Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Breakthru for F2P Gaming
Superman0X
Member RarePosts: 2,292
On 2 July 2014 the Adertising Standards Authority (ASA) for the UK made a ruling that Electronic Arts (EA) was using misleading advertising with this ad:
"GET DUNGEON KEEPER ON MOBILE FOR FREE! ... DIG. DEVISE. DOMINATE. Build the most badass dungeon ever! Raise an army of diabolical minions and lay twisted traps to destroy any opponents foolish enough to set foot in your lair. MASTER THE HAND OF EVIL Cast powerful spells, pillage and plunder other players dungeons, and slap your imps around to make them work harder. A world of wicked fun is right at your fingertips. What are you waiting for, Keeper? Get it for FREE!" A footnote stated "WIRELESS FEES MAY APPLY". The ad also featured a screenshot of the game which appeared to show a well-developed dungeon, and was accompanied by artwork depicting characters from the game.
Their ruling that this was misleading/false advertising was based on these statements:
We therefore regarded it as extremely likely that players would reach a position where they would be unable to take any further meaningful or progressive action in the game until a timer had finished or been skipped, and that these periods would become longer and more significant, and the cost of skipping increasingly higher, as the player progressed
We acknowledged that the game could be played without bypassing the countdown timers. However, from the information available in the ad, players would expect the gameplay progression and their ability to advance to be unhindered by unexpected and excessively onerous delays, and we therefore considered that the length and frequency of these countdown events was beyond that which would be reasonably expected by players.
With this information, we can see that they found that the advertised 'free' gameplay was blocked by paywalls, and as such this was actually a form of P2P, not F2P. Based on this precedent, this could also mean that all similar types of monetization, should not be advertised as F2P, but rather as P2P. This would include all typical Facebook style 'energy' limited gameplay monetization schemes that are used in all sorts of browser and mobile games.
By clearly defining that these games are not F2P, but are in fact P2P, it will be a big improvement in overall perception of F2P gaming.
Comments
I have played this game (in fact have it on my phone right now) and have not paid a cent to them. It is free to play and the fact there are paywalls it does not mean the walls can't be overcome or outwaited.
What I have ALWAYS complained about with the Google app store is the fact that there is no "alternate category" besides free for these types of games. All games that have ingame app purchases that expedite gameplay should NOT be advertised as free. It would be nice if they did a better break down like this -
Purchase - anything that states cost. (they already do this)
Trial - anything with limited feature set without paying for a full product
Free - anything that is truly free
InApp - anything that has in app purchasing to enhance the application.
This would be the best breakdown that would be most accurate in regards to how the application behaves.
IMHO I think things like Order and Chaos should be addressed because when I bought it I paid $3 and only after I got into it was that where I saw there was the on-line cash shop. During purchase there was no indication of added costs.
The ruling took into consideration that it was possible to play the game (for limited time) for free. However, they found that the advertised gameplay was blocked by the paywall, and as such the game could not be considered free (unless disclaimers were also present to clarify the blockage).
This means that blocking access to actual gameplay (not just limiting it) for money is a definition of P2P, and as such the gameplay can not be advertised as F2P. This is a great move forward, as it could mean that other games like this could also not be allowed to market themselves as F2P.
F2P and P2P were never game mechanics. They were always business models. The ADA has called them on 'truth in advertising' not 'quality of gameplay'. If they are no longer able to falsely advertise themselves as F2P, then it improves the perception of the industry as a whole.
SWTOR Referral Link
Free Goodies for new or returning players.
See what it gets you Here
This is much more specific that that. It is not the general gamer complaint that free means that there should not be any way to pay for anything. This is a very specific complaint that what they advertised, is not what they provided. This is something that has been very much needed, but has not the needed public correction.