Support NeoGAF

[Chezzymann]

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

Nope that's terrible. Even if you always win youd pay $365 a year if you'd play every day. Ridiculous.

Maybe like, 10 cents.

 

[dommynick]

Nope that's terrible. Even if you always win youd pay $365 a year if you'd play every day. Ridiculous.

Maybe like, 10 cents.

I mean, 99% of F2P games not named DOTA 2 or Path to Exile are absurdly expensive to play in the long term, so this would be right in line with that. It would literally be just like the arcade system! It's weird how no one complained about putting quarters in a machine, but bring this system outside of the arcade to a F2P game and it's suddenly ridiculous or scummy.

 

[Spman2099]

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

Is that a joke? I would have paid the purchase price of SFV ten times over at this point...

I would simply stop playing new fighting games if that was the new model.

 

[Chezzymann]

I mean, 99% of F2P games not named DOTA 2 or Path to Exile are absurdly expensive to play in the long term, so this would be right in line with that. It would literally be just like the arcade system! It's weird how no one complained about putting quarters in a machine, but bring this system outside of the arcade to a F2P game and it's suddenly ridiculous or scummy.

I'd imagine it's because the majority of people probably didn't go to the arcades as frequently since they weren't in your house with you. So maybe like once a week or something.

 

[Spman2099]

Capcom handicapped SFV in just too many ways.

• F2P progression/currency system
  

You are a fool if you think that is anything but a huge win for the consumer. Posts like the one above consistently emphasize how ignorant the lynch mob is. They want to be angry and they won't let facts get in the way of their anger!

 

[Dark Ninja]

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

Capcom tried this on some ios arcade cabinet game they had. You could choose which game you wanted to play and pay a quarter. I would stop playing SFV if it was like this I have already put over 100 hours into it.

 

[CrispyBoar]

If it's like DOA 5: Final Round & Killer Instinct? Definitely.

If it's like Tekken Revolution? Then fuck no.

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

Hell no.

Capcom handicapped SFV in just too many ways.

• PS4 Console Exclusive
• F2P progression/currency system
• $60 pricetag
• Launching without any significant singleplayer content
• Technical matchmaking/network/loading problems

They probably could have gotten away with maybe 1-2 of these issues, but all of them together pretty much meant that nobody was interested in buying their initial release.

That's not actually a problem considering the huge install base for PS4 compared to the install base for Xbox One...

 

[RocBase]

I mean, 99% of F2P games not named DOTA 2 or Path to Exile are absurdly expensive to play in the long term, so this would be right in line with that. It would literally be just like the arcade system! It's weird how no one complained about putting quarters in a machine, but bring this system outside of the arcade to a F2P game and it's suddenly ridiculous or scummy.

I wouldn't say it's ridiculous but I do find it regressive. With console games you have the freedom to play as much as you want, whenever you want, and now suddenly that's blocked by a paywall.

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

Why are you using that DoA 6 million downloads as metric for success? 6 million downloads doesn't mean anything. When you know how many active users there is and how much money the game is making then make this proposal.

 

[Hubb]

Tecmo wasn't happy with DoA5's retail sales

Where are you getting this from? DoA5 has surpassed what Tecmo had aimed for it to sell at retail. Add on top of that digital sales, DLC, and the f2p version and I think they are very happy with how DoA5 did.

I don't think there is any question DoA6 is coming. I am sure they'll launch a f2p version alongside of it at launch or shortly after.

Why are you using that DoA 6 million downloads as metric for success? 6 million downloads doesn't mean anything. When you know how many active users there is and how much money the game is making then make this proposal.

Because this is the metric they are giving us, they aren't giving us dollars per day. The fact that they are still supporting the game and the game's competitive scene means it must still be making money. The game is 4 years old, they could easily drop it if it was costing them money.

 

[RaySpencer]

I mean after trying out Killer Instinct I can see the advantage of this. In terms of at least being a glorified demo. But I dislike the idea of buying characters individually.

Something like f2p in which you can play online with others but you can only choose a single rotating character, while having the ability to buy the full game if you would like to.



Fighting games are doing great financially. It's just Capcom who IIRC isn't doing well financially in general.

KI is the best.

Free to play, rotating weekly free character, 5 dollar individual fighters, 20 per season, or 50(60 on Xbox) for ALLLL of it.

I dont even think KI locks you out of any of the modes or anything with the free version.

