作者：Lars Doucet

很多开发者/发行商都出售扩展包及其他游戏独立附属内容，作为“可下载内容”或是“付费DLC”。这一模式带给玩家和开发者些许问题。涉及玩家的问题已被广泛讨论，所以这里我们暂且不谈论。

下面是我作为开发者，对于这一模式的看法。

假设我们的《Defender’s Quest》即将问世的1.0版本运行顺利，我们在后续过程推出扩展包。这是否能够带来足够收益，抵消制作投入？

有若干因素会影响这一决策：

1. 我们无法售出比原生游戏更多的DLC内容

2. DLC的价格必须低于原生作品

3. 许多用户将不会选择DLC内容（查看注释）

注释：只有第1和第2点涉及收益问题，但我是个软心肠的人，所以第3点对我来说非常重要。我制作游戏的一个最主要原因是，让尽可能多的玩家享受其中。只要我能够赚取足够收益，靠此谋生，我就不想要限制和分割体验内容（游戏邦注：而这正是付费DLC所做的事情）。免费模式无疑是个选择，但我暂时不谈论这一话题，本文主要围绕由内而外修复DLC内容。

所以假设我们有25%的用户购买DLC（这是个乐观估值），我们以游戏价格的25%出售内容，这给我们的收益是原始总收益的6.25%。还算不错——若制作原生作品的资金、时间和精力投入还不到收益的6.25%，那么我们就获得额外收入！

问题是，游戏是在走下坡路。

首先，人类本性的一个定律是，所有购买决策都有“摩擦”，所以会有越少用户购买原生作品的后续DLC包。其次，人类商业活动的一个定律是，头天是DLC创收最多的时期，这就是为什么如今有许多AAA游戏推行头天DLC。第2条定律的可怕必然结果是，越是推迟发行DLC内容，销售数量就越少。结合这些时间和摩擦压力，你所瞄准的是日益缩减的收益。

这意味着，你的头个扩展包将是最畅销的内容，因此付费DLC无法承受冗长开发过程。有没有什么方式能够修复这一模式，但同时又无需转投订阅或免费模式？

我认为有办法。

我将其称作“Freeloadable Content”，简称FreeLC。

FreeLC的运作模式

首先，假设我想要制作的DLC必须创收5000美元，方能达到收资平衡。所以就付费DLC而言，若基础游戏售价7美元，我们也许会以2美元出售DLC，期望能够至少出售2500份内容。这是传统模式。

而在FreeLC模式中，我们会运行小型Kickstarter项目，筹集我们原本希望通过出售内容获得的5000美元。现在我们已解决成本问题，我们将扩展内容以免费更新包的形式呈现给已购买基础游戏的玩家，即便他们没有在Kickstarter上捐资。所以这就是所谓的freeloadable content。

影响

虽然FreeLC的构思非常简单，但它带来若干有趣且有些违反直觉的影响。

首先，相比付费DLC内容，FreeLC不那么有对抗性。即便玩家非常享受于《质量效应3》及其20美元的头天扩展内容，但这依然会阻碍她的享受过程，因为她得思考EA是否企图通过秘密手段将游戏价格提高至80美元（游戏邦注：EA Peter Moore基本承认这一点）。

所以这是个有利条件。但除无需一点一点索取玩家外，或者更确切来说，10美元、20美元地榨取玩家，我们可以让所有玩家都获得额外内容，同时获得开发资金。我们无需将游戏的共享文化体验分割成高消费和低消费层次。

此外，还有一个优点值得我们特别关注：

我们提高了原生作品的价值！

在付费DLC模式中，基础游戏保持不变，而开发者创造的额外价值固定于独立扩展包中，这些包裹都有额外的购买摩擦。而在FreeLC模式中，各个扩展内容都让原生作品变得更突出，由于我们已获得“DLC 资金”，因此我们能够以相同原始价格出售完整组合的内容。

下面我将通过例子列举其中影响。

首先，假设为了方便讨论，你可以将体验游戏的价值缩减为某个具体数值。所以，假设基础游戏等值于10个单位的趣味性，或者简称“funits”。然后我们制作小型扩展内容，内容的价值是2个funit。总的来说，这是个价值12 funit的体验。我们最终推出一个价值10 funit的完整游戏及各值2个funit的5个DLC包裹。

然后，我们将所有商品载入我们的数字手推车，运载至网络出售。

这是付费DLC包含的内容：

这是FreeLC包含的内容：

你更愿意购买哪个内容？

第二个选择以一半价格提供相同内容。我们已获得我们原本需要通过DLC销售收回的成本，所以我们无需索取额外的10美元。

更好的是，这包含一个简单的低摩擦购买决策——“你是否想要以一个较低价格购买所有内容？”我觉得这听起来像是个不错交易！这远要比如下决策更容易被接受：“你是否想要购买这一内容？更多这一内容？这个？还有这个呢？”

