Maybe they should look at how Knock Out City works. It's all free and unlocked and such... Till ya reach a certain level. And then ya choose to buy or not and continue.
Good video :) Really wish the best of luck to the dev team for figuring out the best model to go for, it's such a tricky choice. As for talking content, do more talk stuff! I love having stuff to listen to while doing work/chores/driving, and there's certainly a lack of it for the Rivals scene. I tune into all sorts of melee podcasts/videos, and I'd love to have more stuff to listen to for RoA.
F2P seems perfect. You can even add the milestone system on top of that. T9 incentivize playing for longer even without q battle pass. Making you more likely to buy one
Interesting video but I kinda disagree? Because, sure, for Multiversus it's the best choice by far. But because people will buy skins for all those characters they know. They will want that super classy outfit for the Batman, the really funky one for Tom & Jerry. Because they know and love those characters already. But with Rivals, it'll be way more niche as not everyone already like furry style characters and clearly not everyone would pay for outfits for them? Me first, I wouldn't care at all about having a Zetterburn outfit or a Wrastor with glasses and would just never buy anything in the game? Where I would actually buy the game if it coasted 40$.
I held off on getting RoA (and put >1k hrs into BH instead) back when it launched, specifically because of the pricing model. I've since sunk more money into BH. But waited to get RoA DE when it was on sale. I somewhat regret being behind in the years of gameplay experience, but am also super satisfied with the amount of content (ahem WS) that you get now - bang for buck. Additionally, now I'm able to draw back in my friends who already owned the game. (This is coming from a filthy casual btw)
Something to consider is that skins and stuff are more valuable and interesting to casual players in games like fortnite or multiverses because skins and costumes can reference preexisting content. I already know Steven Universe and the tux outfit references an episode I like so I’m more inclined to buy it. And a Moonknight skin in Fortnite has infinitely more appeal than Mollo having a maid outfit skin in Rivals 2 because Moonknight is currently relevant. I mean I PERSONALLY would like Maid Mollo, but you kinda have to have a connection to the characters already in order for a skin to have that kind of effect.
Reference skins definitely help but I don't think they're a necessity by any means. Plenty of free to play games have generic/recolor skins and make those work just fine, and I think the rivals devs would be more inclined to make unique skins lines similar to league of legends that people would get excited for.
I think brawlhalla’s model works because the characters are similar enough that you’re supposed to get hooked by the gameplay itself and not the characters. Combine that with the legend rotations, and it’s pretty easy to get into the game. It’s probably why they promote the esports so much: you see the cool gameplay and the tech and combos that are actually not very hard to do compared to other fighters, and it comes together to make a very appealing game.
I guess making the game free to play but having the characters to unlock isn't exacly the best way to go, but it could work depending on how they manage it. I think it would be better to compare that to what happend to battlerite rather then brawlhalla, since every character in battlerite are pretty unic and the game has a more competitive scenary focus like rivals, I think that worked in brawlhalla for the casual playerbase that won't care much for the different mechanics and characters. Battlerite ended up having playerbase issues because of the unlockable characters, since to unlock the cheapest champs u would problably have to play for an entire month nonstop. League of legends don't have much of that problem because u can unlock the cheapest champs pretty easily nowadays. I think the best thing they could do is to make milestones to unlock 4 basic characters and let the others be purchasable by ingame currency or real money, but for those who want to pay "less", they could make some sort of battlepass that could unlock every character more easily and add some cosmetics, so most ppl would pay for the extras and get the characters as a bonus.