 

[Griss]

DoA Last Round Core Fighters is a great example of how to do F2P right. Super game.

 

[Justinh]

I don't know how I feel about this.

I really like the idea of the F2P model used in Killer Instinct (I've never played DoA5) so that more people can try the game and even if they just buy their favorite character, at least they can be a part of the game's community and I think that's important that it gets large.

On the other hand, I like the idea of just buying a game and spending 60 dollars on it (I say this after having no regrets in paying 120 dollars on Killer Instinct so far). This feels pretty good especially with a Capcom game where they've said there won't be any iterative releases.

I wonder how F2P would affect the upcoming content of SFV, though. I mean, KI is a great game for 60 dollars now, and IMO was always a great game, but its release was even more anemic than SFV's. I don't know if it's really fair to compare them though, since they're so different.

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

Where are you getting this from? DoA5 has surpassed what Tecmo had aimed for it to sell at retail. Add on top of that digital sales, DLC, and the f2p version and I think they are very happy with how DoA5 did.

I don't think there is any question DoA6 is coming. I am sure they'll launch a f2p version alongside of it at launch or shortly after.



Because this is the metric they are giving us, they aren't giving us dollars per day. The fact that they are still supporting the game and the game's competitive scene means it must still be making money. The game is 4 years old, they could easily drop it if it was costing them money.

That doesn't mean anything. Making money just means its making more than the cost of keeping the game running, but that doesn't mean it would make enough to pay for the full development+advertising of a F2P game from scratch.

 

[lupinko]

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

A dollar per game? Jesus Christ, man. The average person would never become decent. Something like eight games for a dollar would be easier to swallow and tie training into that somehow. You get 30 minutes in the training lab for every dollar.

Other than that, I like Killer Instinct's model of buying a character and beyond even that, I think the current model is great as well.

The arcade Tekken 7 already does this for ¥100/game in Japan.

And Tekken 7 arcade is all netplay too.

I've spent a lot of money, but I have gotten way better at the game than I would have just playing with the same local people over and over.

 

[Platinum Mad]

I mean, 99% of F2P games not named DOTA 2 or Path to Exile are absurdly expensive to play in the long term, so this would be right in line with that. It would literally be just like the arcade system! It's weird how no one complained about putting quarters in a machine, but bring this system outside of the arcade to a F2P game and it's suddenly ridiculous or scummy.

Except that happened. When games that were obvious quarter munchers people stopped playing.
And when people lost it to someone it put them off spending more money on it.

 

[Hubb]

That doesn't mean anything. Making money just means its making more than the cost of keeping the game running, but that doesn't mean it would make enough to pay for the full development+advertising of a F2P game from scratch.

You asked.

Why are you using that DoA 6 million downloads as metric for success?

And I answered. I never said anything about making enough to pay for the full development+advertising of a F2P game from scratch. None of us are on the board of TK to know exactly how well it is doing, but my opinion is that it is doing well enough since they are continuing to support it.

TK have to my knowledge have never released a statement about DOA under-preforming. The only statements we've had are the opposite of that/

 

[Hellshingu]

I mean, 99% of F2P games not named DOTA 2 or Path to Exile are absurdly expensive to play in the long term, so this would be right in line with that. It would literally be just like the arcade system! It's weird how no one complained about putting quarters in a machine, but bring this system outside of the arcade to a F2P game and it's suddenly ridiculous or scummy.

Path of exile is a one in a million game as far as I'm concerned I wish more games could emulate that model successfully. I know I've dropped more money on that game in the last 4 years than I would have if it was just a flat entry fee.

SFV would need a reward system overhaul for it to be implemented properly I think.

 

[dommynick]

The arcade Tekken 7 already does this for ¥100/game in Japan.

And Tekken 7 arcade is all netplay too.

I've spent a lot of money, but I have gotten way better at the game than I would have just playing with the same local people over and over.

Thank god you came along, I was hoping I wouldn't have to do this gag solo.

 

[deadscreensky]

The real reason fighting games should attempt F2P is network effects. The game simply becomes better, including for your paying customers, the more people who play. SF5 today would be worth more to those of us who actually spent $60 on it if there were a million people playing it. There'd be more people to play against, matchmaking times would go down, matchmaking balance would improve, there'd be a more active offline scene, and so on.

I'm not personally fond of the usual F2P pricing models, but there's no reason fighting games couldn't go a season route like Killer Instinct or something similar. (While I recognize KI is technically F2P, but it's so limited -- one character? -- that I see it as more of a great demo.)