下面，就来谈谈FreeLC模式包含的各种潜在问题以及要如何处理。

1）Freeloader（白吃白喝者）

由于所有购买游戏的用户都能获得FreeLC内容，他们支持Kickstarter项目的动机就降低很多，只需坐等免费内容。这是我能够想到的最大风险。

首先，你需要购买原生作品方能获得Kickstarter内容，因此如果所有玩家都能得到这一内容，其重要性就不那么显著。虽说如此，这里包含若干潜在解决方案：

* 专属抵押者回馈

我们针对高额抵押者制作特殊内容，例如专属奖金和装饰道具，将他们的喜好同游戏结合等。你获得这些东西的唯一方式是，支持Kickstarter活动，所以除获得FreeLC内容外，用户会积极进行捐资。

* 出售基础游戏

最低抵押标准让你能够低价购买原生作品，Kickstarter活动作为某种“销售数量”，数值翻番。若你尚未拥有游戏，现在你就有机会以较低价格买到内容。你不仅能够立即获得内容，你还获得所有当前及未来的FreeLC内容。

* 依靠善意？

也许这一疯狂想法会促使用户出于纯粹的善意支持项目。我并不指望单单依靠这点动机，但这是真实情况，玩家对于DLC内容所怀有的憎恶之情表明，许多用户期待能够给予他们更多尊重的替代选择。

2）丧失“潜在”销量

下个关注点是，通过免费分发更新内容，你流失了销量。常言道，“不要错失收益最大化的机会。”

首先，若Kickstarter活动取得成功，是否“流失”销售无关紧要，因为你原本能够通过DLC销量获得的资金已存在于你的账户中，之后的收益是额外所得。

其次，就如我上面所谈到的，现在用户会更积极地购买原生作品，作品的出售价格高过DLC内容，能够覆盖更多的潜在用户，因为他的购买摩擦最低。

第三，虽然我们无法知晓你原本能够获得的具体DLC销量，但你掌握足够信息，能够设定合理的最大值。DLC内容需要依靠原生作品，因此其销售数量无法超越原生作品。此外，就如上面提到的，诸如《质量效应3》之类具备庞大营销预算的AAA作品在头天DLC内容中只有40%的配售率（游戏邦注：这是DLC销量的最佳时机），所以我们可以合理假设，我们将从中获得更少收益。

最后，FreeLC模式创造额外收益来源——资金丰厚的忠实玩家。免费模式开发者将此称作“鲸鱼用户”，但在FreeLC模式中，我们将其称作“资助者”。这些玩家是游戏的最大支持者，通常寻求进行更多消费的机会。这一模式并非仅仅旨在获取他们的资金，而是将他们当作游戏社区的中流砥柱。

3）插入有关Kickstarter活动的不满

下个问题就是Kickstarter和群众集资本身。

越来越多用户开始关注Kickstarter的乌托邦式游戏活动，他们开出空头支票，索取数万至数十万的融资，这些资金需要耗费若干年方能赚得。这些担忧很多都未体现在FreeLC模式中。

首先，若你是群众融资的FreeLC内容的开发者，你多半已制作出基础游戏，树立自己的业绩。

其次，你多半已设定抵押者将立即获得的基本回馈——原生作品的折扣价，这能够让他们获得所有当前及未来的FreeLC内容。

第三，由于这只是扩展包，不是完整游戏，因此即便是相当庞大和高成本的项目也能够获得少量资金，抵消开发成本。

第四，开发扩展包要比从头制作游戏风险低很多，这所耗费的时间相对较少。

这应能够带来引人注目的Kickstarter活动，无需给出奇怪承诺就能够轻松获得融资。

未来计划

需要强调的是，我上面提到的整个FreeLC模式都是个假设。我不知道之前是否有人真的进行尝试，我不知道这在实际操作中是否真的比付费DLC更胜一筹。这些是我所能够预见的结果和影响，但有待实际验证。

所以我们何时将在《Defender’s Quest》中采用FreeLC模式？

目前，我们正在给《Defender’s Quest》制作大型免费更新内容，即版本1.0，这是在作品于各大数字下载商店发行之后。依照计划，这本该是在1个月前就落实。如果我够聪明，2月份就应该想到这一FreeLC模式，将此运用至此大型更新内容中，但我们具备一定资金，依然能够维持开发过程，希望新内容的销量能够带给游戏光明未来。

我不知道我们的未来发展会是如何，但我可以肯定表示，未来若要推出扩展包，我们定会采用FreeLC模式。

这应该是个引人注目的Kickstarter活动，无需给出空头支票就能够轻松获得融资。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Freeloadable content – an alternative to paid DLC

by Lars Doucet

A lot of developers/publishers sell expansion packs and other discrete add-ons to their games as “downloadable content,” or “paid DLC.”  This model has problems, for both players and developers.  The problems for players have been covered exhaustively, so let’s leave that aside for the moment.