Good video as always Bio! I'm still not entirely sure if I agree that fully free to play is the best route, like you said there's a huge risk regarding people playing the game, which F2P does fix, but people actually spending money is a different story. Brawlhalla is the only breakout success F2P fighter so far, and a lot of F2P games just don't see that return. Even Creatures isn't actively seeing support anymore, while not neccecarily a 'failure' it wasn't a big enough success to expand the team enough to keep it going. That said, I think *some* free aspect would be good to some degree. I hear a lot of people talk about Killer Instinct's model, during it's run it was a full priced game with season passes for the characters, but gave you Jago for free alongside a random character who rotated daily. I know on at least one occasion they released a character with them being free for a few days before becoming paid DLC as a limited trial. I think this system would avoid the pitfalls that traditional F2P titles have while also keeping people engaged and the player count up. Although, 2024 is a very good time frame if they're looking for a new F2P game. Like you said if Multiversus sucks there's a gap in the market, but even if it is good, Multiversus and Project L will run the gauntlet first and see what does and doesn't work so that Rivals 2 can work off of that information. There's always still a risk that the hype around those two is partially designed around characters popular outside of fighting games, but even still that info should be useful. It'll be interesting to see how things go, but if it does become free to play they should add a smash run battle royale mode I think 🙂
For the goal the devs have of making a competitor to the big dogs in the platform fighter sphere, I don't think there's another way to do that outside of some form of a free to play model. The extent in which they do that is a lot more flexible and I agree they can learn a lot based on the games that come out in that time frame ^^
I stan the KI model, but Imma play devil’s advocate just a bit: Brawlhalla may be the only breakout F2P fighter, but it’s also the only fighter that puts big-boy esports amount of money into its competitive scene, which I can only assume means the devs are rolling in it rn. Plus it’s concurrent playerbase on Steam alone kinda dicks on every other fighter other than Smash afaik. Speaking of, the countless number of people who are familiar with Smash gave/gives it a huge advantage over other F2P fighters like Fantasy Strike or the free parts of KI. All that being said, I do still think the KI model might be the best for the Rivals series in particular, especially if Workshop won’t/can’t come back. One of Rivals’ biggest draws is it’s competitive potential, which I think could mean 3 big things: 1) There wouldn’t be a strict paywall for casual players to give it a shot 2) the devs can harp on it’s competitive aspect in the game’s advertising without people saying “hurr durr F2P bad” 3) get money from competitive Smash players which IMO are very likely/willing to pay once they’ve given Rivals a chance.
@@cise3895 I'm not denying Brawlhalla's success, it's undeniably a breakout hit. But it's not like other people haven't tried to follow in their footsteps. As you mentioned Fantasy Strike, but also Slayers for Hire, Rumble Arena, Rushdown Revolt, and probably a bunch more that never took off. I know a few of those are in their infancy too, but at the same time I don't think you can ever immediately expect results like Brawlhalla. And because Brawlhalla stands alone, it's hard to truly pinpoint what made it so successful. Hell, a lot of possible reasons *won't* apply to Rivals 2. Brawlhalla has very low system requirements. It's also on nearly every platform, including mobile. The game has weekly rotating events. There's crossovers everywhere. A lot of what pushed Brawlhalla over the edge from modest to HUGE isn't necessarily going to work for rivals 2. Does that mean it NEEDS those things to survive? Not really, but no other F2P fighter has even come close. It's a very weird market right now, and it really just depends on if rivals 2 has the long lasting appeal to casual players. That said, I do agree that *some* free aspect is a must. Keeping the playerbase up is a huge deal, and allowing a "free to start" system would definitely help with that.
I really really sincerely hope that Rivals 2 does not opt for free to play. I'm sure there exists a f2p model that doesn't amount to constant psychological pummeling to convince people to spend more money, but I've not seen one. Outside of, like, ads and a payment to remove ads? I don't think it would be inaccurate to say that Creatures did not succeed, and I hope what they take away from that is the ftp model is not what their audience wants. The battle pass and gacha mechanics were a big part of why I didn't play much of Creatures.
I go over it in the video but, Fortnite/DotA2 do this perfectly where you can get all the core gameplay experience for free, and then monetize through cosmetics.
No. No no no no no no. No. Oh god please no. Free games are ALWAYS full of toxic little children or no lifers with no jobs or social skills. Please have it cost around 30 bucks minimum to separate the scumbags. There has never been a f2p game that didn't have a toxic community
But monitization aside, I do think having just unlockable characters is still fun if the requirements are small enough. Smash has enough characters that unlocking one every 2 games is still rewarding enough. I think rivals could something like unlock by paying Dan dollars (get by just playing enough) or do something in story mode. Just don't be like MK 11 and decided to not commit to anything and have only ONE unlockable character not behind a paywall.
@@BioBirb A dark version of yourself, forever sitting in the corner, waiting to be activated. His power is too great he had to be sealed away and attempted to be forgotten. But that reminder in the corner won’t let us forget.
F2P brings a lot of distrust with it. When people see F2P they see the brawlhala model, and though it gets a lot of people to try it people are more likely to jump ship when faced with the opportunity to purchase anything additional to the game than if they purchase the game up front. Developing additional cosmetics also takes resources, you are gambling each time a cosmetic is put out that it will make you more than what you spent developing it. The overabundance of cosmetics in F2P games also discourages whales from buying in. When faced with a lot of potential purchases they become choices and not a collection. I should know, I am a whale. I have all purchasable cosmetics in rivals bar some of the Symbiote Studios gold skins that tend to be out of stock. In F2P games if it does not give me some gameplay difference I tend not to purchase more than 10 dollars worth of cosmetics over the game's entire lifespan. (with one MMO as an exception) If you want to attract whales, a cheep price point can often be better than a free one, as well as having less cosmetics (maybe 1.5 times the rate they come out now) at a more expensive price.