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

You asked.



And I answered. I never said anything about making enough to pay for the full development+advertising of a F2P game from scratch. None of us are on the board of TK to know exactly how well it is doing, but my opinion is that it is doing well enough since they are continuing to support it.

TK have to my knowledge have never released a statement about DOA under-preforming. The only statements we've had are the opposite of that/

Ofc they are not gonna release any statements about the game doing poorly, that would be terrible PR. Also saying "Because this is the metric they are giving us" doesn't answer my question at all...

 

[jbluzb]

I have guilty gear sign and played the sfv demo. I like guilty gear more, gg is more accessible and fun to play.

I did not purchase sfv because of all the negative reviews. But if it goes down in price, maybe.

 

[lupinko]

I have guilty gear sign and played the sfv demo. I like guilty gear more, gg is more accessible and fun to play.

I did not purchase sfv because of all the negative reviews. But if it goes down in price, maybe.

SFV has already dropped to $10 on two different occasions on Amazon.com.
Lol

So just wait for that to happen again or something.

 

[TheSeks]

GGXrd recently accepted something like this with their "demo" that's out now.

LMAO. What? No. No, it didn't. That demo is only "free" if you pre-order digitally. Thereby if you pre-order at retail you don't get to get the "game sooner" or anything. Even then it's a cut slice of Revelator IIRC. It's not like the entire console release is out yet, just the arcade version and a training mode to try it out.

It's not the DOA5 model at all.

If we're talking F2P: DOA5 is the only one that has done it right, in a bizarre twist of irony, IMO. Tecmo's PC port is atrocious compared to Arc or other publishers, but their F2P stuff shits on Namco's attempt(s) and Killer Instincts. You get the Ninja's and a rotation of the other characters if you don't want to pay a dime. You can play online with those characters available to you and play the training/tutorial modes. The only thing that is locked beyond the characters that rotate if you don't pay is the story mode and non-CPU versus IIRC.

Namco's is all the characters but you can only play the arcade mode once a day (IIRC) and only have like 3 fights unless you dump cash into it for online (blech).

Killer Instincts is awful: You get a character not based on the tutorial/"dojo" mode they give you to play, while not given a rotating cast of characters to try them all out and see if you want to buy one/them all. However, it allows you free play the arcade/story mode like DOA5 does for versus modes.

I mean, 99% of F2P games not named DOTA 2 or Path to Exile are absurdly expensive to play in the long term, so this would be right in line with that. It would literally be just like the arcade system! It's weird how no one complained about putting quarters in a machine, but bring this system outside of the arcade to a F2P game and it's suddenly ridiculous or scummy.

Uh, what?

DOA5's is F2P to done right: You can buy the character(s) you want if you only want to focus on versus/online and local. If you want the complete package you pay the digital price (which has gone down IIRC) which is comparable to the retail price of the DOA5LR disc/blu-ray you get.

 

[katsubento]

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

Heck no. That's ridiculous. I'd have paid a few hundred bucks for that already if that were the case.

 

[StereoVsn]

Eh, DOA5 is both good and bad example at the same time. The game came out originally on PS3 and Xbox360 for a full price. Then KT continued pumping out post release content at good pace and we can only speculate that it did well since they continued to do it.

So the game took the $60 ( with a lot of content in the game unlike SFV) and a year later released a PS4/Xbone/PC port (PC one is crap which is not surprising for KT) for $40 with yet more DLC content (bundling a lot of previous DLC into the game) AND F2P version.

DOA5 is a great example on how to sell a fighting game as it had its full priced period, recouped Dev money on base sales and DLC (prolly made a profit) and then released another well priced version AND F2P. We can only wish Capcom did that. DOA5 also has decent amount of SP content.

So, no, I don't wish fighting games went all F2P. I am also betting that Tekken 7 is going to sell well and will have decent amount of content at same time. F2P version may come but only after or alongside full priced one.

 

[lupinko]

Heck no. That's ridiculous. I'd have paid a few hundred bucks for that already if that were the case.

I've spent like almost 2Gs on a year of playing Tekken 7.

Spoiler

I'm also counting Tekken.net subs and premium item lotto tickets.

I could've easily bought all three current gen consoles or built a beefy new gaming PC.

But nope and I don't regret it one bit.

