Monetization Madness - How Games Make Money - Extra Credits

[@extrahistory]

Sign up to Morning Brew for free today bit.ly/mbextracredits2

[@jetcraneboyd4278]

I want to play Mortal Wombat.

[@gursimarsingh5505]

I suggest that you should try to make more videos and episodes and give more knowledge in the art that you used in Vienna bombardment tunnels etc those episodes and the one of Boston massacre. That kind of art, that liked that. That makes the episodes more entertaining.

[@LucenProject]

Is get paid via patreon or like platform throughout game development and maybe put out occasional updates to show progress a type of monetization?

[@whiterabbit47]

Heh, Polybius. I see what you did there

[@tomsko863]

You forgot about "product placement" like in Death Stranding. I don't know why but today's video was very difficult to follow. Listing things for 6 minutes straight does that.

[@plewelly]

You guys mentioned that the choice of monetization methods influences design decisions, but I'd love to hear more about HOW the choice influences design designs. What can you not do if you decide to have lootboxes? What must you do if you plan to have expansions and DLCs?

[@jonnunn4196]

For small content based DLC - such as Civ 5/6 civilizations , wonders, map packs, you'd run into a break wall if the code doesn't have sufficient modularization. Major expansions though even though they are also now typically released as DLC typically involve things that will change the underlying model or in the case of Paradox, the associated free patch update does that while the new content is modularized.

[@Hauntaku]

@@jonnunn4196 But extra maps shouldn't be forced onto players if they are rushed or broken because that code had to be added into the base game for everyone and ended up bugging the early maps.

[@NightHawk8P]

This is what I thought this episode was going to be about.

[@davidaugustofc2574]

What suffers the most is the design when More and More Characters are added every update

[@shawnheatherly]

I'm not against any monetization forms in general but I will always prefer just being able to pay up front for the entire experience.

[@aquamarinerose5405]

I agree for the mostpart, though also greatly prefer my Multiplayer games to be FTP over Premium. Mostly because multiplayer games in general feel a lot more hit or miss for me, and the ability to try out a shooter or a MOBA or a fighting game and only give them money when I decide I like the game enough is nice.

[@thinkinggrin165]

@@aquamarinerose5405 Well there is also play 2 hours etc.

[@snaiper195]

And i like craking them

[@KingSlimjeezy]

oh hohohoh thats not how the game works anymore at any level. Even geopolitical

[@Nerdnumberone]

But how much are you willing to spend for that? There was another Extra Creditz video that suggested that, going by inflation, a AAA game should have a base price significantly higher than the $60 people expect. Also, what do you think about expansion-size DLC? That is ongoing monetization, but you get a complete experience when you buy the base game (or at least you *should*). I suppose if we're talking about an older game, you can get a bundle deal with all of the DLC on Steam or a similar digital distribution platform, but you end up dishing out $80-$100+ or so for your complete game.

[@maxgustafsson7802]

Must say I kind of hoped for a deeper dive on this one. Really you only mentioned types of monetization without really mentioning anything about how the experience of players or income for developers/publishers is affected. Extra Credits courts an audience interested in game design, and I think anyone even remotely interested in games already knew of these concepts. If it is a matter of time constraints then I think cutting the time spent explaining what each method is would have been useful, or perhaps the history lesson, as it was too brief to touch on anything particularly revelatory. Just "We used to pay quarters, then we bought games, now there are many methods!" Which I think anyone watching was already aware of.

[@erockandroll39]

I somewhat disagree. Even though I knew the basics, I didn't know the difference between a battle pass vs season pass, or that an extension was different from a dlc. But sufficient to say, an ongoing game will benefit more from on going monetization. (Almost anything multiplayer that requires servers ) But any single player game with an emphasis on the story mode will benefit most from the premium model. (Maybe adding bonus stories in DLC.)

[@Hauntaku]

@@erockandroll39 Yeah, the small things are meant to overcomplicate at bash you constantly over the head to confuse you into forgetting how much money things cost when monetization is involved. Pokemon Unite has a ton of in-game currency to confuse players and make them just buy the "best" option and even then it's not enough currency to get a big item. There's an outfit that costs like $15! Absurd.

[@takatamiyagawa5688]

This seems about the standard depth for something produced by Extra Credits, and you can figure out some of the implications of each monetization method on your own anyway. As much as EC attempts to categorize everything, sometimes, the dividing lines are blurred. "Battle pass" seems like a minor variation on "subscription with benefits".

[@bombomos]

As most of these videos. It's never an actual deep time into fixing problems

[@ryanhancock5837]

Destiny 2's monetization seems to be like everything else in the game, randomly trying new things to see what sticks.

[@Jimera0]

good thing the base gameplay is fun as hell

[@RedEye761]

Well, my good sir, that is how we design games though this process is usually happening behind closed doors, so you don't know about them and the magical perfect game you see before you appear. apparently, Destiny 2 missed the memo to close that door LMAO

[@LuximosTG]

@@RedEye761 Ah, but what a rollercoaster! It's playing a triple A game with a perfect gameplay loop, but the content instability and dynamically shifting ideas of early access.

[@awesomedez]

Y’all forgot about sponsored advertising. Sports games are notorious for this.

Isn't that just advertising?

[@Artista_Frustrado]

i mean that's kinda in the "it's free but with ads" category

[@AkaiAzul]

Didn't Street Fighter do this?

[@Hauntaku]

@@AkaiAzul Street Fighter is fine because they don't try to rob you.

[@insaincaldo]

Death Stranding comes to mind.

[@NoobkinWolfy]

Sea of Thieves is an interesting one. It's a Premium Game, but had microtransactions added later for cosmetics, then recently added Seasons with it's own Battle Pass (named the "Plunder Pass). Funny thing with their Battle Pass, is you get more from completing the season than from the pass itself, but the pass does offer some very high quality items, which then get added to the store for microtransactions later (though it's cheaper to get the pass than buy all of them individually, but at least you get the option, which is better tbh).

