Increasing the stats by strengthening, and the end of growth is invisible. A terrible grinding (repetitive play) for little growth. And you can make the grinding lightly, Or billing systems that may not make much change in many attempts.
Diablo Immortal 's billing grammar has led to a growing voice of criticism of mobile F2P games today. The video game media, which did not mainly deal with the F2P (Free-to-Play) mobile games, also opened the ground.
It's a clumsy way of providing rewards for gameplay and investment. The degree of decorating that would seem likely, but Diablo Immortal has followed the formula of the F2P game on the market. That's why Diablo Immortal is receiving the voice of all these criticisms al1. It is clearly seen by those who are avoiding the arrow of criticism behind Diablo Immortal.
At this point, I talked about fragment. The charging logic of the game_ and I would like to continue the ring of the perfect game price_ .
Diablo Immortal's revenue model is dissatisfied with the entire Diablo franchise. Early growth is a grinding in play like the existing Diablo, but when the equipment is equipped, the growth of the growth becomes narrower. The pleasure of new equipment acquisition decreases, and the acquisition of equipment is just a slight increase in combat power. The great pleasure of acquiring the equipment obtained during growth is that the legendary gems that are randomly obtained from the middle of the game are replaced. The player can quickly and increase the opportunity to acquire legendary jewelry by themselves through in-app payment. You don't buy 100% necessary, but you have a chance to get great pleasure.
However, the revenue model that buys and sells an opportunity to acquire something based on the probability is a widespread way to reduce the face. It is hard to say that Diablo's emortal has implemented a new method of play-> Pay ** that has never been before. To be precise, Blizzard introduced these revenue models very late.
In the end, the IP called Diablo, which was seen by Blizzard and the powerful fandom, was due to today's evaluation. On the contrary, if Diablo was not Blizzard, this would not have been a hot topic. Although there is a difference in criticism, a lot of games are already similar grammar, and it is operated with L missing play that is not hit by the service.
There is another franchise that has been criticized after the introduction of the widespread profit model. It is Elder Scroll. Bethesda moved the worldview to mobile with the first-person action Elder Scroll: Blade that swipes the screen in 2019. The game that started early access with F2P is basically free of the box that provides rewards, but after the opening, the contents can be obtained. Instead, you can open the box or buy an additional box through in-app payment.
Since the release of early access, Bethes has been criticized, especially in the Western market. Although it is an early access version, the biggest regret was by far the gameplay. The battle of the game, the core element of the game, and the action of the early access that embodied it were no better than the conventional Elder Scroll who lived in the battle part. However, the arrow of criticism focused on profit models rather than the build of the game.
▲ Box provided free of charge, but you can quickly unlock it by using paid goods, and the bag with low limits is expanded to money ▲ Pop-up advertisement that sells powerful items ▲ Items, etc. have been criticized.
This is how severe the Western antipathy of the existing video game franchise is about the F2P game. As mentioned earlier, the game's early access period is 2019. It is not a time when the F2P game has only appeared in the market. The revenue model, which quickly opens the box provided free of charge or increases the limit of the bag, is a factor in the top of the game, which has already been popular in the West. And today, this profit model is also called part of 'good billing'.
The revenue model accused with the launch of Diablo Immortal in 2022 was not 2022, but repeated by the previous ones.
Many game magazines complained about Diablo Immortal's revenue model, but the controversy spread faster after the column of Paul Tashi, a senior reporter for Forbes. Many domestic and foreign media, which do not deal with the detailed topics of the game, cited Paul Tash's column_ .
Paul Tash has been criticizing excessive charging guidance models, and Diablo's elements have been analyzed with the reason for the trees. He was wary of the number of power-induced revenue models in the Asian market, but he led the 20-year franchise experience by the P2W (Pay-to-Win) system. And the target to contrast the revenue model was Wonshin .
Premium goods that can be played by the freedom and play that can be played without a specific character, and the pick-up system that can put the core high-ranking characters into the Gacha pool were used as the basis for the revenue model of Diablo.
As he said, Wonshin's revenue model is also considered as a game with less competitive design in the F2P game market. The game has a way to perform all the content without a specific character. However, the performance of the content of a particular character is different, and the system method that strengthens the same character repeatedly is used as a solution to consumes duplicate cards.
F2P games, which are regarded as less competitive, are not the B2P (BUY-TO-PLAY) for rebuttal of excessive profit models. In addition, the F2P, which has the possibility of high profits, regardless of the direction of criticism or strength, is inevitable.
The strong backlash against Diablo Immortal was overwhelming in the US and the US community, but sales_ occurred in the US and Korea. In particular, the United States was 43%and Korea was 23%, with two-thirds of the total sales. Japan, which is popular with Diablo franchise compared to the market size, also accounted for 8%of the highest sales. Apart from the backlash against the F2P, there are more than a certain level of sales in countries with large markets. Although there are many speculations about sudden acting, this is why sales are expected to rise in China.
According to data released by market research firm Newju in January 2022, the US market's mobile game sales amounted to $ 15 billion in 2021. China was $ 32 billion and Japan was $ 13.7 billion, and about 65%of these countries came from these three countries.
Commonly speaking package game. More precisely, it may be explained that the profitability of B2P, which is a classic way of paying the game for the first time, and then enjoying the game without any additional costs, will be difficult to guarantee the success of F2P.
Full game price in a dictionary sense. Or it is easier to understand by looking at the trend of Full-Price, which can be seen as the basic market sales.
The so-called AAA game, which costs a lot of development and investments, is usually released on the market as a full price. When evaluating the value of the game, there are several criteria such as prices, exchange and personal preferences, but usually sets the price based on the AAA game and set the price based on it.
Nintendo, who played a leading role in the video game market early, sold games for 5,500 yen in the 1980s and in North America for $ 60. However, the Final Fantasy series, which was conscious of the Dragon Quest, which represented the RPG of the time, has been sold slightly since its launch. In particular, the final works of the two series, which were released during the Famicom, were sold for 8,500 yen for Dragon Quest 4 and 8,000 yen for Final Fantasy 3. In the twilight of Super Famicom, he also recorded 11,400 yen per cartridge price.
The cause of this price increase was not because of each other, but because of chip prices that can implement various technologies. High-performance sound effects and graphic productions applied to the AAA game of the time were handled through additional chipsets to the game cartridge as well as consoles. The cartridge production cost with this chipset is applied to the game price.
In fact, Sony, who introduced the PlayStation in 1994, used the optical media CD with low production costs as a game media and lowered the sales game standard from $ 60 to $ 50. The price standards for each company have been used in earnest with the expression full price since 2005, when the global market competition is strengthened, and its first game price of PS3 and Xbox360 has risen to $ 60 for more than 10 years.
As of $ 60, it is necessary to sell 50 million titles in order to raise $ 3 billion in cumulative sales worldwide. Currently, more than 50 million single titles are sold in Minecraft, GTA5, Wii Sports, Playon Nobe Battleground, Super Mario Brothers and Mario Cart 8 & Deluxe. Even some titles were sold at a lower price than full price.
That's why the price hike of the full price, which lasted for decades, also came out. Taku to the NBA 2K21, the next-generation version of Standard game price is $ 70, and Sony and Activision also raised the full price.
Full Price was the same as the reason for the reasons for the time when it was the same. Sony, which launched the PS3 a year later, was the same for the $ 60, which was decided with the Xbox360. But this
Comments
Post a Comment