Fighting Games Are Failing as Esports
Why free-to-play is crucial to fighters staying relevant in esports
A week or so ago I was having a pretty rant heavy discussion with one of our regular casters (@dogysamich) about why fighting games ala Street Fighter, Tekken, and Super Smash Bros have been waning as esports and seem to be surviving almost purely on nostalgia. Amidst talks of spectator friendliness, matchmaking, and competitive barriers to entry, one of the points we both agreed on was the dated business model employed by just about every major fighting game; charging $80+ for a game that is re-released with marginal improvements on semi-regular intervals.
We were both bewildered as to why no major fighting game has successfully implemented a free-to-play model similar to most of the current leading esports titles. In League of Legends, players start off with access to a limited number (10) of champions which rotate on a weekly basis and can earn access to the full roster of characters — albeit very slowly — purely by playing the game. Alternatively, players can pay for immediate access to champions, along with different skins which are often available for only a limited time. Both Hearthstone and Dota 2 employ similar systems. In Dota 2 players immediately have access to the full roster, but pay to unlock skins for their heroes, wards, and even the game client itself. And in hearthstone, players start off with a standard basic set of cards that is expanded by opening card packs, which can be purchased with real money or by grinding out games to earn in-game “gold”. The key in all three instances is that there is no additional financial barrier to entry beyond owning a PC (or even a phone in the case of Hearthstone) capable of playing the game. Users can play and enjoy the game, and truly get hooked, without ever having to commit a dime.
The obvious question that might get asked by a typically stubborn Japanese gaming behemoth that produces most of our beloved fighters (I’m looking at you Capcom and Namco) is “why would a user ever pay for a game they can play for free?”
Earlier I mentioned that no major fighting game has “successfully” implemented a free-to-play model. While there have be several attempts — most notable are Dead or Alive 5 Ultimate and Killer Instinct — all have fallen short in some respect, and none have come close to seeing the same kind of success as the current top-tier of free to play esports titles. Odd, given that many consider platform fighters as the original esport.
Are fighting games incompatible with the free-to-play model? Or is it just a matter of poor implementations? And why are the fighting game giants so unwilling to try what is so clearly working in other esports? I’m going to lay out what I think are some of the key ingredients to a successful free-to-play fighting game.
1. Make a game that people actually want to play competitively.
This may sound stupidly obvious, but it is surprisingly easy to overlook and just as easy to mess up, even if you are planning for it. There is a big difference between playing the story mode or playing casually on the couch with buddies when compared to playing a game in a highly competitive environment.
The number one issue that most would be esports games face is competitive balance. Literally, every major fighting game has been plagued with balance issues which at best limit their character pool and at worst completely undermine the competitive aspect of the game.
There is no simple remedy to this. The only fix is to keep a sharp eye on the competitive scene while being willing to push frequent updates to buff and nerf characters as new balance issues are discovered. This cycle leads to an ever evolving meta-game in titles like Dota 2 and League of Legends but ensures that the games always remain competitive. There is no reason the same strategy could not work for competitive fighters.
2. Have a deep character pool.
No one wants to see the same four characters over and over (I’m looking at you DoA 5 Ultimate). It leads to a boring gaming experience and a terrible spectator experience. Players should immediately have access to a wide and varied character pool so they can really get a feel for the game and find a play style they enjoy.
In my opinion, the approach League of Legends takes to character pool makes the most sense for adapting to fighting games. In LoL there is a weekly rotation of ten free champions. Simply by playing the game long enough, users will get an opportunity to play any and every character in the game. When you find one you like and want to keep playing with, you can buy it; adding it to your roster permanently (A notable side effect of the limited character pool is that it drastically reduces the barrier to entry for new players. Picking from a roster of over 100 players is pretty daunting when you first open Dota 2).
Most fighting games already employ a similar mechanic (this is likely where the idea originated) whereby players slowly unlock the entire roster by completing parts of the single-player/story-mode portion of the game. But just about every fighting game has a relatively simple way to undermine this, usually a cheat code to automatically unlock everything. Kind of defeats the purpose huh?
Rosters are one of the inherent strengths of fighting games, particularly when we are talking about games like Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, Tekken, and Super Smash Bros who have been building in depth story lines around their rosters for the last three decades. None of the current leading esports titles come anywhere near close to having the same kind of depth in their law and nostalgia in their rosters.
The fix here? Stop putting backdoors in your fighting games that let players unlock everything instantly. It should take time, a hell of a lot of it (something in the order of years), to unlock the entire roster.
3. Allow users to unlock the whole game simply by playing.
In Hearthstone, players can theoretically unlock the entire card pool without ever paying a cent. Players are rewarded with class specific cards every few levels they gain on any specific class. On top of that, daily challenges reward players with in-game “gold” that can be spent on card packs, entering arena games which reward with card packs and gold, or unlocking new chapters to the single player experience which reward exclusive cards. I say it is theoretically possible because new cards are released at somewhat regular intervals, meaning that there is always new cards to aim for.
Now imagine this same mechanic in a version of Super Smash Bros geared towards competitive esports play. Players start with a limited roster of Nintendo’s A-listers — Mario, Link, Donkey Kong, Pikachu, Samus, Fox, Kirby, and Bowser — and can then slowly (and I do mean slooowwly) earn their way to unlocking the rest of the roster by completing both single and multiplayer challenges. Nintendo has a near endless potential character pool, so adding characters every couple of months in the same way Hearthstone adds cards or LoL and Dota add champions and Heroes would be trivial. What’s more, the law and nostalgia are already built into the roster! No need to come up with elaborate backstories and artwork, it’s all there already because the characters are recycled from other games.