[@retts75]

That and the fact they only sell cosmetics so you never sit there getting your head kicked in because someone paid and you didn't

[@digitalhermit8928]

This is why I mostly play retro games. I just hate the constant grasping for my wallet after I paid for a product

[@TealWolf26]

There's also the time honored "I'm the only employee of my company and can choose what my paycheck is. Everyone else is a contractor that I make sign borderline criminal NDAs and offer no benefits to. Then I just cash out whenever the water gets too hot and pull my golden parachute."

[@Dramatic_Gaming]

For premium games, dlc is still the best way to go for me. Keep microtransactions as far away as possible from them. For free-to-play, cosmetic and QoL microtransactions are likely ideal, and maybe occasional ads as long as they aren't excessive. Battle passes can be okay in either one, but I prefer the stuff being directly buyable instead. Also, if you implement battle passes, 1)make progress for them count from *all* game modes, not just specific ones, and 2) make premium progress retroactive for players who get the pass late. As for lootboxes... nope, throw them off a fucking cliff.

[@suicune2001]

I second this.

[@TheProfessi0nal115]

Lootboxes like Overwatch are fine IMO. The problem with them is when you have games like Call of Duty that have pay to win mechanics.

[@SuperFlamethrower]

Season pass and DLC are the same...right? You pay money and access additional game content. Season pass is not to be confused with the similar-sounding battle pass.

[@Hauntaku]

@Dramatic You give an inch and they'll take a mile! Don't dare try to protect the big companies who rob players.

[@P51mus]

@@TheProfessi0nal115 No, they still prey on people with gambling problems/impulse control issues. My friend that had to stop playing genshin because of the gacha also had a history where he spent a ridiculous amount of money on overwatch lootboxes, among other things.

[@derrickstorm6976]

Problem is the shareholders who don't care about anything else than improving quarterly reports

[@warmachineuk]

Indeed. They forget video games are a luxury. Please the customer or they walk away and never look back. I say a number of publishers have gained our ire and deserve to have dire sales figures.

[@BrenGamerYT]

Games have become such a large industry that many of them are being made by accountants rather than people who actually like games.

[@blaster915]

Sad to see how lootboxes have been abused... It was shown years ago when you first covered them on this channel a very wholesome way to implement them. But the industry has dived headfirst the opposite way for cruel predatory approach. :(

[@lessonslearned2569]

They were always abusive.

[@Nostripe361]

@@lessonslearned2569 I can be fine with ones for like a gatcha game but the game needs to have a fair chance to get rare characters/items and an at least manageable way to get free in game currency while just playing the game.

[@Artista_Frustrado]

they were never a Good idea that wasn't designed to be "Diet Gambling"

[@piteoswaldo]

I think the only acceptable way to do lootboxes is if the rewards are only cosmetics, or at least completely optional not affecting the fundamentals of the game.

[@Artista_Frustrado]

@@piteoswaldo "just cosmetics" is also part of the experience, so hard pass on that

[@xaviarsly]

you speak of this stuff like these companies actually pay their developers.

[@Hauntaku]

The indie devs usually care about their employees but this is about monetization schemes so it's only talking about the big dogs in the industry and not the cute little puppies you really want to take home with you.

[@naufalaushaf4784]

Hi EC, you have talked a lot about making games more accessible, it would be nice if you also make your videos more accessible. Closed captioning is an important accessibility device for people with limited hearing abilities. Even simply releasing your transcripts as an online document would help a lot :)

[@SenshiSunPower]

The automatic captions think this video is in Korean.

[@peckz.]

Fr

[@DTFauxClassic]

One very interesting attempt at the Free-to-Play/Free-to-Start concept was Rusty's Real Deal Baseball on the 3DS. It was a series of baseball mini games where majority of them were locked behind a paywall. But what made it stand out was that you'd earn items and tickets in-game that would then be used to lower the real world price of those mini games you'd pay real world money for. So, while the impatient could just pay full price for all the mini games, the game's design and narrative was very much built around bargaining and haggling for the lowest prices possible. Of course, it was all designed where Nintendo would still be walking out with *some* money, but it was such an interesting experiment at the time.

[@Dogbehu]

"KZbin premium allows you to skip ads" Great! "This video was sponsored by MorningBrew" Great...

[@knightlon]

But you can easily skip the MorningBrew part...

[@Darasilverdragon]

1:40 You think you're slick with that Polybius reference I see you. Also let's not forget Warframe: Free to play, with the ability to pay for most things, but also the ability to earn any non-cosmetic (and many cosmetics as well) in the game without payment

[@davidhueso]

I knew someone will get that ;D

[@Darasilverdragon]

@@davidhueso You've doomed us all! Now the references will follow us everywhere...

[@ReleeSquirrel]

Huh, you didn't mention good olde Shareware, where the game is free but asks for money with no requirements, or the modern Patron Supported games, where you pay for the game before it's made and then it's free when it's done.

[@kitrana]

this is my preferred way to be honest. and there's a few games i've been patreoning for years now. i am happy to give these games way more then 60 bucks in the end.

[@AynenMakino]

"...helps illustrate how many options games have to support their creators". This sentense beautifully illustrates how devs are trying to get their revenue from the game itself, rather than it's player. In this design-focus, the game does a thing by which it gathers money from gamers, and then the game passes that money onto someone else. But if the design focus was devoid of the game needing to do that thing, by any means at all, then they can focus on something else as a source of money, like the player directly. A player either wants to spend money on a game, or they want to spend money on a dev. They aren't the same thing psychologically. And very importantly, a destributor doesn't get a cut from it. This radically changes the relationship between distributor and gamer, dev and gamer, and lastly it changes the relationship between devs and their own games.

[@RorikH]

Isn't that just how all products work? If you sell a hot dog, the man pays for the hot dog, not for the sake of supporting the hot dog merchant. Do you mean everything should be free and developers should just hope players give them money? I'm not saying all gamers wouldn't, but that's not a great business model when you've got 500 employees and a 200 million dollar budget.

