Don't Call Them Whales: F2P Spenders and Virtual Value

In this 2015 GDC session, Kongregate co-founder Emily Greer examines the game industry practice of building financial models based on large-spending users, and how attitudes toward spenders and spending shape the whole game industry -- not just free-to-play.
Join the GDC mailing list: www.gdconf.com/subscribe
Follow GDC on Twitter: / official_gdc
GDC talks cover a range of developmental topics including game design, programming, audio, visual arts, business management, production, online games, and much more. We post a fresh GDC video every day. Subscribe to the channel to stay on top of regular updates, and check out GDC Vault for thousands of more in-depth talks from our archives.

[@dud5606]

Dont call them whales because it might disinsentivize them from spending money in your exploitative virtual casino posing as a videogame.

[@robosergTV]

so like all F2P games in your opinion?

[@PrettyGuardian]

@@robosergTV Most of them thats for sure!

[@danielboi1869]

Same reason twitch banned the word 'simp' ?

[@chimichangle]

"If somebody spends again and again and again, they must feel that they are getting something of good value" Have you considered the possibility of sunkcost fallacy and disappointment from not receiving what you wanted from gacha. It's nice that you're trying to humanize the approach to designing around big spenders, but it really also feels like a defense for predatory practices in video games by rebranding.

[@chimichangle]

The comparison to ice skating and other real life hobbies is also moot if you don't address addiction. Is there anyone who's addicted to spending on ice skating? Are there gambling loot boxes in competitive running?

[@chimichangle]

I completely agree with providing good value with purchases however. I agree that gaming is a hobby, like ice skating or running or music, however the monetization models in games right now don't reflect that whatsoever, and the value that they provide are at a ridiculously low baseline that was standardized by greedy scumbags from the early days of monetization

[@tha-fresherson]

But these aren't compulsory purchases. Looking at the graphs, it's fairly evident that spenders across all commitments will spend steady amounts over time, not gamble it all away in a single go as you suggest. That's an indication that people are aware of their budget and how much they want to spend. If you and I are any indication of the average player, predatory practices in any free game would be enough to stop someone from even touching the game. I think it's insulting to assume that people are being so easily manipulated.

[@chimichangle]

@@tha-fresherson I have been manipulated into spending however. I had to quit those sorts of games and re-evaluate my relationship to a lot of them. They use things like community to peer-pressure and create a sense of obligation. They use things like leaderboards and rewards in tandem with bad game mechanics to incentivise competitive spending... The F2P landscape is a dangerous place that doesn't care about your personal budgeting.

[@chimichangle]

All I want honestly is for the in-game purchases to really be worth my money. For instance, I love Genshin Impact but I hate that the exchange rate for a single 5 star character is 160$

[@synged7160]

This shouldn't be common standard for our industry to prey on vulnerable people. Monetising mobile games to the point where 2% of the player base is supporting your studio production should be alarming.

[@GregHib]

Did you even watch the video? She clearly explained how the top spenders are not preyed on or vulnerable people and it's the same in all hobby industries whether that's sports, music or theater

[@synged7160]

@@GregHib no it isn't the same as those hobbies. This monetisation is simular to the skinner box experiment in which game mechanics "reward" virtual rewards the more actions and time the player puts into a game. The game then makes the rewards harder and harder to get "rewards" by making the actions take more time an effort. Monetisation is the nudge to skip all that and they prey on people with low patience, gambling addiction and the mentally ill and it works. Hobbies require a consistent state of practice and patience but you can't get better at something by throwing money at it. F2P games are rigged so that in order to progress is throw money at it.

[@GregHib]

​@@synged7160 "This monetisation", kongregate has 110,000 games with each developer handling monetisation differently. You can't just group them all into one and assume they're all the worst most predetory kind of F2P game. As she pointed out all of their top spenders are wealthy specilists with excess cash, they're not making money off of gambling addicts and mentally ill people. You can buy private lessons in every industry and on every topic imaginable to get better at any skill faster than if you didn't spend on it.

[@Garrette63]

@@GregHib Where is the proof that this is actually their market? I find it hard to believe that "wealthy specialists" are blowing hundreds of dollars a month on trashy mobile games.