And for those players that are impatient to unlock the roster by grinding it out (practically everyone who plays beyond a certain number of hours), there is always the option to buy your favorite characters with real money.
4. Pay to play now.
Here is where the business model actually kicks in. The key is dangling the carrot just far enough ahead that, eventually, players decide they would rather just pay to unlock characters than keep grinding out the free game. When I started playing Hearthstone (maybe a year ago), I vowed never to spend a dime of IRL money on the game. It was going to be a purely casual effort for me and I didn’t care how slowly I progressed. Fastforward, I have now spent more than $50 on “gold” so that I could unlock the single-player component of the game and the precious cards within. So much for my vow.
The same is true for the vast majority of players in all of the top esports games. Let players invest enough time in a game, and eventually they will be more than willing to shell out their hard-earned in order to stay up to date. Game devs are notorious for exacerbating this by making new cards and characters overpowered on release, almost forcing high-tier players to shell out for the new additions immediately in order to stay relevant, only to turn around and nerf the new character in the next update. Pay-to-win is an annoying practice from the players’ point of view, but it has proved to be a fruitful business model (when implemented delicately) for LoL, Dota 2, and Hearthstone alike; no reason Street Fighter couldn’t release a new Akuma every few months.
5. All the skins!
For games like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive that do not have a roster per say or Dota 2 that gives access to the entire roster from day one, there are still some totally viable business models. Both have thriving ecosystems for in-game skins. In CS:GO every weapon has dozens of skins or varying rarity and in Dota everything from a hero’s hat, to the in-game HUD, to the announcers have skins available. Skins are randomly awarded throughout the game as you gain hours/experience and for completing occasional challenges. But the only predictable way of acquiring skins is by buying them directly in-game or on the secondary p2p marketplace also offered in-game.
Skins like this would be another potential standalone business model, especially in with the nostalgia-heavy rosters in most major fighting games. Imagine how many skins you could create and sell for Mario in Super Smash Bros! Alternatively, you could follow the LoL route and incorporate skins as just one of many monetization models. Either way, new outfits, arenas, flourishes, and animations would surely be a big seller in the free-to-play fighter.
6. No more cyclical releases.
CS:GO is more than six years old and League of Legends is more than seven years old. This kind of release cycle is unheard of in fighters; which are typically released every two or three years. Everyone likes updates to their games, but most users detest the bi-annual new release where game developers pry $80 from their wallet so they can play the current iteration of the game. 2k is notorious for this with their yearly release cycle, a topic for future rants given the NBA’s recent announcement of their entrance into the world of esports.
Unlike the 2k sports games, fighting games do not have a natural reason (coinciding with the relevant sports season) for regular new editions.
This doesn’t mean that developers can’t update their game. In fact, quite the opposite. Update as often as you like! Dota 2 updates almost daily. What it does mean is that rather than committing years and millions into building the new version of a game in hopes it will be a hit, development time can be used to continually refine a game on every level. Compare the graphics and gameplay of LoL now to when it was first released. They look like totally different games! There is a reason more than one hundred million players play League of Legends, they have done an incredible job refining every aspect of the game over the past seven years.
Alright, so that turned into a bit of a long winded rant. If you made it this far, thanks for sticking with me. By now you are probably as bewildered as I am, wondering why none of the major fighting game titles have properly attempted a free-to-play model. It’s a simple formula that is clearly profitable, but more than that it leads to more enjoyable and competitive games.
I’d love to hear your thoughts on why free-to-play hasn’t taken off in the world of fighters. Is it compatible with fighting games? Do you think it is something we’ll see in the next iteration of the major fighting game titles? Or will they continue down the same tried and true path, even if it seems it will inevitably lead to their doom? Too melodramatic?
Oh, in finishing up, I’d just like to add that I’m aware that not all of the current top-tier esports titles are free to play. Overwatch retails for ~$60, Rocket League for ~$20, and CS:GO for ~$15. So an initial price to buy the game is not necessarily a deal breaker. Although I think there is diminishing returns as you raise the retails price of your game. Hell, I still haven’t purchased Overwatch because of the $60 price tag. But even though these three games do have a price tag, all three include most of the key ingredients listed above.
Also, I feel obligated to give a shout out to Brawhalla, a relatively new Smash Bros-esue melee brawler that seems to have implemented a great version of the free-to-play model and is slowly breaking into both the fighting game and esports worlds.
Dev Update
As I mentioned in last weeks dev update, our current focus is redesigning and implementing a large portion of the UX which we identified as a major barrier to entry and usability for our core demographic (mainstream competitive esports players). Making the user experience simple and intuitive enough for mainstream users is, and has been, a major challenge for the crypto space as whole because well… crypto is kind of complex.
Internally, we’ve had several long debates on how to accomplish this while staying true to both our mission and business. A complex challenge that will almost certainly require some compromise in the short-medium term.
While the vast majority of the changes we’re currently designing and implementing are in the backend, we are redesigning and reimplementing the frontend in parallel. Here is a quick sneak peak of the UI.
We’re Hiring!
If you have a mad skillz and a burning desire to change the face of competitive esports, then we want you! We are currently in the process of expanding our team and have a few key roles that we would like to fill immediately.
If these roles fit your skill set, fear not! We’re expanding quickly, so keep an eye on firstblood.io/careers as we post more position.