[@iam2ku4u]

The spirit of Sterling screams over the horizon.

[@blake-81]

And he screams "SURPRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISE!! I AM A SURPRISE MECHANIC!!! BLBLBLBLBLBLBLBLBLBLBL!!" :P

[@SarahAndreaRoycesChannel]

@@blake-81 And they do so on the slide at 3:11 (Big Chungus)

[@ConManAU]

I like the model that Nintendo used for a few games like Pokémon Picross - the game was free to download and you used in-game currency to unlock content. You got a smattering of it one time, but your could also buy it for real money, in amounts up to and including the total you’d need for the entire game. And IIRC it scaled as you bought it, so there was always an upper limit to how much you’d have to pay, which was about the amount the game would have costed as a premium title in the first place.

[@RainEls]

5:58 I think there's a way to please all players though: make a complete game with fair price, dlc as extension not cut content. But that'd probably mean less money for the publisher.

[@RorikH]

To be fair most big AAA games and a lot of indies still work like this. The system has not completely gone to hell, even though it's definitely racking up some sins.

[@takatamiyagawa5688]

Everyone has different expectations as to what a fair price for extra content is, and whether something belonged in the base game.

[@Hauntaku]

Remember back when games didn't try to rob you at every possible moment? But in all seriousness, there's still some games with integrity out there that won't try to rob you blind. Most of the good games out there are indie titles that are well worth the price tag! Indie games don't usually have DLC but if they do then the DLC is always a bonus instead of content that should've been there day one.

[@jasonreed7522]

Also, surprisingly Minecraft (and Terraria) are examples of premium only for all updates / important content. Now of course Microsoft has since added ingame transactions and a marketplace that can get you alot of interesting premade cosmetic stuff, but none of that has any real impact on the game, like you don't have to pay to get caves and cliffs or redstone. (I don't know if Java has the marketplace but Bedrock has it and it does have free user made content which is the closest to mods console can get)

[@GK_GAMES]

you mean arcade games? the thing that where designed like the claw games? whose design filtered on early console games like early megaman?

[@caseyb1346]

Yeah I remember when I could just pay 50 bucks and get a whole, complete game.

[@CoralCopperHead]

@@GK_GAMES Nail on the head. Games have always been about making money first and foremost -- there was just an extended period where the people making them also loved playing them enough to forgo some easy money. Barely.

[@trevinbeattie4888]

Personally I prefer the up-front payment, with the option to buy expansions; though my current game addiction is subscription based after a free trial period (WoW). But more important to me is having the ability to play games off-line - no forced updates, no loss of the game if the server is down or my Internet connection is disrupted.

[@rogerproductionz4926]

Anyone else see the duck at 1:16

[@illegalprime3626]

I generally lean toward premium games, however free to play games with small amounts of microtransactions are usually ok. I play a lot of roblox stuff and the way monetization works there is you can play games, and buy additional content or currency etc. Of course every developer is different but I rarely find any really preditory microtransactions there. One of my favorite games is Train Sim World, where you buy DLC by the content piece, and all of them are independent of each other. Though if you own certain routes and trains, they can add to the experience on other pieces of content. The base game comes with 3 routes which can theoretically be changed anytime. I think this model works well especially in tandem with frequent sales on steam. Some routes have been distributed on season passes as well and individually, which is pretty cool as you can save a large amount of money.

[@wickerbotterthewizard707]

Offline/non multi-player games typically thrive with premium Monetization, It's hard to imagine paying a subscription to a game that doesn't need constant updates or additions. Even with online multi-player games, imagining a subscription to play the game, or play the game as intended, seems a bit sleazy considering you technically lose money for every day you buy into the game but play another game instead. Free to Play games with microtransactions that mostly don't effect direct gameplay and mostly make $ via cosmetics seems like an ideal for MMOs. This however is all on the basis that your game library is curated by the player, and not that you buy a subscription to gain access to a whole library of games like a game pass. A game pass might seem attractive if all the games offered are themselves made for a subscription model, or the game pass unlocks content that would save the player $ if that player only wanted to play that content once but didn't care about owning the game forever. Another reason why subscriptions to individual games seems sleazy, is that some titles will charge a subscription cost comparable to paying for game pass that grants access to multiple games and might be a gateway to playing new games players might not have considered playing before. The primary drawback of a game pass is that customers typically lose access to those games once they stop paying, and some games exit the game pass library never to be seen again. However on the game production side, a game is free to be much more risk taking and different from other games if the creators make the game for a game pass. Since the player doesn't pay a premium price to play these risk taking games, the player is much more likely to try it at least once and come back to play more if the game was fun to play. And yeah loot boxes are straight up gambling, those can choke and fall off a cliff.

[@probablythedm1669]

I say yeet all the predatory ones, meaning all the ones relying on the fear of missing out and manipulating the player by making the game a worse experience without them and so on. They only harm the players, the games, and the medium as a whole, while grossly enriching publishers at the cost of real harm to people. It's awful and I don't buy games like that. Meaning... I buy very few games.

[@Failway-]

1:33 Great attention to detail. As someone who grew up in the ass end of the arcade era, we used to say "I play winner" and put you quarter on the cab under the screen. When 3rd strike came out there was no more space for quarters every day lol.

[@blbernak]

You didn't cover "Collector's Edition" merchandise bundles.

[@TealWolf26]

And the infamous Ubisoft spreadsheets.

[@Merennulli]

Wouldn't that just be a form of premium?

[@blbernak]

@@TealWolf26 Infamous and iconic.

[@TheTrueWanderCat]

I remember playin Fire Emblem Heroes loving the game and trying to save orbs for characters. Playing the game to earn orbs or saving my actual money to get spend on the game. Only to be constantly disappointed when I never got the characters I wanted. After a while I was like: what’s the goddamn point. While I can’t bring myself to delete the app I haven’t played the app for a year.

