Why Free-to-Win Battle Royales?
This is the first time I write a nonacademic article about game design, so I am very excited about it. For some reason, with a recent talking I had about Battle Royale games, and the release of Rumbleverse (by Epic Games), I feel challenged and motivated about this theme. Then, to be more precise, I will make a starting investigation on free-to-win battle royale games, trying to understand the reasons behind their success.
We can basically define a Battle Royale as a game where a group of players is dropped in a large scenario, and in the next minutes, they need to look for weapons and equipments, while fighting to the death. During the match the playable area contracts, forcing players closer together, until only one survives. We already had something similar to that, a couple of decades ago, in Bomberman games. But now there is a wave of Battle Royales coming, starting with games like PUBG and Fortnite, and consolidating this dynamic as a new and very profitable genre.
Considering this scenario… how games like Fortnite can be so profitable using a free-to-win model, with monetization limited by elements that do not affect victory chances? By playing other modern battle royales it is possible to identify that many other popular games are using a similar (or very similar) approach.?
When looking for battle royales it is common to find a bunch of free-to-play games, like Apex Legends, Fortnite, Realm Royale, Rumbleverse, Spellbreak, Bullet Echo, Naraka: Bladepoint, PUBG, Zooba, and Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodhunt. Most of those games don’t monetize by anything related to providing gameplay advantages. Some exceptions would be Apex Legends and Naraka: Bladepoint, where there are unlockable characters (which does not necessarily provide gameplay advantages, but variability), as also Zooba: Zoo Battle Arena and Bullet Echo, where besides having unlockable characters, players need to perform upgrades to make those characters more competitive, as well manage items that provide special abilities (all that creating a complex mobile F2P meta).
However, nowadays most successful battle royale games are using the free-to-win model (if we consider unlockable characters as free-to-win), taking place in most of the top 10 Battle Royale Games across Twitch and YouTube. What happens is that players feel engaged when identifying a “fair” model that allows them to win based on their capabilities, the community grows up healthy and interested in a better understanding of the dynamics and strategies related, become more competitive and involved with the game itself, and then streaming matches starts to make more sense. Considering this scenario, a monetization strategy focusing on skins and other aesthetic elements totally makes sense, since this approach would maximize experiences related to self-expression, collecting, and bragging.
I do believe it is possible to make a lot of money by using a pay-to-win model. However, by doing that probably many other players would churn before getting engaged, feeling discouraged by a system that seems to demand more time/money than skills, which could early constrain the growth of the community. Then, when planning a battle royale, using a pay-to-win model should be treated as a potential barrier, when we want to create an environment for a large-scale competitive game.
领英推荐
Then, regardless of what you decide to have in your game... a battle pass system, loot boxes, unlockable characters, or seasonal skins... just remember that what is important while designing a free-to-win game is the focus on providing a competitive and fair experience.
References