Warframe Article in Gamesindustry.biz

[SnowLeopard25]

I just spotted this article about Warframe at: gamesindustry.biz 

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2016-11-21-nothing-beats-age-old-word-of-mouth-between-players

Warframe and the success of its F2P beta mode appears to be disrupting the business model of the bigger software companies.  Please post your impressions!

[RawGritz]

Actually just tweeted that article, which also sends a post to my LinkedIn. A lot of good info supposed triple-A title dev makers and f2p studios alike could really learn from.

[Damuranashi]

Well, is good to know that someone says something good about Warframe, unlike the rivers of salt in here.

[Zeiss17]

31 minutes ago, Damuranashi said:

Well, is good to know that someone says something good about Warframe, unlike the rivers of salt in here.

You sir deserve an upvote.

[-skimmer-]

45 minutes ago, Damuranashi said:

Well, is good to know that someone says something good about Warframe, unlike the rivers of salt in here.

You mean "seas". Its shorter than "rivers of salt".

Edited November 23, 2016 by -skimmer-

[ranks21]

yeah word of mouth in the gaming biz is a double edged sword, all it takes to kill warframe is word of mouth << no salt here...

[CarrotSalad]

A very nice read, When i look at some other f2p games i play. Some are better games at the base in either gameplay/mechanics/graphics/story/pvp etc but have a very aggressive f2p agenda with a focus on both cash shop centered events and heavy grind in all areas for non paying players. This can burn a games value in reviews.

It's interesting how the article draws a comparison with buy to play triple A titles too. As a long time gamer on console and PC nothings more frustrating then buying a game.then seeing developers ignore the problems with it after day 1 release and if you want to ever see your problem fixed you have to buy the sequal.

I have to say, Warframe is the type of game i would've never even looked at had it been a on a shelf with pay 2 play.

Comparitvely speaking another f2p title i used to love Blade n Soul is a great game but the western version punishes you for spending your money on fashion rather than convenience items. It's also been dragging its feet when it comes to improving performance of the client and improving the quality of the graphics. (the gfx quality has actually been getting worse im seeing more n more pixellated and square characters n cutscenes). Blade n souls grind/player experience has also been very slow and almost lazy in thier ability to respond to grind and ingame economy problems.

As a result i've gone from someone who's from telling everyone about Blade and soul to not even mentioning it anymore.

[OniDax]

Yeah, the success of a F2P game that has managed to stay in an alpha-level state for nearly 4 years now while raking in money...

Look, I like Warframe a lot (enough in fact that I've spent probably close to $1000 on it from Founders Program to numerous Prime Access packs), but I don't think DE's business model is something to be proud of. If we were looking at a game that was no longer called a beta, then yeah, it'd be remarkable. But being an alpha-state game that calls itself an open beta for nearly four years now? That's not a good thing imo. To me, Warframe is no different than the Early Alphas that don't manage to leave that state. Warframe just happens to be a really good one, while most others are terrible.

To reiterate: I love Warframe. I think it's a good game, but I don't think it's perfect, nor do I like the fact that DE makes money off of Warframe while the game is in "beta." So given Warframe's current state, I don't think its F2P model is a good thing. All it does is sends the message that you can make money off of a game while ensuring that you're never completing that game; that you can make money off of a game while keeping it in an unfinished state, while attracting players with the promise of completing it someday. It'd be nice if DE could present players with a development plan that demonstrates the things they plan to do to get this game out of "beta." But until then, I cannot praise Warframe's development under DE's F2P business model. Because it's quite literally the case of DE making money off of an unfinished product.

Edited November 23, 2016 by AntoineFlemming

[SnowLeopard25]

Thanks for the replies.  The point of the article seems to be that Warframe has changed the way all devs look at their business models.  WF has been around 3.5 years, and still seems to be going strong.

Look at the graph for this year at SteamSpy:

https://steamdb.info/app/230410/graphs/

They don't mention the problems associated with getting into a game that wasn't perfect at the start.  On the other hand, many of us have watched the improvements over time, and they have really changed the game.  

[direcyphre]

Seems clear they've been part of the every-changing landscape of games development funding, seeing as so many other companies are adding micro-transactions for their full price games instead of just changing their business model entirely.

[Sabreracer]

I don't see the need for a "The End" screen to make a game be considered reasonable that the developer make money from it.  

A game that is in a "finished" state stops growing other than DLCs to make you spend more after paying for the original.  Warframe continues to grow in different directions, not all of which I enjoy to play but I don't have to spend money to continue to enjoy it.  

I was too late to be a founder and to be honest when I first tried the game around U7 I wasn't that impressed but I tried it again around U10 and have played since.  I've spend more money on this game than I would have if it was a conventional game and played 1730ish hours (in game, over 3000 hours according to Steam)

The regular frequent changes keep me playing rather than stopping and waiting 18 months for Waframe 2.