Here’s my perspective as a developer.

Let’s say that the upcoming version 1.0 launch of our game Defender’s Quest goes well, and some time down the line we release an expansion pack.  Will it earn enough money to justify working on it?

There are a couple of facts that influence this decision:

1. It’s impossible to sell more copies of DLC than of the original game

2. DLC’s price must be substantially less than the original game’s

3. Many people in your audience will never experience the DLC content*

* Only issues 1 and 2 are relevant from a financial perspective, but I’m a softie, so number 3 is important to me for other reasons.  One of the biggest reasons I make games is so that as many people can enjoy them as possible. As long as I make enough money to keep doing my job, I don’t like restricting and fragmenting the experience, which is exactly what paid DLC does.  Free2Play is certainly an alternative, but I want to leave that for another article, this one is mostly about fixing DLC from within.

So let’s assume 25% of our audience buys our DLC (an optimistic estimate), and we sell it for 25% of the base game’s price.  This gives us 6.25% of our original gross revenue.  Not bad – and if we spent less than 6.25% of the money, time, and effort it took to make the original game, we just got a raise!

The problem is, it’s all downhill from there.

First, it’s a law of human nature that every purchasing decision has “friction,” so fewer people will buy each subsequent DLC pack than the one before.  Second, it’s a law of human business that day one is the most profitable day for DLC, which is why so many AAA games these days push day-one DLC.  The frightening corollary to this second law is that each day you wait after launch to release DLC means fewer sales.  Combine these pressures of time and friction, and you’re looking at ever-dwindling revenue. 

What this means is that your first expansion pack will almost certainly be your best seller, and thus paid DLC can’t sustain prolonged development.  Is there a way to fix this model without abandoning it for subscriptions or free-to-play?

I think there is.

I call it “Freeloadable Content,” or FreeLC.

How FreeLC Works

First, let’s assume the DLC I want to create must make $5,000 to justify working on it.  So, with paid DLC, if the base game cost $7, we might sell the DLC for $2 and hope for at least 2,500 sales.  That’s the traditional model.

Under the FreeLC model, we instead start a small Kickstarter project to raise the $5,000 we would normally expect to make through sales.  Now that we’ve covered this cost, we release the expansion as a free update to everyone who has already purchased the base game, even if they didn’t contribute to the Kickstarter.  Hence, freeloadable content.

Implications

Although the idea of FreeLC is quite simple, it has some interesting and somewhat counter-intuitive consequences.

For one, FreeLC can be less adversarial than paid DLC.  Even if a player legitimately enjoys Mass Effect 3 and its $20 day-one expansion, it dampens her enjoyment when she has to wonder whether EA is just trying to find a sneaky way to raise the game’s price to $80 (EA’s Peter Moore has essentially admitted to this).

So that’s one benefit.  But besides not having to nickel-and-dime, or more accurately, ten-and-twenty-dollar our players, we can let all of them have the extra content and still get paid to develop it.  We don’t have to fragment the game’s shared cultural experience into high- and low-paying tiers.

Furthermore, there’s one final benefit that deserves special attention:

We just increased the value of the original game!

Under the paid DLC model, the base game stays the same, while any additional value the developer creates is locked up in discrete expansion packs, each of which has additional purchasing friction.  With FreeLC, each expansion makes the original game better, and since we’ve already made our “DLC money,” we’re free to sell the whole collection for the same original price.

I’ll illustrate this effect with an example.

First, let’s assume for the sake of argument that you can actually reduce the value of enjoying a game to some number.  So, say the base game is worth 10 units of fun, or “funits,” (whatever those are).  Then, we make a small expansion, worth 2 funits.  Together, that’s an experience worth 12 funits.  All together, we eventually release 1 complete game worth 10 funits and 5 DLC packs worth 2 funits each.

Then, we load all our merchandise into our digital wheelbarrow, and cart it off to the internet for sale.

Here’s how it looks under paid DLC:

And here’s how it looks under FreeLC:

Which would you rather buy?

The second option provides the exact same content for half the price.  We’ve already recouped the cost that we would normally have to make through DLC sales, so we don’t have to charge the extra $10. 