[@GK_GAMES]

2 names Azur Lane Dragalia Lost As a full F2P player on both, i only ever missed on like 4 characters on AL and while DL is more random there hasn't been a point where i can't progres because a lack of a character. There are games that are fun to play but have from bad to horrible gacha (like genshin or fatego) then there are games that are somewhat simple (like azur) but you keep playing them because the gacha is generous/have ways to guarantee gacha drops

[@FedoraKirb]

@@GK_GAMES Despite Dragalia’s ABYSMAL 5-Star Rate, you can get away with not spending a cent thanks to how generous the devs are with Wyrmite (the free currency), and how most endgame can be cleared without the absolute strongest characters. Not to mention CyGames finally implemented sparking last year (which imo should be a LEGAL REQUIREMENT for any game that implements randomized rewards for real world money).

[@JMcMillen]

It's funny that there are people that complain about microtransactions that also wish the Oasis from Ready Player One was real. Yet the Oasis was pretty much a F2P game world filled with microtransactions all over the place. Not just cosmetic stuff but plenty of gameplay and quality of life things as well. It's only touched on in the movie, when Parzival had to skim coins for fuel, but is more heavily talked about in the early chapters of the book.

[@matthewhager270]

I like games with expansions. Even if the expansions aren't good, they give creators something to hone in their craft for the next game in the series.

[@scarredchild]

Years ago, I was sick for a few months, so I played 'The Sims 3' almost non-stop. That game has micro-transactions that used website currency, web currency that could be accessed by watching ads, loot-boxes that you got from paying medium to large amounts of money, loot-boxes that triggered when you pulled a handle every so often, daily deals for loot, and both DLC and expansions that use real money. I love the "game" part of the game, but I have a violent reaction to it because of how it ran its monetization.

[@darkally1235]

The other important factor that developers (and publishers) must consider are the costs related to the game. The premium model was sufficient for a traditional offline single player games, but for modern multiplayer online games there is a cost which is incurred each time a player plays the game. Ongoing costs means there must be an ongoing revenue stream (which is hopefully sufficient to cover those costs, e.g. Glitch).

[@shadowscribe]

A lot of these can be used in equal parts for good or ill depending on the design (except lootboxes, get those out of gaming asap) They left out the many flavors of premium games with multiple versions, each more premium than the last and/or preorder bonuses akin to Day 1 DLC around a core experience. At their best, the value is consistently increasing, so you can tell neatly what you're getting. At worst is a deliberately random selection of boons that require a spreadsheet to map out what each has, because what they REALLY want is you to buy the biggest bundle that just has everything.

[@Interesting_Failure]

Another thing that's worth mentioning is games that are free but have either an option to donate to the developer or an option to pay any amount for the game. These are by far the least reliable monetization models, and I believe are mostly seen on small projects where income from the game is not a necessity for whatever reason (hobby game, person or people have sufficient revenue from other games, etc)

[@darter9000]

Ah yes-I remember that video-even without hindsight, I knew their views had a core problem-they assumed any sense of ethics or responsibility in the gaming industry.

[@MythrilShotgun]

Yeah, I saw the title of this vid pop up after months of not watching EC (Due in large part to said initial video actually) and wondered if they'd address their previous stance on the matter. One I would simply put was "Dumb as hell."

[@Chris.Cook.]

Just wanted to say to the artist, David Hueso: I see and appreciate that Polybius reference, my dude.

[@davidhueso]

Thanks! It was my pleasure :D Always happy to add extra refs here and there and see how long it takes for the viewers to see em!

[@UrbaneOracle]

Your animations are so good! I loved the Hitchhiker's Guide and Polybius references!

[@ElLorenzoMagnifico]

Oh MY GOD! MORTAL WOMBAT! That's gotta be a Dungeons and Daddies Reference!!

[@davidhueso]

Actually no , that was just my brain being stupid while drawing this episode :D

[@Freekymoho]

Lawful good: premium game with expansions and meaningful dlc Lawful evil: FTP game with microtransactions Chaotic evil: premium game with microtransactions and/or a subscription

[@JMcMillen]

You do know that the Oasis from Ready Player One is a FTP game world filled with microtransactions? Not sure I'd call them Lawful Evil.

[@Freekymoho]

@@JMcMillen arent the people running the oasis the enemy in that book? In either case; microtansactions are inherently evil, but its lawful because they're atleast following the "rules" by being ftp

[@pyroicarus1203]

Regardless of monetization method, I don't believe games should charge us for content that exist within a games data. Is this almost impossible to do with online games since every user has to have the same codes to play with one another? What is this type of paid content called, and what do ya'll think will happen if it's ban?

[@IANOYTYK]

Very surprised the Sims franchise wasn't mentioned. Especially since they've recently updated their offerings to include "kits", in addition to the multiple sizes of DLC.

[@ten.seconds]

The rhythm game Cytus has DLC song packs, but every million download they release the oldest one for free so that everyone can play them. I never see any player get upset about it since the seasoned players usually have all 10 packs bought already and their attention would be on the newest pack. I love how this generates hype and good PR while technically just lowkey ripping off DLC players.

[@silentxshadow888]

There's also episodic games, which allow you to purchase chunks of a game at a time, at your own pace.

[@davidkelly4210]

I like free to play with a subscription option for extra content and COSMETIC only microtransactions that let you look cool but can be ignored without effecting gameplay.

[@TheLordDracula]

I love the model of either paying outright for the game, or paying to remove adds.

[@ZachariahNelson]

Veteran Guardian here, D2 monetization is fine. $60 yearly major expansion/contraction, 4 season passes each yearly update that has a free and a $10 paid tier, and a premium currency to buy cosmetics. All in all it's at least $100 a year to play all the content, but you can save $20 by buying the Deluxe Edition of the yearly expansion, that includes the 4 seasons. The latest outlier is the 30th anniversary bundle coming out in December for $30 that has it's own content.

