Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto just did an about-face on F2P, so now what?

Perhaps Nintendo's IP doesn't work well with F2P, but from a business perspective, F2P "seems the only way to go right now," says Dr. Serkan Toto.

[masterfox]

"F2P "seems the only way to go right now," says Dr. Serkan Toto." , ""The only really successful monetization angle for single-player games has, historically, been DLC and you can't make enough money on DLC spenders to make up a box cost"

^^^ Complete BS!!, historically really ? , oh ok let me see what DLC I downloaded when boughts FF VII, or DMC for the PS2, or MGS for the PS1 , or RE series from PS1 , Grant Turismo bought lots of cars in the PS1 right?, Marvel Vs Capcom 2 I bought lots of characters from DLC right ?, Uncharted 1 of the PS3 bought lots of things right?,...... BS!!!! , none of them had DLC cr@#p in it and were a total success, the issue here is that some developers want's to cash in quickly by releasing a mindless MP game just like Fortnite, or PUBG , instead of creating an immersive Single player experiences , one of the main issues here also is that developers are lacking imagination and vision to create Single player experiences like in the past so instead they choose the easy way and go for a MP only instead or F2P brainless games.

[jimbost79]

Agree with you totally mate. Why is there a need to make more money of a game other than sales? Its just pure greed.

[gangsta_red]

"Why is there a need to make more money of a game other than sales?"

Is this really a question? There's all different factors on why a game needs to make more money after an intial sale. One reason comes to mind of a games retail cost is much lower than development and there's no guarantee that sales of that game will re-coup the cost.

DLC, MTs and other GaaS type services also help a lot of devs fund the next project.

[gangsta_red]

"... what DLC I downloaded when boughts FF VII, or DMC for the PS2, or MGS for the PS1 , or RE series from PS1 , Grant Turismo bought lots of cars in the PS1 right?, Marvel Vs Capcom 2"

You're naming a lot of past games that didn't have nearly the cost of development that these current titles have and are in a much more agressive gaming market.

"...mindless MP game just like Fortnite, or PUBG , instead of creating an immersive Single player experiences ,"

PUBG and Fortnite are mindless? Why does every discussion like these seem to always devolve into some debate about MP vs SP? Especially when it could be argued that there are also mindless SP games as well as excellent MP games?

We have already seen a number of developers unable to keep up with today without trying their hand at MP, Housemarque and Bethesda automatically come to mind.

We have also seen a lot more developers rely strictly on well known IPs instead of bringing out new games (like in the past) because of brand recognition selling more.

[jimbost79]

Yes it really is a question. I remember playing games on all my early consoles. Take nintendo for example. On my nes, snes, n64 none of their games had any dlc or MTs. Yet nintendo managed to make a profit, survive and have enough money to develop further games. Without making more money after the initial sale. So how did they they do this without any dlc or MTs?
I can tell you how. They made great games that people wanted to buy. Full games, with no bullshit.
I get that devs like housmarqee who I also think make great games struggled to make a decent profit. But that's just the nature of business. Not every company can survive.
You're saying that company's knowingly make games that they know won't recoup the cost of development so add mts and dlc to help them make more money? Maybe some do, but those are primarily mp games and it doesnt work out for alot of them.
As far as sp games go. Imo there is 0 reason other than greed to charge the player more money for anything. Remember when alt costumes etc were just unlockable in game? When you didnt have to pay for it. Now some companies have seen this as a way to squeeze an extra few quid out of the player and thats bullshit.
Look at god of war. Full game no bullshit. Profit made. Could they add dlc and mts? Yes they could. Would it sell? Yes almost certainty. What would be the reason? To squeeze an extra few quid out of the player. Also known as greed.

So what are all these other factors that mean a dev has to make more money after the initial sale?
Like i said not all devs/games can be successful and some will go out of business even tho they made great games. But once again that's just the nature of any business.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Build quality games with no gimmicks with all included content for the game even free DLC expansions. Nuff said!

[porkChop]

I don't mind paying for proper expansions if they're done right.

[Servbot41]

The same Nintendo charging $279 for items in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp...