Quote of the Day – Let’s Not Talk About Money

I am tired of having my conversations with players be about the money. I want it to be 100% about the game.

John Smedley, Twitter

I can buy that… so to speak.  I’m tired of games constantly reminding me that I need to buy things.  And a lot of people seem to be jumping on Smed’s post about not going with the F2P model after being such a proponent of the business model.  SynCaine, Keen, and Massively OP all went there pretty quickly, each with their own take. (Oh, and I missed Jewel somehow.)

Not that Smed has ceased to be a fan of the model.

I still think F2P is a great model, but for the reasons I stated we’re going in a different direction.

John Smedley, Twitter

Sure.  Certainly some companies have made it work very well.  It is hard to argue with success.  But I am not sure where to go with this next quote.

too many people not related to development end up having a lot to say about the monetization part of games and that sucks shit.

John Smedley, Twitter

My gut response to that is, “Good.”  Part of me is glad that making the decision to bring real-world money transactions into a game so that they are pretty much a constant and intrusive part of the experience doesn’t come without cost to the developer.  I don’t know if he is more concerned about marketing, accounting, senior management, investors, or the customers, or all of the above, but when playing the game is about revenue, as opposed to just buying the game or subscribing to the game, then of course it becomes a focus all around.

Another strike against anybody arguing that business model is somehow separate and distinct from the game itself.  It ain’t, not for the customer, not for the company, and, as we now see, not for the developer either.

And some day Smed will actually have a game to talk about, now that we’ve beat business model to death… though if it ends up not being $20, expect more NGE-level rage! Hah!

3 thoughts on “Quote of the Day – Let’s Not Talk About Money

  1. Jenks

    “Another strike against anybody arguing that business model is somehow separate and distinct from the game itself.”

    If anyone even tried to argue that, I’d just laugh at them. You don’t need to know anything else to be sure that they are either advertising for their game, just a hack, or both like Damion Shubert. Articles like this were the nail in the coffin years ago, marking man Smed’s flip flop is pretty insignificant.


  2. Wilhelm Arcturus Post author

    I think Smed is more trying to have is cake and eat it, as opposed to flip flopping. He says in one tweet that F2P is still a great model while also saying it is a pain in the ass that alienates both developers and customers and he doesn’t want to put up with that shit any more. He wants to justify his past while explaining his present position. Or something.

    And yes, people have come here on occasion to argue that F2P does not change games despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.


  3. bhagpuss

    I want to see what this game is he’s working on before I take a position on what he’s saying. Clearly there are many types of game he could be working on where F2P and microtransactions are simply not relevant. Also I’d want a definition of “microtransaction”.

    As a player I have found F2P to be hugely more to my advantage than otherwise so I am not inclined to cheer when one of its proponents apparently has some kind of damascene conversion, even if that proves to be the case, which I very much doubt it will.


Comments are closed.