[@kevind814]

Once upon a time I paid up to $60 for a PC game, but was fine cause I had all I needed to play and win. Games that are pay to win don't deserve a penny from me.

[@Game_Hero]

1:38 OBEY

[@warmachineuk]

When microtransactions were removed from Star Wars Battlefront 2, the game was patched to make earning of in-game content less grindy. That is, the game that you already paid for was originally designed to be less fun. If the game was free, I could accept not having content to play for free, but it's not. Fuck EA.

[@Ryu_D]

I just remembered that the Dans used to be a big thing on this channel. Now it's all about Zoey, and I am absolutely okay with this change. Zoey for the win!

[@partyjams]

I guess you could add services like Game Pass to this where it’s a subscription fee for access but to multiple games in a changing library. But all of which can be bought for premium if desired (at reduced cost).

[@gregoryarvey2793]

I like the Warframe game. It's Free to Play -almost- all the content (some character cosmetics are only real money purchasable) No "pay to win" only "pay for convenience". No ads (only at a corner of your ship to see only in-game purchases at your leisure). Did I mention trading with other gamers for in game parts and items can give you real life money in the form of platinum? Yes you can spent no penny and get about 95% of the game

[@andrewhook6092]

I don’t usually comment, but I want to express my contempt for Destiny 2, and I am not certain of the entire story, but this is my experience. I had the original Destiny 2, I had delayed buying the first expansion, and as a result areas I had been readily playing since I purchased the game were locked out by level increases. This move stopped me from playing the game in any meaningful way, and took part of the game away unless I paid. This turned me off to the game entirely, and I don’t know if this has a remedy or not, but when what I had been reliably enjoyed becomes held hostage, it tends to irk my sensibilities.

[@mosesbrown4126]

Nice Polybius reference.

[@MartinPurathur]

You forgot to mention the predatory gacha system. Awareness is power, the less whales the better

[@WolfBoy-om6dw]

What's the gacha system?

[@MartinPurathur]

@@WolfBoy-om6dw It's a lootbox system prevalent mostly in video games that come from the east. It tends to be a live service game where new unique characters are added in, but gated behind a lootbox. People can spend their life savings gambling for a jackpot oftentimes without even getting the anime jpeg they want. Well, this is a pretty surface level explanation, you can find more online or on youtube. Both explaining the kind of design choices in these games, as well as how they affect users and the industry

[@cablefeed3738]

@@WolfBoy-om6dw Loot boxes for the required mechanics of the game.

[@dragonlord21392]

The gacha system would fall under the umbrella of lootboxes, I think.

[@mattbsblogsandtheorys8609]

@@WolfBoy-om6dw it’s like loot boxes, but the main differences being that most of them are from game companies either in China (Genshin Impact) or Japan (fgo) and you can spend real money to buy items AND characters (mostly characters).

[@gniludio]

There are a few things missing: Merch When to pay (Kickstarter, Pre-Order) Paying for Bonus-Features (e.g. Limited Editions, earlier access)

[@danielhale1]

Instead of lootboxes, why not just directly harvest the player's organs and leave them in a bathtub only half-full of ice? It's the same intent but with a lot less development time.

[@mafuletrekkie]

I'm tired of seeing games designed around bleeding their players dry... Looking at you Diablo III, Shadows of War, and Star Wars Battlefront.

[@Oxtocoatl13]

Shadow of War was especially bad because they basically locked the game's ending behind an insanely long and repetitive epilogue grind that no one wants to play through without buying assistance. The core game was completely sacrificed for microtransactions.

[@althelor]

@@Oxtocoatl13 especially since they claimed that their micro transactions were "optional" yet had to restructure the game completely when they were removed. Almost as if they knew the game was almost unplayable without them.

[@Oxtocoatl13]

@@althelor Yep. It's a damn shame because I really liked the actual game play but the devs shot themselves in the foot and their nice original ideas went somewhat unnoticed.

[@KikomochiMendoza]

One of my biggest gripe in ways a game is monetized that affects gameplay is that the amount of currencies in a game, MMOs and live service games are particularly horrid with this. Games with currency usually have around just one or two, experience and money. With games like AC Odyssey Destiny and more recently Gotham Knights and Redfall there is a ballooning of a number of currencies in a game. Crafting materials are becoming currencies which games incentivize you to buy with real money. Imagine how much of a garbage Skyrim or Witcher 3 would be like if you have to fork up real money if you want to craft or mod a new weapon with materials that are so difficult to come by.

[@yitzhakkornbluth2554]

Another add-on that can be added to many microtransaction/subscription/pass-type approaches is to make it transferable in-game for in-game currency (or, equivalently, bought with a "premium" currency that can be traded with other players for the normal game currency). That way, low-budget players can still get some of the monetization-locked content in a way that still ends up with the developer getting paid. It does often (depending on the game) require care to avoid a "pay to win" result...though most games with in-game currency that lasts between sessions tend not to have "pay to win" in the same sense anyway.

[@takatamiyagawa5688]

There's PLEX from EVE Online.

[@TerminalDevastation]

The line about "having hoped gacha would be used responsibly really struck me." This is the whole issue in a nutshell really. The gacha monetization model has benefits on the consumer end that are just completely overshadowed by all the abuse of the system to the point where not only does no one bother developing that towards a hypothetical best form, even if one did so, the toxic reputation of the system would drive people away.

[@arcticfox1402]

I don't get a lot of time to play games, being an adult is nothing like the brochure, but I've been finding that I tend to buy games that have been out for a bit over new releases. It's a much better experience playing a game that has had the benefit of post release patching and fixes than some of the half baked, over hyped, under developed games that hit the shelves for full price these days.

[@snerdbrgrSkips]

I wonder if you guys can tackle in game rewards for F2P games. Currently there is a game called Genshin Impact that's getting review bombed negatively due to how they handle their anniversary rewards for players being lackluster. So I wonder how you guys would be, in your perspective, should handle retaining / enticing players to keep playing.