[@GregHib]

@@Garrette63 You're free to believe whatever you like, she provided data from her website/platform (not mobile btw), if you don't think that's accurate then you should test your hypothesis by collecting your own data among large spenders. As trashy as you might think mobile games might be it's the biggest video game market now.

[@ilPrinni]

This talk is more: "What a whale is and here is why you shouldnt feel bad about using them." Edit: I dont agree with the points brought up. And this poorly explained why we shouldn't feel bad about it

[@joaocarlossantana3452]

exactly

[@randyh3761]

Also this woman should see someone about her figure skating addiction.

[@martinbalcarek4175]

So if I buy a computer hardware to be better at a game, it is the same as buying pay to win stuff? How? I can resell the PC hardware once I don't want to use it anymore and get quite a bit of my originally "invested" money back, I can't do that with digital goods. I am in control of that piece of HW and decide when I want to use it a how, I can even decide to just throw it out of the window if I so choose. For digital stuff? That is out my control, the game can shut down the next day or the goods I bought will get devalued by a patch the next Monday, I am not in control of the goods I buy, I don't own them, the game developer/publisher/platform owns them and they decide what I do with goods I bought. If that is not a conflict of interest and a massive hypocrisy I don't know what it.

[@cameronschiff132]

You can definitely sell digital goods on online markets if you wanted, or worst case scenario just sell the account. Also the risk of goods being devalued post-purchase is not unique to digital media

[@martinbalcarek4175]

@@cameronschiff132 Would you mind linking me to a mobile game that allows you to resell their virtual goods for money, or allows for an account trading? I'm not aware of a single one that allows this. To me, it's a difference between paying for a service and paying for goods. Digital goods have all the characteristics of a service.

[@cameronschiff132]

@@martinbalcarek4175 wait, why limit to mobile games?

[@robosergTV]

@@cameronschiff132 selling an account is against the TOS

[@xulip4]

Agreed. There is no game that I ever know that won't try and stop you from reselling their virtual content unless they get a cut like steam.

[@chairezpunx]

So, their bussines model depends on a really small group of highly addicted (but educated) people that spends 100+ dollar per month on free to play games that constantly implement addictive mechanics and psichology principles that encourage that kind of behavior, got it. Oh and, shure spending money on figure skating its the same as spending money on a F2P game (because a sport that requires physical equipment and access to actual buildings that require maintaining its the same as spending on digital goods that once created can be replicated to infinite and could have the price the developer wishes). Also I say this as a developer that believes in the idea of creating software and then just sell it, but that's just me.

[@robosergTV]

isnt it the same for all F2P games? Fortnite is making billions

[@corriehingston6744]

I know the tricks the developer plays to force us F2Ps to pay because we're not getting as many good items as the whales. I refuse to become those odd folk who think paying for a game is actually worth it

[@BobbyJ529]

my concern re: the value of spending in these f2p games is that you don't own anything of it. The company can close or you can get banned over something silly and you're SOL. On that alone, I can't see these games having same value as most other hobbies and forms of games.

[@tehphoebus]

And excellent and informative talk. It would be great to hear her input for the current day and age

[@RudyTheNinja]

This is why I'm not too happy about gaming getting so much spotlight All the greedy companies start coming out of the woodwork with predatory practices Just take a look at what happened to Roblox Kids bully each other for not having Robux (an in-game currency only attainable buy spending real money) All kids want are Robux, for Christmas, their birthdays, every time they play The company knows not to stop them from peer pressuring each other as well, it would make them less money

[@sertankutlu1731]

With even only with lots of great statistics in this talk, it is valuable, though it has more.

[@anagram]

OMG, She really wants to believe she is not in an exploitative industry. A slot machine is good because it enjoyable? A 5k computer is the same as buying digital goods that can be used in a single online game? I get that the experience of going to a show can be of the same quality as someone playing in an online tournament, but the F2P genre is MADE to make people spend as much as possible. wtf

[@tomsko863]

You touch on alot of very different points here. 1) Don't judge so harshly how and what people want to spend their disposable cash on. If gambling is what someone like to do to relax, then let them do it. Personally, I also do not understand the appeal of casino's, slot machines, Pachinko machines, etc. but 100's of millions currently (billions throughout history) seem to enjoy it. It makes no sense to me especially, when you look at it as a dollars per hours of enjoyment rate. But I am not that blind that I do not recognize that randomization (which is the heart of ALL gambling games) can be an enjoyable attribute in games. If that's random drops, bullet spread, or procedural generation. 2) This is a pretty large leap while the speaker only touched on this and didn't expand. The point was that value is different for different people. Go to the XBOX or PS5 forum and you will be ridiculed for wasting your money on 5k PC when you could get "much better games and quality from a console". I personally see spending more than $100 on a phone once every 5 years as a waste of money. Some people may find that spending money in a game as a good investment (not a monetary investment but a social and personal one). Value is a variable quantity. 3) There is always a "price of admission" to play a game, especially competitively. I also agree that it should be more transparent so players can know earlier on what will be needed to continue having a good time and that is NOT in the interest of the developer to divulge. I wish people were more conscious and honest with their feelings when engaging with products. That they would understand when they are just chasing the next high instead of really having fun. It's a complicated situation but exploring these things through dialog and education will make all of us more intelligent.

[@ollllj]

dont call them whales. call them easily addicted zombie cattle goose that lay golden eggs

[@tomsko863]

You can also call them fans. Would you also consider 20-50 year-old Star Wars/Marvel/DC/etc fans "easily addicted zombie cattle"? Even the most chill fan has spent well into the $100's on products, cosmetics and memorabilia. Because I could, easily. Any junk quality product with any of those IP's on it sells like hotcakes. I would say most of the consumer market exists because people are "easily addicted zombie cattle". Have a nice day!

[@Garrette63]

@@tomsko863 I bet those people have something physical for the money they've spent though. I bet they don't get bullied at school for not having an expensive Star Wars costume to wear. The amount of manipulation going on in these games is far above anything in physical retail and it's only allowed because video games is a mostly self-regulating market. That's going to change soon, the corporations are so predatory and damaging that governments are taking notice. Consider for a moment that lootboxes are allowed in E rated games but gambling is not, that's enough evidence alone.

[@tomsko863]

@@Garrette63 Small details here: 1) Poor argument: "Bet it's something physical" - Don't bet. Just because it's physical you think there's more value in it? And we are on a video game forum, so are all digital products not worth as much as a physical product? Especially since we are on a video game forum here where you don't physically own anything, you just pay for a limited, non-transferable license that is subject to change at any moment. Even if you do buy a DVD or cartridge of the game, you are not allowed to modify it or even share it. Regardless, who cares if the item is physical or not. You are putting your values on someone else. Don't judge so harshly how and what people want to spend their disposable cash on. If digital platforms is what someone likes to do to relax, then let them do it. 2) You "bet they don't get bullied"? Would you put money on that? I will happily take that bet. Now I know you are not thinking before typing. Kids are terrible animals and bully for any reason they want. That is Fortnite's entire business model: peer pressure to have popular animations, items and textures to "fit in" for the "easily addicted zombie cattle". And it is one of the most popular and profitable games of all time (at the time of this writing). Crux of the argument: You lost me because you are pushing your own hard line between what is and is not acceptable. You say that F2P games are doing "yada-yada-yada worse yada-yada evil yada-yada" but I feel that's because it's new. Maybe you don't remember the product placement in movies and TV when you bought that bag of Oreos or can of Coke. That bright blue box of Mac&Cheese looked so good but it always seems to taste like soggy noodles when you make it at home. The store layout, package/food colors, textures, sounds, packaging are all there to help sell the product but don't actually make the product any better. Marketing and Advertising is all about manipulation. But that's something that society has decided is acceptable. I wish people were more conscious and honest with their feelings when engaging with products. That they would understand when they are just chasing the next high instead of really having fun. It's a complicated situation but exploring these things through dialog and education will make all of us more intelligent.

[@izzyd885]

@@tomsko863 r/iamverysmart in a nutshell

[@corriehingston6744]

@@tomsko863 So an F2P who hasn't paid a single £ is not a fan? That's kinda what you're suggesting

[@randyh3761]

Why did this woman talk about a figure skating metaphor for 15 min.

[@Airwane]

slide share of this?

[@REXanadu]

It's scary how a 5-year-old talk about game monetization is not only so relevant to today, but how little has truly changed about the monetization models used and how big spenders are viewed by the majority of the industry. These issues seem like they've actively gotten worse. Politicians see these kind of models as dangerous enough to regulate, while games like Battlefield 2 and Gacha Simp Pact have shown how dangerous and uncaring these models can get. When a F2P game can recoup their production costs within the first week of the game's release, someone is ignoring how these games are able to get millions of dollars so quickly.

