523
Is this the fastest video game death of all time? Not even Lawbreakers died this fast.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
523 points (98.7% liked)
Games
32359 readers
1293 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I thought it was killed by having stupid design around game objectives and not letting you tweak those rules yourself.
Don't forget the fact that is was a free-to-play game with a $30 price-tag.
That's what killed it for me. I really enjoyed the Lawbreakers beta, but paying $30 for a game that would either die at a fixed price or quickly shift to F2P made no sense.
How does a f2p game cost $30?
Executive said, "Fuck it, we're charging $30". He thought people would pay that even though its main competitors were f2p.
So it's not f2p then?
Ultimately, no. It was going to be at first but prior to release, it changed models and ultimately stayed at $30 until it died.
You know what f2p means to me? It means you can play the game for free but the experience is guaranteed to be miserable because you're going to have relentless ads crammed down your throat for skins and other bullshit I couldn't give a single fuck about, and no matter how much you pay it never stops.
So if it's between that and just paying $30 for the game, I'll take the $30 every time. I avoid f2p games like the plague.
I agree with you. The market didn't.
Free to play games have to reach a much larger audience to break even, so chances are it was just as doomed if it was free.
Yeah, but the barrier to entry is much lower when the games are free.
Chances are it wasn't the barrier to entry that did that game in, is my point.
Your previous statements seem to indicate otherwise:
It was originally advertised as f2p, at some point they changed their minds and decided to charge for it, clearly it didn't go well since people already associated it with free.