Inside Network - Providing news and market research to the Facebook platform and social gaming ecosystem Inside Facebook    Inside Social Games    Inside Virtual Goods    AppData    PageData  
Inside Virtual Goods: The Future of Social Gaming 2010   Contact   About   Advertise       Subscribe:   Email   RSS   Twitter
MTV Addicting Games
By Christopher Mack 3 Comments »

Maple Story is a "Free-to-Play" MMOIn a recent post on Gamasutra, David Chang, EVP of Business Development and Marketing for GamesCampus, explains why he thinks “free to play” games need to be rebranded as “MTG” – or Micro Transaction Games. Why? Because calling games free to play “generates a lot of unnecessary cynicism and calls our product quality into question.”

Chang draws a parallel with how the primary function of Google, searching the web, is free to any user. Both can charge for various premium services (for Google it would be something like paid search and for a game, virtual goods). “In both situations, people receive a valuable service – free search or a free game experience,” says Chang.

Despite the logical comparison, Chang believes that one of the biggest cause for the stigma is a matter of branding; stating that the term “MTGs (Micro-Transaction Games)” would be a far better label. Immediately upon rebranding, there would no longer that preconceived notion of “what is wrong with it?” However, in order to be dubbed an MTG certain prerequisites are required:

  • No purchase to download/play
  • No level/content cap beyond what is needed to play
  • Monetized by virtual goods sales (at least partially)

Of course, virtual good sales are not the only workable business model for an “MTG”. In the article, Chang also touches on the models that can also work for this growing genre, but more importantly, what will not work.

His chief example is content caps, stating, “People end up investing time and emotionally connecting with a game only to find out that if they want to continue, they need an admission fee… you will lose most players at the pay-gate.” This certainly churns some food for thought, as there are a number of “free-to-play” titles that are guilty of this, and the damage to the game’s community from said player lose dramatically hurts the game as a whole.

Overall, however, most free titles are moving in the right direction regarding their business models. “Now is the time,” says Chang, referring to the growing virtual goods business model. “We should be looking at re-branding from free to play, to instead being known as micro-transaction service providers.”

To dig deeper into the social gaming market, check out our new report: Inside Virtual Goods: The Future of Social Gaming 2010.

Inside Social Games Sponsors
AdParlor     SoftLayer Hosting
Gate2Shop

3 Responses to “Should “Free-to-Play” Be Rebranded MTG?”

  1. Matt Mihaly Says:

    Doesn’t really make sense. Lots of free-to-play games don’t utilize microtransactions. For instance, Runescape is free-to-play with an optional subscription that unlocks content gates. In other free-to-play games (such as my own) that have microtransactions you can still get anything that’s purchasable by just playing the game.

  2. Chad Boyda Says:

    I like it. Plus it addressed how games like Runescape don’t qualify if they have a level/content cap with a pay gate. Those games can still be referred to as “Free To Play”, but the rest of us can be called “MTG”.

  3. SuperSecret.com is a New Virtual World for 9-13 Year Olds Says:

    [...] model of $4.95 a month. It doesn’t seem like a lot, but they are making a potentially dangerous move in making the game free at first but capping the age/level at 12. Once players get to the gate and have to pay the “admission fee,” many players could  [...]

Leave a Reply