[@danielboi1869]

I wasn't even aware that this talk was that old, lol. Makes sense now, since kongregate is no longer relevant.

[@Hey_IMBM]

What she is trying to say when she refers to ice skating is that the video games are lazy replacement for hobby so they find it appropriate to milk their customers based on the avarage price that they would pay doing hobby or going to bar. Its a really cool way to push the people away from idea that prices should relate with a development cost. Just as a reminder one unique skin or skin set on freelance platforms cost from 3 $ up to 200 $ . You pay for it once and than resell it in your game for x hundred or thousands of times each time getting from 1$ up to 99 $ or 200$ . It doesn't feel like a fair price to me. I dont know why no government in the world try to regulate this nonsense.

[@ThePuzzleExpert]

hey i'm a game developer who also has problems with the free to play model but "development cost" is a really woolly thing and if game developers were actually getting paid the full value of their work then games would be a lot more expensive all around. delegitimizing games as a hobby doesn't help any of us on the player or developer end and paints gamers as uniquely susceptible to being manipulated.

[@LinoWalker]

1. None of the other industries she talks about rely on whales the same way F2P games do. Yes, there are SEGMENTS within those industries that do, but not nearly to the extent of F2P games. 2. When you buy a figure skating costume who is the owner of that costume? Can the seller take it away from you after you've bought it? When you pay for skating hours, can the skating rink take them away from you without giving you your money back? Because in F2P games, you don't own any of the items you buy. On the very next day the company can roll out a balance patch that makes your items useless. They can close down their servers, and everything you've ever owned in that game will be gone. Thanks to the EULA's you agree to, they are not obligated to give back even a cent. Also, when you pay $1000 for a golf club, is there a chance that the seller will take that $1000 and give you a club that costs $10? No? Because if he does, any single court in the world will rule that that was illegal, and a dick move at that. But that's exactly what lootboxes and gacha games do. And it's totally legal. 3. What sort of value are you getting for your thousands of dollars, exactly? Because doing sports, practicing instruments, etc. have a number of health benefits associated with them. What are the health benefits of lootboxes, exactly? What benefits are you giving your players for these thousands of dollars? Because health and ownership definitely aren't it. 4. I also love the subtle way she's trying to normalize whale exploitation. It started with equating it with hoobies like skating and overclocking, and in the end she started talking about games as art, and games being taken more seriously. Whst a masterclass in bullshitting this is!

[@HotMuffin328]

not the best take. Have you ever tried selling a used Golf Club? I literally made more money on a CS Go butterfly knife ($300) I got from a lootbox than I did from selling my used clubs. And at least I didn't have to pay every time I wanted to play a game with my knife like I did when I wanted to go to the course. Just like a f2p game, the value of any specialized item you buy is tied to the activity associated with it.

[@LinoWalker]

@@HotMuffin328 CS:GO is one of the very, very few games that allow you to resell items you buy. The majority of F2P games don't let you do that. The only option you have is to sell your account. Which - again - would be useless if the game's servers shut down. Or if the devs introduce a patch that makes your items useless. Which they can do at any time.

[@Nettacki]

This surely hasn’t aged well

[@imakefun8639]

In what way? Mobile games are now an 80B a year business globally. Played by hundreds of millions of people around the world. Bigger than ever! Totally makes sense if you're not a gamedev and you don't understand this stuff though. Understanding how the sausage is made isn't always easy.

[@rohitaug]

Gamedev is not about making money. You lost your way.

[@imakefun8639]

rohitaug I never said it was about making money. I was emphasizing that the industry is bigger than ever. Free to play game players aren’t victims. They’re rational people who make their own choices. If something is a rip off or doesn’t provide fun or value, people won’t play it and certainly won’t pay for it. People vote with their wallets in free to play games more strongly than any AAA games. There’s zero obligation to spend money and all the expectation to provide a great enjoyable experience.

[@Garrette63]

@@imakefun8639 Many of them are victims. If these tactics are ethical and fine than why has gambling been so heavily regulated? Why is anything regulated? If people can make the decisions that are best for them and everyone is a healthy, rational person then why do we need any regulation at all? Because in reality, everyone is different and many of these people absolutely are victims because these systems are intentionally designed to prey on them.