 

[Elixist]

Riots coming. If their game is good other fighters have alot to worry about.

I agree fight games should have a f2p option to keep the playerbase up at least.

 

[fresquito]

So yeah, let me understand where you're coming from, OP. Comparing a game that was a failure for quite a while with a game that has been out not even two months is the base of your thesis, isn't it?

The problem with SFV is not a model problem, but a problem of being unfinished at release and still having some server side problems. But SFV is here to stay and I have no doubts it will end up being successful based on core gameplay alone.

 

[Iokis]

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

If fighting games were all to take on a model like this I'd quit playing them and wish the whole genre crashed and burned for good. As others have written, playing daily would cost you $365 a year and that's if you never lose. I myself would already have spent enough to pay for SFV four times over if this model was in effect.

And I believe the goal of SFV was to make it the most accessible one yet. I think they've lived up to that in terms of playing competitively (I'll agree it's far too light on SP, but that's not the point I want to make right now). Despite the game's price tag, enough people are playing it that matchmaking can place me with people around my level online, and I'm terrible. As extortionate F2P practices only work by exploiting whales, I guarantee you that any casual players who try the game out by it being F2P would quickly stop paying $1 (or even 50 cents, or whatever else) for the privilege of getting their arses kicked. The playerbase shrinks to only include mostly hardcore players, and then any newcomers will be instantly turned off by the whole "pay money to get blown up in 30 seconds by a pro" experience they'll most likely receive.

 

[vocab]

Namco experimented with F2P Tekken and Soulcalibur games. The latter shut down but did the former turn out well for them?

F2p tekken was trash. You can only play x amount of times before the game locked you out. Fucking awful.

 

[petran79]

Capcom could also make SFIV and USFIV completely free
Though I doubt even then anyone would play those...

 

[Ban Puncher]

I downloaded the free version of DOA and never bought anything for it.

Hell, I didn't even play it.

Spoiler

I bought the full version on a PS4 disc.

 

[Rajang]

Namco experimented with F2P Tekken and Soulcalibur games. The latter shut down but did the former turn out well for them?

At PSX Harada said that the game turned out very well for them and that it even surpassed 5 million downloads. Thats quite alot for a game that is only available on PS3.

LMAO. What? No. No, it didn't. That demo is only "free" if you pre-order digitally. Thereby if you pre-order at retail you don't get to get the "game sooner" or anything. Even then it's a cut slice of Revelator IIRC. It's not like the entire console release is out yet, just the arcade version and a training mode to try it out.

It's not the DOA5 model at all.

If we're talking F2P: DOA5 is the only one that has done it right, in a bizarre twist of irony, IMO. Tecmo's PC port is atrocious compared to Arc or other publishers, but their F2P stuff shits on Namco's attempt(s) and Killer Instincts. You get the Ninja's and a rotation of the other characters if you don't want to pay a dime. You can play online with those characters available to you and play the training/tutorial modes. The only thing that is locked beyond the characters that rotate if you don't pay is the story mode and non-CPU versus IIRC.

Namco's is all the characters but you can only play the arcade mode once a day (IIRC) and only have like 3 fights unless you dump cash into it for online (blech).

LOL what?

For online play you get 5 battle coins which regenerates every 30 minutes and up to 5 may be held at any given time.

For arcade mode you get 2 arcade coins, these regenerate every hour and a max of 2 can be held at any given time.

You also get golden tickets, if you use those for online play and win you get the ticket back. So you can theoretically play online forever IF you win.

 

[KingJ2002]

Not every fighter can exploit the free 2 play model, much the same as MMO's trying and many eventually failing to attract an audience going down that road.

If we're talking specifically about SFV (and I feel like we are mostly) , it was an attempt by capcom to get their feet wet with the free 2 play thing. BUT they dropped the ball from the start because while they were honest and upfront about SFV being a service going forward with high aspirations of going big with the pro gaming circuit they failed in one key area - the game was released about 6 months before it was actually ready AND they charged full price for it while also begging people to spend another 33% of that cover price to more easily obtain the content they were giving away for "free".

They wanted the best of both worlds and currently have little to show for it but it's also only been about 2 months and this is a situation that can be fixed if capcom has the patience to let it work.

The free version of DOA5 came out only about a year after it's initial release and the core version of the title did launch at full price but it also had plenty of content included from day 1. The re-branded DOA5 ultimate showed up a year later with some new characters and backgrounds for a 30% discount while the free to play title also launched where anyone could try the game out for free with a much more limited set of options available. They turned a standard fighting game release into a free 2 play title with a shop only after 12 months of sales.