Even better, there’s one, simple low-friction purchasing decision – “Do you want to buy everything for one low price?” Sounds like a good deal to me!  That’s a much easier sell than, “Do you want to buy this? And how about a little more for this? And this? And this?”

Now, let’s look at all the potential problems with the FreeLC model and see if we can address them.

1) Freeloaders

Since everyone who’s already purchased the game gets the FreeLC, there’s less incentive to support the Kickstarter drive, and just wait to get the content for free. This is the biggest risk I can think of (though we certainly have nothing to lose by just trying it and seeing what happens). 

First of all, you have to buy the original game to get the FreeLC, so it’s not as big a concern as if it was just free for the general public.  That said, here’s some possible solutions to the problem:
 
* Exclusive pledger rewards

We create special stuff for high-dollar pledgers, such as exclusive bonuses and vanity items, putting their likeness into the game, etc. The only way you can get these things is by supporting the Kickstarter drive, so people still have an incentive to contribute besides just getting the FreeLC.

* Sell the basic game

The lowest pledge level lets you buy the original game at a reduced price, so the Kickstarter drive doubles as a kind of sale.  If you already have the game, you can gift this copy to a friend.  If you don’t have the game yet, now’s your chance to buy in at a reduced price.  Not only do you get something right now, you’ve now bought into all current and future FreeLC.

* Count on goodwill?

Perhaps this crazy idea will drive people to support it out of the sheer goodness of their hearts.  I wouldn’t count on this alone, but it’s a real thing that happens, and the amount of resentment players have for DLC suggests many would welcome an alternative that gives them more respect.
 
2) Lost “potential” sales

The next concern is that by giving away the updates for free, you’re losing sales.  “Never leave money on the table,” as the saying goes.

First of all, if the Kickstarter drive succeeds, it doesn’t really matter if you “lose” sales because the money you would have gotten through DLC sales is already in the bank.  Everything after that is just gravy.

Second, and as I’ve said above, people now have more incentive to purchase the original game, which sells for a higher price than a DLC pack and can reach a larger potential audience since it has the lowest possible purchasing friction.

Third, although it’s impossible to know the precise number of DLC sales you’d have made otherwise (and thus ask for too little in the Kickstarter), you do have enough information to set a reasonably accurate upper bound.  DLC requires the original game to work, so you simply won’t sell more copies than you did of the original game.  Furthermore, in the articles I linked above, we saw that AAA titles with huge marketing budgets like Mass Effect 3 had a 40% attach rate for day-one DLC (again, the best day for DLC sales), so it’s safe to assume that we mere mortals would get substantially less than that.   

Finally, the FreeLC model opens up an additional revenue stream – dedicated players with deep pockets.  Free-To-Play developers call these “whales,” but under the FreeLC model, I’d call them “patrons.”  These players are the game’s biggest supporters and are often looking for ways to spend more money.  Rather than just getting their money, this method includes them as pillars of the game’s community.

3) (Insert complaint about Kickstarter)

The next issue is that of Kickstarter and crowdfunding itself. 

Many people have raised concerns about pie-in-the-sky Kickstarter campaigns for games that promise the moon and ask for tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding, which then take years to materialize, if ever.  Most of these concerns don’t apply to FreeLC.

First of all, if you’re a developer kickstarting FreeLC, you’ve already made your base game and established your track record.

Second, you already have a basic reward that you can deliver to pledgers right away – a discounted copy of the original game, which entitles them to all current and future FreeLC. 

Third, since it’s just an expansion pack and not a full-fledged game, even a relatively large and expensive project can ask for a modest sum of money and still cover the cost of development. 

Fourth, developing an expansion pack is much less risky than creating a game from scratch, and it takes a lot less time to boot.

This should result in an attractive Kickstarter campaign that’s easy to fund without making outlandish promises.

Future Work

Let me emphasize that the entire FreeLC model I’ve just laid out is a hypothesis.  I’m not sure if anyone’s actually tried this before, and I don’t know whether it will actually work in practice any better than paid DLC.  These are the effects and implications I can foresee, but nothing beats actually trying the thing out.

So…when are we coming out with FreeLC for Defender’s Quest?

Right now, we’re still working on our big free update to Defender’s Quest, version 1.0, followed by a release on all the big digital download stores that will accept us.  This should happen in a month or so if everything goes according to plan.  If I had been smart, I would have thought of this FreeLC idea back in February and used it to fund this huge update, but our financials are in reasonable shape and we should still be able to squeak by, and hopefully new sales will give the game a future.

I’m not sure what the future holds for us, but I can say for a fact that if and when we release an expansion pack for a game, it will be FreeLC.

This should result in an attractive Kickstarter campaign that’s easy to fund without making outlandish promises.（Source：gamasutra）