[@ThePianistDragon]

One of my favorite games is Dragon’s Dogma Dark Arisen. But the game originally released as just Dragon’s Dogma. During its time on PS3 and Xbox 360, the dev released small pieces of DLC with costumes, weapons, and I believe even some quests. Later on however, they released an expansion called Dark Arisen which had its own story, dungeon, etc. And eventually, the game was reworked into Dragon’s Dogma Dark Arisen; a premium game that included all DLC that had been released up to that point. Monster Hunter World has a similar thing with its Icebourne expansion; where you can get physical copies of the game now that have the expansion already included. Funny enough, both games using this model were published by Capcom.

[@araxiel2051]

Which monetization model does the game use? Rainbow Six Siege: *"Yes"* Premium game, with multiple deluxe editions, that had a cheaper version for a limited time that was more grindy. Premium currency you need to buy. Microtransactions for both skins, but also locked new characters. Used to have a season pass, then recently replaced that with a battlepass. Timed boosters. Lootboxes, which acquisition in the first place is also random; random lootboxes that randomly drop... or of course can be bought with microtransactions.

[@IndiBrony]

Magic the Gathering Arenas has the best system if you ask me. It doesn't choke players into being pay to win because players who don't put a penny into the game can unlock exactly the same cards as those who plunge thousands of dollars into it. The players willing to put money into the game keep the game afloat financially, whilst the players who don't put any money into it ensure a large active player base as they grind their way to unlock the more powerful cards. I think it's balanced nicely.

[@SaberToothPortilla]

The only issue that I do have with Arena is that packs are fundamentally lootboxes, and unlike real cards, which you could probably make a compelling argument that they are gambling too, you can't recover the value of digital cards. Now, Arena does have a wildcard system, which is good, but even though I don't actually like the games much compared to Magic, I do think that Legends of Runeterra and Hearthstone have better monetization.

[@dimitrijejovanovic5939]

To be honest, I think that World of Tanks should be mentioned as well. The game technically has almost all of the monetization models. Free to play, with premium "subscription" that makes the grind a bit easier, lootboxes (for certain events, like the current Waffentraeger event) and battle pass seasons that last over 3 months and give you a lot of goodies even to the free-to-play players... And yeah, a ton of microtransactions in the shape of gold, premium tanks and a lot more

[@NaejDoree]

Here I am having all my games under a monetisation model you didn't talk about: pay what you want / donation based, but I get why: I make 0$ with my games, it's not really monetisation at this point XD

[@TheSugarRay]

'We don't often talk about how a game plans to make its money to [redacted], support its creators and development costs.'

[@arminhergl5388]

Premium. Period. I am a simple man. I buy it, I play it. It is either good or bad. I either uninstall for good or replay it in the future.

[@ukaszs9833]

I think you should have explored more what happens when monetization doesn't work. Mentioning Faeria, Artifact and Duelyst. Because one side of the coin are predatory practices, and other side is studios having to shut down really fun titles, because they don't make enough money. Or not having money to develop sequels, expansions, patches etc for titles that really could use them.

[@l.l1969]

Gacha games: *laughs evilly on top of a mountain of salt*

[@CaptainGreenHawk]

Hye, Fortnight also does advertising, with those movie tie-ins. Also, the Batman Comic tie-in with codes, that's something different from just Merch.

[@jeremiasrobinson]

Kind of wish this was 2 channels. One for the educational content, and one for the gaming stuff. I just subscribe and receive notifications for the educational content but I think because I am subscribed to this channel, the KZbin algorithm is always recommending gaming channels to me, which I find annoying.

[@sonictimm]

"Thanks Capitalism, ugh" ... "Thanks so much to Morning Brew for helping us monetize this episode!" ... "A huge thanks to our patrons" For real, I'm glad that we can make games (and videos at that) ourselves and sell them as we like.

[@raventhorX]

Personally I prefer the subscription model. Old school but you get access to all the content with the exception of some cosmetic and vanity items you can purchase from an additional shop. The games themselves still usually have really decent cosmetics you can earn in game still too so it doesn't feel like you're forced to purchase the good stuff. One game that comes to mind is final fantasy 14. Before the controversy of WoW however I would have included it as well.

[@Adrianatoras]

The best model is pay upfront for the game and then you pay for each dlc separately. Battle pass and all the other types of monetization are generally bad because you pay more money for less material Also its not guaranteed that a studios will release more content after the initial release.

[@LadyLakilea]

Personally like what Paradox is doing with DLC's. Even those who don't buy the DLC still get some free content and updates, which is perfect for a game you've already paid for. Keen does something like this with Space engineers: Each update comes with a bunch of free stuff, basically, everything functional is free, but merely aesthetic stuff is often part of a DLC. BattlePass is another method I'm entirely ok with, specially in games i usually spend tons of time in and that have a rather competitive nature, such as World of Tanks.

[@Darzaire]

Surprised to hear no mention of Warframe, my personal favorite and a system so good it added a lot of gameplay time for me just by its implementation. The only thing you buy is a premium currency (platinum), which exists in addition to the regular earnable currency (credits). Anything at all can be bought with platinum, while some stuff (usually cosmetics) are plat-only. Buuut the important thing is, the currency is tradeable. This means you can indirectly earn it in-game by working toward something that other players would want and then selling it. Therefore, you can play to earn even the premium content. And boy howdy did I.