[@robosergTV]

@@rohitaug gamedevs need to eat and pay the rent too, like any other people

[@nickfuckface1444]

Nope

[@mathildep2272]

Really great talk. It seems even more relevant today as more and more games adopt a F2P business model not just on mobile but also PC and console. The beauty of it is that most players are getting to play great games like Fortnite, Apex Legends, Genshin Impact, etc. for free. And thinking of games as hobbies helps explain the longevity of games like Clash of Clans, still going strong after 8 years.

[@jasklisto]

*looks up Brian Boitano song from South Park*

[@lexbaldwin5613]

Games' monetizer's conference

[@KugleeKuglee]

nope She only talked about data without any tips.

[@ioda006]

Nearly every comment here is full of ignorance and shortsightedness. This is an absolutely fascinating insider view of business models and gamer psychology. Incredible that the information was shared publicly. Thank you

[@hendazzler]

Gamestop owns kongregate!

[@LinoWalker]

Turns out that as of 2017, they don't :/ At least according to Wikipedia.

[@polymakegames]

This talk tanks at about 30mins in. Great up to that point though.

[@jacob-2271]

I feel like the figure skating analogy doesn't work. Generally i'd say this is because they are two different things but that doesnt describe it properly. I think it's because skating actually provides something to your life. Skill progression in skating and progression in a game aren't comparable. I don't care what you say a free to play game can never give you the same fundamental fufilment in life an actual hobby can provide. If i was good at figure skating a could say the money helped me progress to be better at skating where in a free to play game it would definitely be clearer to say the money is your progression. I also don't think skates for instance come in mystery boxes and you open the box and the skates could be worth anything in there. Whether is the shittiest skates in the world or the most perfect skates that let you beat evetyone I would bet that most big spenders in anything generally have something wrong with them. Especially when your development costs are being sustained by such a small percentage of your population. I sure figure skating as a whole isnt sustained by 1-5 percent of the figure skater spenfing decisions And the music ticket thing mentioned for 1500 for the hotel room premium acess to purchase merch and a the chance to meet the band sounds like something someone who is mentally ill would think is a good idea unless they have all the disposable income in the world or going to concerts is their hobby which id still attribute to some kind of mental defficency. Everything is designed to be exploitative because exploitive means more profit so just play it straight or tone it down for moral reasons I personally would rather have a new console game than 25 premium mobile games

[@ChaseCares]

This was a really thoughtful talk and I found it very interesting.

[@tha-fresherson]

This was a wonderful talk. Really eye opening to see how these kinds of games manage to function despite public perceptions.

[@asdfjklo234]

This very much explains why many modern games are what they are. It's not one gamer, one vote, it's more like one dollar, one vote. It's what brought us the abomination of Battlefront II. Of course it doesn't help calling out people's compulsive spending habits if you want to keep the sweet monetary drip from whales flowing. The speaker conveniently omits the fact that unlike in figure skating, video games increasingly employ covert algorithms designed to manipulate you into spending more. I fail to see how figure skating hooks into the psychology of gambling the way many games do. Numerous recent patents of publishers in that regard show to what lengths they are prepared to go in order to boost spending. wccftech.com/ea-matchmaking-algorithm/ Maybe if games were open source, consumers could take a look at the complete game mechanics and decide whether it's fair and worth playing.

[@qgamer2266]

don't call them whales, call them gods

[@corriehingston6744]

Gods? Not when they're arrogant because they apparently have higher prestige etc

[@vans2548]

We live in a society. Maybe back then they didn't intentionally design to monetize, but nowadays, heavens help your psyche and sanity. Now we have NFTs and the value of virtual goods is being exposed.

[@NikeGipple]

When a GDC video has half the positive votes and half the negative ones, it means that it is a video that tells a very important truth.

[@antonskor8127]

Your comment is the biggest brained one so far on this video. “I’m in the middle so it must be good” looking ass

[@GregHib]

Great talk, it's a shame the majority of viewers and commenters here won't apprieciate that a healthy human being can choose to spend $1000 on a game of their own free will and it be okay. I see a lot of anger, bitterness and resentment in the comments which has nothing to do with the speaker or talk at all.