Capcom is trying to do all of that all at once and as we can see by the gimped store , lack of content in game along with delayed features and such , it's an uphill climb.

BUT , to get down to the OPs comment/ question - I do feel something like SFV will benefit long term once it goes to a free 2 play model. I feel the version available on disc right now isn't the version to do it. In much the same way that Super SF4 turned SF4 into it's own fantastic thing , I feel SFV needs a big update to really get into the proper setup. A re-launch next spring at a 40$ price tag that includes the base game, all of 2016's non cosmetic DLC (which means all 6 characters) as well as perhaps Sakura and Akuma thrown in to please the fans AND having the character story mode re-tooled into a proper arcade ladder mode while also turning the combo challenge into a full on proper interactive tutorial instead of simply a ton of videos. Make it into the game people expected this years version to be. At the same time, throw up a free SFV 2017 edition trial/F2P version. Download the client and SFV just has Ryu and perhaps a rotating character that changes every month. This free version includes the full new tutorial , training mode, offline VS play and online ranked/casual matches as well as lobby support(maybe this version comes with only training stage and hong kong too). Offer the big movie style story mode by itself for a few bucks, offer the arcade ladder/survival mode for a few bucks, and offer additional characters, costumes, stages, colors, titles for a few bucks. Or, if you don't want to spend money, you can play the shit out of the 2 free characters for hours a day and you can spend fight money on anything non-cosmetic. Currently the 50 fight money you get for a win isn't much , I feel that should be a starting point but winning frequently should increase the fight money earned to a point. Adding in Killer instinct style challenges for bonus fight money would also work while maybe even throwing in double XP/fight money weekends could also be great.

That's a great endpoint I feel for SFV but , Capcom needs to rebuild what's there right now so that the above can happen. So , next february/ March , I've little doubt we will see a free version pop up and then the userbase will start to increase and who knows - maybe it will catch up to DOA5 one day. At the very least a F2P version will give SFV a more consistent playerbase , more people will have it so more will play it which hopefully means less wait times for all involved online.

But with all that said, I don't think a smaller game like Guilty Gear or Blazblue can get away with this sort of model. Even if it were free I don't think the game is well known enough that too many more people would play it. In order for free 2 play to work you can't just have 100,000 people check it out, you need 500,000 + so that you've got plenty of people buying stuff through the games store.

Likewise, on the other end of the spectrum you've got something like MKX , selling millions of copies last year and then this year bringing out a 30$ upgrade pack that likely sold another million units. In all likelyhood another 30$ pack may show up next year too, so long as Injustice 2 isn't coming out any time soon. Even if it isn't though, for most people MKX was a 100$ product , they spend 60 on the game, 20 on 2015 DLC and 20 more on 2016 dlc. It worked because millions bought it. Going F2P for MKX in a couple years (if no MKXI is planned) might be worth it but for now ? more money can be made via traditional methods.

I came in to echo the same sentiment.

It's almost as if this game was intended for the F2P model similar to Deep Down but was changed to be a 60 dollar title for the day 1 cash in. Overall... the current state of SFV will not cut it... there needs to be more modes, characters, stages, costumes, and a better online experience for this title to see a successful F2P experience.

I can actually imagine Capcom doing this next year with the second wave of DLC characters... if they announce a F2P version with it... it would re-ignite marketing efforts and allow sfv to last a generation.

 

[Gxgear]

All I know is this middle-of-the-road approach is killing SFV. Capcom's obvious seeing the franchise turning into games as a continuing service, but still wants money up front for something that is clearly incomplete. I would have been pissed had I paid full price for it.

 

[TsuWave]

A real novel idea would be if they made it free to download and just used the arcade revenue model. Pay a dollar every time you want to play online, if you win you get to keep playing, can't control or stop the queue or matchmaking.

this sounds awful tbh

 

[Trickster]

KI has done it the right way in my opinion since 2013.

This is also my oppinion. I really feel Capcom should have gone that route with SF5.

f2p gives you a lot of advantages in these multipplayer centric game that have long term dedicated playerbases. You attract a lot more potential players, and peoples willingness to make a lot of micropayments increase a lot.

 

[DSix]

Tekken with its hundreds of costumes is prime for F2P. They don't even need to sell characters, Tekken players love their customization.