[@sohkaswifteagle2604]

My favorite monitazation style is the old League of Legend format: Free to play. All players are equal, If you pay you can buy new skin (with no power benefit) some quality of life (having multiple pre-determine rune load out, instead of having to change them on the fly) but none of them will give you an edge in the game. Buy more heroes (sure usually the brand new heroe is OP and not well balanced yet, so sure if you buy it on day 1 you kind of "pay to win" but if you save your in game currency you won doing matches you can also buy the new hero day1 While playing game you can win some in game curency to allow you to buy some of those skin, quality of life and new heroes, but at a much slower rythm then if you actually played. So this force the game team to keep their game fresh and interesting, since the moment he game quality go down hill, player will quit the game and impacting the game publisher/deve team etc... directly and quickly Compare to a game you buy the game 70$ at the store, and if you are happy, maybe you will buy an extra level or a new armor set for 2$ later, but if the game sucks, you already paid the comapgny 70$. How many player got trap, buying a bad game because the commercial was good or because your favorite super hero was on it, play with it 5 minutes, realised the game is shit and try to return it to E-Bay Game and being offered 20$ in store credit? meaning you paid 50$ to play a game 5 minutes and realised it was a bad game. Players with a tighter budget (unemployed, students, stay at home parents etc...) can still play to the game without feeling cheated/frustrated because they are canon fodder for the whales. So the population of your world remain active, compare to a pay to play game where if you can no longer pay (for any reason) you can no longer play, therfore one les active player online. And when you'll get disposable income, are you goign to return to that old game, where you are now a few month behind, your guild probably kicked you and are now 3 dungeons further etc... Compare if you would have remained you would have keept playing remain active and remained able to progress with your guildy, and once you get disposable income, you can buy the new skin or the cool new mount. A subscription can be ok, if the ubcription give you access to EVERYTHING, but Word of Warcraft method, where I need to buy the game for 70$ then pay 20$ per month, to realised the game is shit. Then I need to pay even more moeny if their is a cool interesting mount (and most of the best mount are reserved for the store...) Personally I think that the best model would be: Free to play you can buy: - cosmetic (mount, skin, transmog, new emotes etc...), - more character slot, - more classes/races (as long as those new classes and races are not more powerfull then the free to play one, this can be very tricky to balance if your dev team are not expert at game balance), - remove ads (if my game screen have a small non intrisive add, or if the loading screen show me an add instead of game tips, hint, lore, it's acceptable, if the add pop up in the middle of my screen in the middle of combat killing me in the process because I was unable to avoir the game mechanic because of the add, that is unacceptable) - quality of life bonus (as long as the base game is still playable for example a 10% increase inventory space is acceptable, a 500% increased is not) with microtransaction OR you can pay a subscription and receive all the microtransaction for free or receiving an allowance to buy many microtransaction (for example, if you pay 15$ per month, you get 30$ worth of microtransaction currency

[@EndlessRecursion8]

Premium with free demos are my favorite.

[@bengodsey2179]

Season Pass (annual, content, RPG) and Battle Pass (monthly, cosmetic, FPS) are both good options so far as I've seen.

[@RogueMastermind]

I don't mind any monetization model as long as it's unintrusive and implemented fairly. As a prime example, Mihoyo does excellent gacha games with extremely high production quality but also doesn't push for in-game purchases outside of the usual FOMO marketing - and the battle passes in Genshin Impact and Honkai Star Rail are excellent. At the same time, I lamented the move from Overwatch 1's earn-or-buy lootbox model to Overwatch 2's painful battle pass (especially in comparison to Mihoyo's) and extremely pricey skins. But my favorite DLC and monetization post-premium purchases are the games where everything is free or earnable in game even if it launches years after release. Sunset Overdrive, Hollow Knight, and Stardew Valley did this perfectly. Another option is where the base game is relatively cheap but the extra DLC is strictly cosmetic, lacks any competitive advantage for the relevant genres, or is fun extras outside of the game like OSTs, concept art, etc. I love how Batman: Arkham City handled this in particular, but there are several Visual Novels and similar casual games I can name that did this well too.

[@OniBoiXD]

my favorite is free to play with cosmetic products to buy

[@olbaze]

I think there's two forms of monetization that are typically a sign of an evil game: Lootboxes, and Pay-to-Win. Lootboxes are predatory by nature, and only exist because they make more money than outright selling the good stuff to the player. Pay-to-Win, which I would say includes Pay-to-Skip-The-Grind, undermines the existence of your game in the first place. I will personally never play a game with a subscription, because I feel that's also kind of predatory. You're incentived to give them 3, 6, or 12 months in one payment. And since you've paid, you're probably going to feel like you HAVE TO play the game now.

[@NationalDevin]

First battle pass I saw personally was TF2's "contracts"

[@dientimuri3956]

The monetization method I have the most issue with is lootboxes/gachacapsules. I'm not a big fan of how microtransactions are often employed, though. I don't begrudge them entirely because developers do have to support themselves (especially for ongoing games like MMOs and other multiplayer games), and some games have even done them well. Guild Wars 2 is still one of the games I use as a good example of microtransactions (even if the dye packs get lootbox-y). I very much prefer premium games with DLC and Expansions for most games, and generally see subscription as a better path for MMOs than leaning into lootboxes and FOMO.

[@Bredar1e]

