Smedley Flip Flops on the F2P Model

So here’s a fascinating turn of events. Remember when Smed (John Smedley) was all about the F2P? The “our games will be free forever!!” mantra that was being preached from every channel. Check out the article he wrote on back in 2011. I particularly like the section headlined, “The Future is Free to Play.”

People can change their minds. I do it often. Apparently John has changed his mind. See the tweets below.

You don’t say? I’m not trying to be an overly snarky ass here. I completely agree with all of his tweets. Check out all of them @j_smedley. I’m cautious, though. This is all a little bit much to take in when you look at the 180 he’s taking.

I hope that more people grow tired of the “development” process being all about how to monetize every line of code. I’m ready to stop feeling like I am being manipulated into spending money, or feeling like everything I do has been calculated to maximize revenue per player. Smed is tired of people questioning whether or not something was done to make money or to make a better game:

Well guess what? I’m tired of having to do the questioning. I’m tired of having to listen to corporate shills tell me why playing for free forever is so amazing for me. I’ll be waiting to see what Smed churns out, and for $20 I just might give it a try.

  • The problem with whatever he is dreaming up is going to be scale. He either needs a backer with serious pockets, or we are headed to Kickstarter. Which my non professional polling tells me typically results in a bunch of amateur, non sticky, mmos.

    I need to take my glass half full medicine again. BRB.

  • Has Smed even said what type of game this is? Has he even said it requires online play?

    A standalone game that doesn’t have forward development doesn’t need microtransactions, does it. And if it’s a game that is extended by tranches of DLC then he can reasonably say those are not “microtransactions”.

    I think all he means is it won’t be dependent on a cash shop to keep servers up.

  • @Bhagpuss: It doesn’t matter what his B2P business model is at this point. He introduced the line of questioning. He opened the door wide open. He dangled very real failings of the F2P marketplace right in front of the world and said that’s why his company won’t be making a F2P game. That’s a 180 from his very poignant statements about F2P being the future, and how it makes more sense for companies and players to only do F2P moving forward.

    @Sanz: Exactly.

  • Keep in mind this is Smed, the guy who also told people airdrops in H1Z1 (home to SWG players!, also according to Smed) weren’t Pay-4-Power, so what most of us consider ‘no microtransactions’ and what Smed views as ‘no microtransactions’ might be completely different.

    Also whatever he produces has to be even halfway decent for it to matter, and his recent track record is PS2, Landmark, H1Z1, so…

  • @SynCaine: Having to overcome PS2, Landmark, and H1Z1 being awful games is a huge hurdle. Having to overcome their business models is an additional hurdle. I don’t see it happening.

  • Smed has routinely shown himself as a person with no integrity. I am sure wharever he is working on will fail.

  • While I hope he develops a halfway decent game and only sells it for $20, this is Smedley so please do not believe anything he says this early.

  • Does anyone who know Smed’s history take anything he says to heart?

    For me to believe anything out of his mouth concerning a game’s financial model it would have to be released for over a year.

  • I would like to see Smed and Molyneux produce a game together if only to assemble a video documenting the timeline of their lies, gaffs, and revisionistic excuses during the entire process.