 

[gelf]

Best thing about the DOA free to play model is that there is still the option to just pay the normal price of a game to unlock all the modes and characters. It manages to cater to either market.

 

[oti]

This is also my oppinion. I really feel Capcom should have gone that route with SF5.

f2p gives you a lot of advantages in these multipplayer centric game that have long term dedicated playerbases. You attract a lot more potential players, and peoples willingness to make a lot of micropayments increase a lot.

You know what another advantage is? Getting 100% of the money upfront.

The game isn't even a year old. I'm sure they'll release a F2P version eventually.

 

[Enter The 36 Chambers]

Killer Instinct did this in 2013

 

[Eidan]

I don't think Smash or MK need this at all. Their games are known to have quality and value, and their sales reflect that. It could help with SF, which has quality, but fuckall value. I still think SF would benefit greatly from actually giving a fuck about content, but a lot of the FGC seem to almost relish the barebones experience seen in V, to the point where they'd rather see a drastic shift in pricing models instead of just admitting Capcom offers little to the casual player.

EDIT: also nothing in the OP addresses the core issue of fighters being impenetrable for newcomers or casual players. I don't see how a F2P option addresses the issue of new players feeling that all they can do is go online and get pummeled.

 

[Trickster]

You know what another advantage is? Getting 100% of the money upfront.

The game isn't even a year old. I'm sure they'll release a F2P version eventually.

Killer Instinct route would pretty much do that for you, all the core fighting fans would still buy the version that gets them all the character.

And it would open up the game to many more people, and you would not get the negative backlash about content.

 

[sixteen-bit]

SFV is on track to be F2P (or at least PS+) IMO

 

[Blackquill]

No, absolutely not.

So yeah, let me understand where you're coming from, OP. Comparing a game that was a failure for quite a while with a game that has been out not even two months is the base of your thesis, isn't it?

The problem with SFV is not a model problem, but a problem of being unfinished at release and still having some server side problems. But SFV is here to stay and I have no doubts it will end up being successful based on core gameplay alone.

Your post sums up my opinion quite well.

 

[Baleoce]

http://www.eventhubs.com/news/2016/apr/07/dead-or-alive-5-last-round-core-fighters-hits-6-million-downloads/

After fighting games not doing well financially aside form MK and Smash I think this is their best option for this genre. SFV failed miserably financially lets not kid around. I think this is the model they should pursue ASAP.

I actually think that they have always been pursuing this as an eventual target for their business model from the start. They're going to try and have their cake and eat it.

By that I mean, they have their initial $60 early access release, and then they take time to introduce QoL updates gradually and make the game into what they actually intended over time, and more importantly add characters and costumes etc. to the ecosystem to the point where it's actually enticing to a potential f2p crowd.

When that ecosystem is then big enough, I believe they will convert the game to f2p, infact I'm sure of it. This transition will likely not happen until there's sufficient distance between it and the initial release, so as not to infuriate those who bought into it early.

A PS+ version is another extremely likely route that would accompany such a transition.

 

[ScOULaris]

So basically you're saying that fighting games should adopt the Killer Instinct (2013) model.

I agree.

 

[emag]

The real reason fighting games should attempt F2P is network effects. The game simply becomes better, including for your paying customers, the more people who play. SF5 today would be worth more to those of us who actually spent $60 on it if there were a million people playing it. There'd be more people to play against, matchmaking times would go down, matchmaking balance would improve, there'd be a more active offline scene, and so on.

Agreed.

I'm not personally fond of the usual F2P pricing models, but there's no reason fighting games couldn't go a season route like Killer Instinct or something similar. (While I recognize KI is technically F2P, but it's so limited -- one character? -- that I see it as more of a great demo.)

It doesn't have to be entirely F2P -- having a low initial bar of entry would suffice.

Proposed Autumn/Holiday 2016 pricing:
$10 Starter pack - Ryu and Chun (possibly with premium costumes?)
$30-$40 Core pack - the 16 characters from the original retail release
$50-$60 Super pack - Core + season 1 DLC characters
Additional characters and costumes priced as now.

 

[LordRaptor]

I don't think Smash or MK need this at all. Their games are known to have quality and value, and their sales reflect that.

I could actually envisage Smash as a F2P title using Amiibos as 'per session' character unlocks working

e: Not sure I would want to sit there scanning amiibos until the roster is fully open, but it could 'work'