For me, what types of monetization I find annoying really varies on a game-by-game basis. For example World Of Warcraft, as I'm sure anyone reading this comment is aware of, has a subscription you have to buy if you want to play a character above level 14. WoW also has some microtransactions as well as DLC's. While there aren't many microtransactions, and basically all of them are far from a micro amount, neither the micro-transactions nor the subscriptions or DLC's bother me. Another point to add is that while in-game if you have enough gold, you can buy a WoW token which adds another month of gameplay. If you gather enough gold to buy the WoW tokens, you don't even have to pay to play and it turns into free-to-play. In contrast to WoW, there is The Elder Scrolls Online. ESO has a premium subscription system as well as an upfront payment to buy the game, but it's playable to high levels without the premium subscription and ESO has A LOT of microtransactions. While I love the universe of The Elderscrolls and the gameplay of ESO, I don't like how they restrict me while I play by almost forcing me to pay in order to fit everything in my inventory. As well as the fact that basically everything for additional house items must be bought with the in-game purchasable currency. In that regard, while I can play and have fun with ESO, it's always a little frustrating for me. As an example, that's not an MMORPG, on my IPad I have a colour by number type game, called Happy Color, that I play to relax. This game is free to play and has only one type of microtransaction. In Happy Color, there are (I think) 4 packs of pictures that one can buy for like $5 cad each. all of them are superhero-themed and I honestly am not a big superhero person so that doesn't bother me much. In contrast to other colour by number games, which will almost force you to buy packs of pictures, or the pictures individually, in order to colour more after you have already finished coloring the free ones, Happy Color has new free pictures added every day. While the amount of new pictures varies per day it is usually between 8-20 new pictures. I colour on average 4 pictures a day, so it's never-ending content for me. Happy Color also has ads. When you enter a new picture an ad is shown and after 5 seconds you can close the ad before it finishes. While in the picture, you can choose to watch an ad to get more hints if you are stuck, and after you finish a picture It forces you to watch another ad and after 5 seconds you can exit before the 30 some second ad is done. Normally, I don't like apps that force someone to watch an ad, especially back to back ads when you enter and exit levels, but, most pictures in Happy Color take me around 20 minutes (or more) to colour, and as such the ads are relatively spaced far apart. There are also no ads that randomly start playing while in the middle of coloring a picture (unlike many other games in which ads start playing the middle of a level). Some of the older pictures by contrast can take no more than 3 minutes or even less to finish. In those instances, the ending ad won't play and I can then immediately select a new picture, and if I'm fast enough, the beginning ad won't play. It's like there's a time limit for when after one ad is done, the next ad can play. When it comes to free-to-play apps on my IPad, Happy Color, is the exception and not the norm. Normally for most apps, I get extremely annoyed at either the microtransactions, the pay-to-play/continue, the ads, etc. While I'm sure many other examples of games doing monetization right do exist, at the moment of writing this, these 3 games are the best, in my opinion, to showcase my point. WoW with its pay-to-play, that (for some reason) I'm perfectly happy with, ESO with its 1-time purchase of the game and its microtransactions, premium subscription, etc. which I don't like, and Happy Color, a free to play app that I love, even though it has many more ads then a lot of games. Well, all in all, this is my opinion. Thank you for reading this comment (essay) that I wrote.

[@TheCreepypro]

thanks for educating people on this too many are confused and get taken in by predatory practices of some of these kinds of monetization now if we could just get companies to stop putting gambling in games aimed at children we would be good

[@ST2008X]

I think free to play is wonderful. I really like Yu-Gi-Oh Duel Links, no ads, and you can earn the cards you want by simply playing the game and participating in events. There is no pressure to pay for anything in Duel Links. I grew up with Yu-Gi-Oh, I appreciate this game and all it has to offer. Other than that I like games whose entire cost is essentially 1 Micro-transaction to have a licence to play the game forever. I know you don't own your eShop purchases, but I like the value proposition of Sega 3D Classics and Sega Ages. Pay one small fee, download, and enjoy. No limits, no ads, no other transactions. Pay a little once and enjoy the best Arcade games.

[@erockandroll39]

You didn't mention merchandising, or any other methods outside the games themselves. I imagine a great deal in design will be there to create a brand.

[@salomefredericks6652]

For me personally two models are good with games. First a premium game with dlc, if the premium is a full experience in and of itself (e.g. no cliffhanger in the story). An extra plus if there is a demo to test the gameplay (does not have to be long, just so I get a feeling for difficulty and controls). Second a F2P with some microtransactions. Cosmetic items are always ok to buy and some QoL too, like fasttravel from everywhere instead of fixed points. Other QoL like extra inventory space are ok as long as I can farm for the currency ingame in a reasonable time to buy what is needed to play the game. I do like to know what I get for my money, so no lootboxes, just throw them off the cliff. I would not buy season passes or abos, because I do not like limited time to play content, but that is me. Advertisement is only an option when it is an alternative to spending real money.

[@orangeboi3387]

theres some interesting cases, for example payday 2, where the base game is only 5 bucks or less on offers but all the dlc content pre-2020 combined turns to be about 60 dollars, so its basically a premium game its just that the players have th choice of a smaller yet complete experience (thanks to the system where the maps and missions dlc can be played if other players host them) so basically what the dlc or "the full game" does is allow the player to be mmore creative and open with their character skill and weapon choices but dosent actively restrict getting to the 100% just with the 5 dollars base game, for example i bougth the base game then about 30 dollars of the dlc i know i want with the weapons and talents i want, so i got my premium game for about 35 bucks instead of the 60, actively excluding the 30 dollars of dlc i know im not interested in

[@escritora84]

I prefer the expansion model because expansions usually enhance the core gameplay in some way. The Sims franchise did a great job of this up until the tail end of The Sims 2, when EA got really greedy and started releasing stuff packs and expansion packs with piecemeal content. They really exploited that model with The Sims 3 & 4, to the point many players have stopped playing altogether or have gone back to earlier games. Still, I prefer the expansion/DLC model for older franchises though, because I know the content usually is intended to be a gift for fans, like the Mass Effect Citadel or Omega DLC. So many easter eggs and nods that it makes the purchase worth it. When season passes and game passes started becoming standard in games I love, like Saints Row, it left a sour taste in my mouth.

[@Yurikan]

If I had to pick the models I liked the most, its premium, subscription, and the DLC/season pass. Worst ones are Gacha / Loot boxes and the micro-transaction deluge.

[@Readysetheal]

I'd love to see a video about socio-economic reality of videogames. It's clear that everyone would love more and cheaper (free, even) games, but then developers need money and publishers want even more. Then we have consoles, console generations, brand "wars" and so on. Make a best possible scenario for both parties (devs and fans) in an abstract and work from there - like, a universal game engine or a universal console/pc

[@kitrana]

pure premium with expansion packs is the only monetization i actually like. you buy a complete experience upfront with optional additional experiences in the future.