[@findingliospugolini8979]

So you’re saying that if we had a random selection of people who had spent $1000 dollars on a game and had to take bets on whether they were healthy or not, you’d bet that they WERE? That bitterness didn’t just materialize out nowhere; as an ex-gacha gamer I feel MUCH happier now that I’ve dropped that stuff. Not everyone who gets into that can say the same. It’s not ABOUT the people who CAN safely spend lots of money on these games, it’s about concern for the people who DON’T have that self-control/resources.

[@GregHib]

​@@findingliospugolini8979 ​ No we don't need to take bets, she already said the top 40 highest payers on her platform were poliet seemingly normal healthy individuals, specialists in their fields who have excess cash to spend. Yes there's no doubt preditory games out there that profit soley off addiction but that's not what this video is about. It's a developer conference where she's shared her companies data on it's players and her opinion on why the industry should be treating players better and not like fish to lure and catch. How is the industry going to change when people are hating on those trying to improve it?

[@findingliospugolini8979]

@@GregHib well, the industry kinda already HAS changed. This talk was done in 2015. And maybe I shouldn’t be bashing the point at this time since it won’t change much, but the ability to spend real money on in-game benefits (which to many will feel like achievements) is addicting. A company doesn’t HAVE to make the transactions manipulative, it has to HAVE them. Even if it’s not exploitative, some (kids especially) have been shown to lack the self control needed to use their money responsibly. It’s just hard to be okay with the practice, even done responsibly, when others are just as free to do those same practices irresponsibly. I know I shouldn’t be ragging on about this, and a 6-year old talk archive isn’t a place to spread modern opinions, but that “micro transactions are the future” mentality is what got us here.

[@GregHib]

@@findingliospugolini8979 Yeah I don't disagree with any of that, but it's not like micro transactions are bad or could've been avoided it's the way in which some companies are currently allowed to do them which people have an issue with. And most of the time that's down to one or two of the largest publishers

[@Bornoftheimpure]

@@GregHib Sadly its pretty reductivist to say its "down to one or two of the largest publishers" Its not, not at all. These business practises are done by plenty companies, and warrant legitimate discussion regardless of how many companies do it because it doesn't exist in a bubble. Plenty other folks and companies will see whats going down and will "do what works"

[@tugger]

yes, let's assume most whales actually spend money and don't trade for items. the lack of nuance and economic sense in this is mind-boggling. As a former "whale" in a few markets, the financials are inverse and you can expect to /make/ hundreds to even thousands a month by having a good sense about it. This talk describes 'whales' as the people who try hard and spend hard to be "like" whales, the "nouveau riche" within their respective game world. These are fake whales. These people don't trade and comprehend market dynamics so they buy their way in. I really want the 'academic video game' discourse to evolve and gain a foothold but this is just plain inaccurate. There is a big problem with behavioural shaping when it comes to interactive media and purchases, but this discussion is so far off the mark it just further degrades the credibility of institutions such as Kongregate.

[@tugger]

And don't come at me with 'you're just a sexist gamer' I'm a woman. This is baloney. This is nonsense.

[@jiribem9845]

header should been more like "How to develop gacha games and be ok with it". No matter what its old and outdated anyway

[@eisobakamono410]

Thank you for posting this. I was there and possibly hungover...now I can share w/ my design team

[@antondegroot6061]

13:33 20 sessions a day. That must be casuals playing some silly crap game. Real gamers play 1 session a day. Real gamers and real games is not what this video is about though.

[@ossie200]

yes. How can the people who run these companies take themselves seriously. they make garbage

[@DingoAteMeBaby]

Do all the dislikers think business is a moral enterprise?

[@findingliospugolini8979]

Even if they did understand that, they’re still allowed to dislike it

[@DingoAteMeBaby]

@@findingliospugolini8979 I dont see anything in the comment above about "allow"

[@findingliospugolini8979]

@@DingoAteMeBaby oh thx let me clarify; they can absolutely think that many business ethics are shitty, and voice their displeasure by disliking the video. Some might’ve realized those shitty ethics, some maybe not. But whether they did, did not, or even still don’t realize that business ethics are often cruddy, it has nothing to do with whether they disliked the video or not.

[@Garrette63]

No, most people simply dislike predatory business practices. Seems pretty straightforward.

[@Bornoftheimpure]

Does this imply that all the likers think business is an immoral practise?