See, I like the idea of the game being free to play, but I don’t want to have to re-buy a battle pass over and over again. I’d like it so that you can play the game for free, but purchase a “membership” or “deluxe version” that gives you access to more buddies, future cosmetics, and maybe even earlier access to upcoming DLC characters (by maybe a week or something). Subscription based services end up being a turn-off for a lot of people I think because they seem like a weird commitment that not everyone wants to dive into.
i like your hair dude and thanks for the upload very good points there a youtuber called maximillion dude that has been stressing this point too it's not a bad idea for fighting games although i'm old school so i rather just pay for a game and it's mine but im tired of buying a game full price 60 quid and then having to buy 5 different season passes
I agree, f2p + skins is genious, as you say just look at fortnite, or league coming even earlier. Its a great model, and I for one would surely spend more than 50 buck on skins for my favorite characters over time
Yeah I was very much expecting the game to be finished lol. Curious what they have in store when they fully launch, I'm assuming they'll still be a competitor but not to the potential they had when I made this vid.
Also respectfully. Multiverse is going to be a nick brawl situation. The game will die. I haven’t seen anybody talk about multiverses like nick brawl. Hell I didn’t even know multiverses existed.
I enjoyed this style of video Bio. I wouldn't mind a few more like this
background music is so goated
Maybe they should look at how Knock Out City works. It's all free and unlocked and such... Till ya reach a certain level. And then ya choose to buy or not and continue.
Wow, Bio! Great video! Engagement!
Thanks Luca! Hope you enjoyed your soap :)
@@BioBirb LOL
Good video :) Really wish the best of luck to the dev team for figuring out the best model to go for, it's such a tricky choice.
As for talking content, do more talk stuff! I love having stuff to listen to while doing work/chores/driving, and there's certainly a lack of it for the Rivals scene. I tune into all sorts of melee podcasts/videos, and I'd love to have more stuff to listen to for RoA.
UA-cam Windo... UA-cam Bio Birb, huge fan
Thank you :>
What a great thumbnail
Noodle has been killing it recently twitter.com/NoodleBirbArts
F2P seems perfect. You can even add the milestone system on top of that. T9 incentivize playing for longer even without q battle pass. Making you more likely to buy one
Yeah there's a lot of ways they could experiment with the f2p formula, really curious what they end up settling on
Would be interested in hearing your thoughts on Fraymakers as well! (Specifically mechanics and the studio's history with Smash Flash)
I'm gonna go deep into fraymakers when it gets closer to release, that and multiversus are the two big things I have my eyes on this year
Interesting video but I kinda disagree? Because, sure, for Multiversus it's the best choice by far. But because people will buy skins for all those characters they know. They will want that super classy outfit for the Batman, the really funky one for Tom & Jerry. Because they know and love those characters already. But with Rivals, it'll be way more niche as not everyone already like furry style characters and clearly not everyone would pay for outfits for them? Me first, I wouldn't care at all about having a Zetterburn outfit or a Wrastor with glasses and would just never buy anything in the game? Where I would actually buy the game if it coasted 40$.
I held off on getting RoA (and put >1k hrs into BH instead) back when it launched, specifically because of the pricing model. I've since sunk more money into BH. But waited to get RoA DE when it was on sale. I somewhat regret being behind in the years of gameplay experience, but am also super satisfied with the amount of content (ahem WS) that you get now - bang for buck. Additionally, now I'm able to draw back in my friends who already owned the game. (This is coming from a filthy casual btw)
great video :)
Thanks!
Something to consider is that skins and stuff are more valuable and interesting to casual players in games like fortnite or multiverses because skins and costumes can reference preexisting content. I already know Steven Universe and the tux outfit references an episode I like so I’m more inclined to buy it. And a Moonknight skin in Fortnite has infinitely more appeal than Mollo having a maid outfit skin in Rivals 2 because Moonknight is currently relevant. I mean I PERSONALLY would like Maid Mollo, but you kinda have to have a connection to the characters already in order for a skin to have that kind of effect.
Reference skins definitely help but I don't think they're a necessity by any means. Plenty of free to play games have generic/recolor skins and make those work just fine, and I think the rivals devs would be more inclined to make unique skins lines similar to league of legends that people would get excited for.
I think brawlhalla’s model works because the characters are similar enough that you’re supposed to get hooked by the gameplay itself and not the characters. Combine that with the legend rotations, and it’s pretty easy to get into the game. It’s probably why they promote the esports so much: you see the cool gameplay and the tech and combos that are actually not very hard to do compared to other fighters, and it comes together to make a very appealing game.
