics have mentioned, this maximizes the audience NS2 can get, but only to the limited extent of issues that prevent/deter these new players from staying. (Learning Curve, Performance, Niche of Game)
The much harder, but more profitable, would be the proper F2P system that almost every F2P game out there trends towards. This would include:
- Progression System (NS2 kind of has this with HIVE levels)
- Robust Matchmaking (more managable with more players I would suspect)
- In-game store to purchase...skins, etc.
- ( * ) In-game "credits" to unlock permanently/rent for X days variations of weapons earn able by completing games (X amount of credits for win, less for loss) encouraging players play their hardest.
Of course this might mean we might have to remove the option to choose a team and force players to play each side once? (Man that would be long, and most people don't time for that)
* By variations, I'm referring to stock weapons in games like Planetnet Side 2, Nosgoth, League of Legends that have variations of their stock weapons/heroes to appeal to different player styles. Example, we have NS2 Marine stock rifle and one that shoots slower, but harder, perhaps one that shoots in bursts, one that has higher capacity, but less damage? That would take a hell of a time to balance, but would give people reason to spend those in-game credits.
Also, we all want to avoid the "pay to win" model, but it is possible, PS2 does an excellent job of this, but they took a while to do it, also they designed the game around F2P, making NS2 transition to this extreme level of perfect F2P would be very hard, almost like making entirely a new game.
I don't think anyone here is an expert on how these systems work, and I'm sure that my post here has plenty of flaws or have issues of how it may or may not work for NS2, relax, these are simply my observations. Perhaps UWE could go the simple route, and gradually implement portions of a more robust system as we have already seen attempts.
I am also realize that even though I write this post today, we should all know that UWE is working on Subnautica, and I fully don't expect them to even consider any of this until Subnautica is nearing completion. We all love NS2, but have respect for that. I would be surprised if we got a response to this trending topic.
There are huge differences between RO2 and NS2 in regards to learning curve and player retention.
I suggest:
* Rookie only servers based on playtime.
* Force a brief 60 sec tutorial, video or interactive for rookies, before playing.
* Include more optional robust and advanced tutorials for things like alien movement.
Else you will just instantly hemorrhage all of those new players, days after, and it would be for nothing.
In NS2's case it would be more like getting a free game but they probably wouldn't play it immediately (kind of like not playing games you get from steam sales). Since they wouldn't be too hyped to play it ASAP, they probably wouldn't give too much hype to people they know.
NS2 does not really run that well on a potato :P
You don't have to run your potato on 1.1V, you know.
The game struggles to get higher than 500-600 player concurrently even during peak times AFTER a minor DLC patch?! I know I'm of the minority on these forums but this game will continue to trickle and lose players if there is no future plan here. Either going F2P, a big sale that coincides with marketing or a free weekend or even as mentioned, a free game for a day or this community will be reduced to nothing but the hardcore players. That might be favorable to some but certainly not to all. Almost all the big sales and free weekends have coincided with a DLC patch that was buggy as hell.
The free day/free weekend type concept only works with what @IronHorse has mentioned. If UWE can't find the time to enhance the tutorial with advanced stuff like alien movement then may I suggest asking a community modder to take a look at this? I don't know the logistics of game development but this is certainly something to consider if it is possible.
The playerbase is at the moment, very slowly but surely reducing in size. It might be stable for the next year or so but down the line, it could become very dangerous. I only hope there's a plan and I hope combat is a big success but I very much doubt that.
Not throwing players into an NS2 game with no idea of what's going on would go a long way to improve the retention rate I think. Since, judging by the Reinforced thread, we won't be seeing more performance optimizations any time soon, this is probably our next best option to keeping new players in the game. Hopefully someone at UWE is taking note of these suggestions @hugh @SteveRock @flayra
I guess we didn't do a job of communicating this (apparently), but there is a basic interactive tutorial in there along with videos by...guess who? It'sSuperEffective! Yes, he made all the "tip videos" that are in there now.
More advanced tutorial levels to focus on things definitely would be cool, but yeah, at this point it needs to be up to the community and SamusDroid basically.
In psychology, the best way to actually learn something and improve is to actually do it yourself, applying experience and knowledge to a practical setting. Just as in a professional environment, actual first-hand experience is key rather than an instruction booklet/video telling you what to do. An instructional process that directly involves and places an individual in a practical and sometimes stressful situation is the most effective way in this regard. A video showing someone how to skulk hop is largely useless compared to an actual fleshed out tutorial in-game. This isn't the only variable at play I know but I can logically assume, it is a large confounding variable in player retention and teaching.
@coolitic I don't argue that there aren't any non-f2p multiplayer only games that are successful, what I specifically stated was shooters are going to have a harder time and although I didn't specify what type, I mean more competitive shooters like NS2. Most successful shooters particularly on PC that are successful and are multiplayer only like TF2, CS, etc are also funded and marketed by large developers or already have a large established legacy such as Quake Live or other variables such as ARMA2's success due to DayZ. How many indie studios do you know that are considered huge successes in regards to shooters of this model? I'm not saying NS2 is not a success, it already is as the development of SubNautica is evident of that but it certainly is not flourishing or growing at this point in time and from what I see, it is slowly dying.
Searching steam top 100, I can't find a single shooter there that is A) multiplayer only and
I'm not asking that NS2 become the next MOBA in terms of success but having a decent selection of servers, a continuously refreshing playerbase and not seeing those player numbers drop month after month might not be so depressing. I came from AvP2, never heard of NS1 before I found NS2 on steam (didn't bother much with HL mods) but the 1000 hours I've spent the past year and a half have been nothing short of amazing, I would just love this game to grow rather than slowly wither away.
I personally don't have much patience after instructing and 'dealing' with rookies during sales to the point where I just get burnt out and I just want an organised game, going F2P or sale day isn't my idea of having fun and certainly doesn't directly benefit me (terrible I know but I'm not rude to new players). I'm thinking long term but if F2P or a small marketing campaign that coincides with a free sale day/free weekend is something that can increase the games longevity at the expense of more hardcore and organised play? Sign me up.
I hope NS2 Combat Standalone is a great success, I would love indie paid multiplayer shooters to thrive and affect the market but I don't see it anywhere at the moment.
What people 'THINK' what is best for them sometimes (from a long-term and developer PoV) is not always what is best for them.