$100: The New Alternative to Free

I was listening to the Combat Jack podcast over the holidays where his guest was Nipsey Hussle: A Compton rapper famous for successfully releasing a $100 mixtape. Considering mixtapes are used as a free giveaway to promote an artist, selling 1,000 copies at $100 a pop is kind of incredible. Nipsey didn’t just set the price, he turned paying for it into a movement.

Oh, and the mixtape is good, but I prefer the “Chop not Slop” remix version.

Nipsey_Hussle_Crenshaw-front-large

During the interview, Nispey said he got the idea of the $100 mixtape from the book, Contagious. The first chapter is about a restaurant that created a $100 Philly Cheesesteak in an attempt to start some buzz. The rest of the book is a typical hand-wavey marketing tome using non-scientific anecdotal evidence to prove the author’s premise about why ideas catch on. Nispey is now working on a book with the author based on his experience selling Crenshaw. Maybe I’ll dig that one.

Still, this got me thinking about a similar trend in games. As we’ve discussed before, in this era of free everything, early access and alpha funding are new ways games are financing development long before completion. In some cases, you pay more for early access than the released game. Take Planetary Annihilation as an example. Early access runs you $90–nearly the price of Nipsey’s mixtape.

In other interviews, Nipsey stated that he wants to be less of a record label and more of the “urban Sanrio.” Essentially selling physical product and using music to promote it. This is a similar model that streetwear brands have used and somewhat reflective of a growing trend in gaming where physical products are starting to become a significant engine of monetization.

In the era of free, the relationship between your players and their wallets is evolving in surprising ways. It turns out, those who want to pay REALLY want to pay. The one-size-fits-all model of $60 games may be dead, but simply making everything a f2p hamster wheel isn’t a blanket solution either.

Feeling Ripped Off in Ravensword

If you’ve read my previous review of the Ouya, you may be familiar with my strange obsession with Ravensword: Shadowlands. It’s a hilariously inept Skyrim clone for phones, tablets, and the Ouya. The game seems like they went down the list of Skyrim features and implemented a bare bones version of each one. From horseback riding to guild systems, they all exist–but are laughably basic. Still, I must have dumped over 15 hours into this saga, exploring its ambitious yet flawed world.

One interesting element of Ravensword is the business model. It’s essentially premium, with an up-front cost to buy the game once the demo period is over. However, at any time you can buy gold, experience, gems, health restores, and talent points with real money. It’s probably the first single player RPG I’ve seen with such a business model.

Early in the game I hit a difficulty brick wall. Monsters were way too strong and there seemed to be no way to grind for gold or XP. I decided to make a one-time purchase of 5,000 gold pieces for $5. I then bought the finest equipment the shops in South Aven had to offer and ventured out into the wilderness, tearing through monsters that were previously kicking my ass.

Maybe 10 minutes after making this purchase, I found a chest containing a sword better than the one I spent the equivalent of 2 real-world dollars on. I felt ripped off. It’s the in-game equivalent of buying the latest iPhone a few days before they announce a new model.

This made me constantly suspicious of the game. Every time I hit a tough point, I thought about if it was some kind of game design sales funnel to get me to spend money. If there was any kind of competent story to be immersed in, it probably would have taken me out of the game, too.

As I stated in my Kotaku piece earlier this year, f2p game designs are still too primitive to carry a single player campaign. Ravensword is a prime example. I salute the developer for making a stab at merging a single player narrative with f2p economies. Yet, scattering purchases throughout a quest makes you second guess every design choice to the point of completely breaking any sense of immersion. Issues like this make me think it’s impossible to reconcile the design principles of f2p monetization and an epic single player experience. Yet, Ravensword is only the tip of the iceberg. Hopefully we’ll see some stronger attempts at this problem soon.