I guess making the game free to play but having the characters to unlock isn't exacly the best way to go, but it could work depending on how they manage it. I think it would be better to compare that to what happend to battlerite rather then brawlhalla, since every character in battlerite are pretty unic and the game has a more competitive scenary focus like rivals, I think that worked in brawlhalla for the casual playerbase that won't care much for the different mechanics and characters.
Battlerite ended up having playerbase issues because of the unlockable characters, since to unlock the cheapest champs u would problably have to play for an entire month nonstop.
League of legends don't have much of that problem because u can unlock the cheapest champs pretty easily nowadays.
I think the best thing they could do is to make milestones to unlock 4 basic characters and let the others be purchasable by ingame currency or real money, but for those who want to pay "less", they could make some sort of battlepass that could unlock every character more easily and add some cosmetics, so most ppl would pay for the extras and get the characters as a bonus.
Yeah Dan tends to take a lot of inspiration from LoL so I could see them going that route
first time viewer here subbed
Good video as always Bio!
I'm still not entirely sure if I agree that fully free to play is the best route, like you said there's a huge risk regarding people playing the game, which F2P does fix, but people actually spending money is a different story. Brawlhalla is the only breakout success F2P fighter so far, and a lot of F2P games just don't see that return. Even Creatures isn't actively seeing support anymore, while not neccecarily a 'failure' it wasn't a big enough success to expand the team enough to keep it going.
That said, I think *some* free aspect would be good to some degree. I hear a lot of people talk about Killer Instinct's model, during it's run it was a full priced game with season passes for the characters, but gave you Jago for free alongside a random character who rotated daily. I know on at least one occasion they released a character with them being free for a few days before becoming paid DLC as a limited trial. I think this system would avoid the pitfalls that traditional F2P titles have while also keeping people engaged and the player count up.
Although, 2024 is a very good time frame if they're looking for a new F2P game. Like you said if Multiversus sucks there's a gap in the market, but even if it is good, Multiversus and Project L will run the gauntlet first and see what does and doesn't work so that Rivals 2 can work off of that information. There's always still a risk that the hype around those two is partially designed around characters popular outside of fighting games, but even still that info should be useful.
It'll be interesting to see how things go, but if it does become free to play they should add a smash run battle royale mode I think 🙂
For the goal the devs have of making a competitor to the big dogs in the platform fighter sphere, I don't think there's another way to do that outside of some form of a free to play model. The extent in which they do that is a lot more flexible and I agree they can learn a lot based on the games that come out in that time frame ^^
I stan the KI model, but Imma play devil’s advocate just a bit: Brawlhalla may be the only breakout F2P fighter, but it’s also the only fighter that puts big-boy esports amount of money into its competitive scene, which I can only assume means the devs are rolling in it rn. Plus it’s concurrent playerbase on Steam alone kinda dicks on every other fighter other than Smash afaik. Speaking of, the countless number of people who are familiar with Smash gave/gives it a huge advantage over other F2P fighters like Fantasy Strike or the free parts of KI.
All that being said, I do still think the KI model might be the best for the Rivals series in particular, especially if Workshop won’t/can’t come back. One of Rivals’ biggest draws is it’s competitive potential, which I think could mean 3 big things: 1) There wouldn’t be a strict paywall for casual players to give it a shot 2) the devs can harp on it’s competitive aspect in the game’s advertising without people saying “hurr durr F2P bad” 3) get money from competitive Smash players which IMO are very likely/willing to pay once they’ve given Rivals a chance.
@@cise3895 I'm not denying Brawlhalla's success, it's undeniably a breakout hit. But it's not like other people haven't tried to follow in their footsteps. As you mentioned Fantasy Strike, but also Slayers for Hire, Rumble Arena, Rushdown Revolt, and probably a bunch more that never took off. I know a few of those are in their infancy too, but at the same time I don't think you can ever immediately expect results like Brawlhalla.
And because Brawlhalla stands alone, it's hard to truly pinpoint what made it so successful. Hell, a lot of possible reasons *won't* apply to Rivals 2. Brawlhalla has very low system requirements. It's also on nearly every platform, including mobile. The game has weekly rotating events. There's crossovers everywhere. A lot of what pushed Brawlhalla over the edge from modest to HUGE isn't necessarily going to work for rivals 2.
Does that mean it NEEDS those things to survive? Not really, but no other F2P fighter has even come close. It's a very weird market right now, and it really just depends on if rivals 2 has the long lasting appeal to casual players.
That said, I do agree that *some* free aspect is a must. Keeping the playerbase up is a huge deal, and allowing a "free to start" system would definitely help with that.
I really really sincerely hope that Rivals 2 does not opt for free to play. I'm sure there exists a f2p model that doesn't amount to constant psychological pummeling to convince people to spend more money, but I've not seen one. Outside of, like, ads and a payment to remove ads?
I don't think it would be inaccurate to say that Creatures did not succeed, and I hope what they take away from that is the ftp model is not what their audience wants. The battle pass and gacha mechanics were a big part of why I didn't play much of Creatures.
I go over it in the video but, Fortnite/DotA2 do this perfectly where you can get all the core gameplay experience for free, and then monetize through cosmetics.
No. No no no no no no. No. Oh god please no. Free games are ALWAYS full of toxic little children or no lifers with no jobs or social skills. Please have it cost around 30 bucks minimum to separate the scumbags. There has never been a f2p game that didn't have a toxic community
ssf2
Btw brawlhalla you can try every character and every skin in training mode.
But monitization aside, I do think having just unlockable characters is still fun if the requirements are small enough. Smash has enough characters that unlocking one every 2 games is still rewarding enough.
I think rivals could something like unlock by paying Dan dollars (get by just playing enough) or do something in story mode.
Just don't be like MK 11 and decided to not commit to anything and have only ONE unlockable character not behind a paywall.
If you get people REALLY quick like that it could work. Rivals 2 will have a smaller roster so finding that balance would be tough
Rivals 2 can’t flop as free to play because Windows will buy every cosmetic they put out :)
Who? :)
@@BioBirb A dark version of yourself, forever sitting in the corner, waiting to be activated. His power is too great he had to be sealed away and attempted to be forgotten. But that reminder in the corner won’t let us forget.
F2P brings a lot of distrust with it. When people see F2P they see the brawlhala model, and though it gets a lot of people to try it people are more likely to jump ship when faced with the opportunity to purchase anything additional to the game than if they purchase the game up front.
Developing additional cosmetics also takes resources, you are gambling each time a cosmetic is put out that it will make you more than what you spent developing it.
The overabundance of cosmetics in F2P games also discourages whales from buying in. When faced with a lot of potential purchases they become choices and not a collection. I should know, I am a whale. I have all purchasable cosmetics in rivals bar some of the Symbiote Studios gold skins that tend to be out of stock. In F2P games if it does not give me some gameplay difference I tend not to purchase more than 10 dollars worth of cosmetics over the game's entire lifespan. (with one MMO as an exception)
If you want to attract whales, a cheep price point can often be better than a free one, as well as having less cosmetics (maybe 1.5 times the rate they come out now) at a more expensive price.
See, I like the idea of the game being free to play, but I don’t want to have to re-buy a battle pass over and over again. I’d like it so that you can play the game for free, but purchase a “membership” or “deluxe version” that gives you access to more buddies, future cosmetics, and maybe even earlier access to upcoming DLC characters (by maybe a week or something). Subscription based services end up being a turn-off for a lot of people I think because they seem like a weird commitment that not everyone wants to dive into.
F2p would be sick asf for roa 2!
i like your hair dude and thanks for the upload very good points there a youtuber called maximillion dude that has been stressing this point too it's not a bad idea for fighting games although i'm old school so i rather just pay for a game and it's mine but im tired of buying a game full price 60 quid and then having to buy 5 different season passes
Mewmore’s Marvel v Capcom Clocktower is a sleeper agent noise for me because of all the pokeaim ive watched
I'm already super hype for R2, but it's possible it'll be FREE??
I agree, f2p + skins is genious, as you say just look at fortnite, or league coming even earlier. Its a great model, and I for one would surely spend more than 50 buck on skins for my favorite characters over time
engagement
Wow I am so e n g a g e d
Wowzah!
Rivals 2 being F2P while also having good skins that costs money seems like a good idea. Go for the Riot Games strategy.
Engagement comment
Engagement response
more talk videos!
Engagement :)
Woag
Well, I don't think multiversus is much of a threat anymore.
Yeah I was very much expecting the game to be finished lol. Curious what they have in store when they fully launch, I'm assuming they'll still be a competitor but not to the potential they had when I made this vid.
youtube algorithm
If rivals 2 costs more than 20 dollars it will die within 1 month.
$30 its a dead game
Respectfully windo. This take is bad
Also respectfully. Multiverse is going to be a nick brawl situation. The game will die. I haven’t seen anybody talk about multiverses like nick brawl. Hell I didn’t even know multiverses existed.
Reminder that the game is under NDA and in early alpha, so people aren't allowed to talk about the gameplay or their impressions.
@@BioBirb yeah I guess but I really don’t see it being big for long