Ghost Recon Wildlands as a Platform | Forums

[J J Marachev]

Hi Ubisoft Product Management Staff,

I wanted to address a post to you about “Ghost Recon: Wildlands” not simply as a title, but as a platform. You have built something quite unique in this game, a sandbox experience that is focused on tactical situation in the great outdoors. You have a well defined character customization user experience, that can easily be expanded. I wonder if you have thought about utilizing this platform as a sales engine for outdoor and tactical goods?

Okay, I just made a lot of players angry by suggesting a new/additional monetization model, which tends to offend. Please bare with me for a moment. Revenue for a company can be translated not only into profit but also into continued development budgets for improvement of a platform. So save your hate for a moment.

The outdoor apparel industry has a revenue stream of 4 billion dollars in the US alone. US Outdoor focused retailers saw an combined annual revenue of over 7 billion. The tactical and service clothing industry has seen year on year revenue growth of 8%, currently bring in over a quarter billion in revenue. We’ve seen many more traditional apparel manufacturers enter the space, and cross over use between tactical and outdoor goods has grown.

Wildlands is a perfect platform for advertising, promoting, and selling tactical gear and apparel. The ability to buy gear and apparel in game, for a small number of credits, and then get a promo-code for buying a discounted version of the real thing, could help further the longevity of the platform and fund development and enhancement of the game. Producers get an advertising opportunity, Ubisoft gets an in-game revenue stream, and producers can directly track sales success through promotion.

There are some ethical and public relations concerns with expanding this into the firearm and firearm accessory market. However in the US that could be incredibly popular and profitable. Allowing users a full template of customizable parts for the AR/M4 platform, such as uppers (LVAO-C, Alexander Arms Beowulf, .458 SOCOM, etc.), rails, stocks, triggers, magazines, scopes, lasers, lights, etc. could be easily monitized as purely in-game features. There are roughly between 8 and 9 million AR rifles in the US, and many AKs as well. Doing a similar promotion scheme with firearm manufacturers, even if revolved around the sales of promotional apparel rather than real firearm parts, could also be a revenue driver.

With this revenue, the in game customization system could be expanded to have gear make a larger impact on game play. I’ll use Blackhawk as an example, though I have no affiliation with them.

This 5% increase in stamina brought to you by Blackhawk’s Cyane Dynamic Pack with water reservoir. This slightly increased pistol draw speed brought to you by Blackhawk’s Serpa CQC Holster. This 2% speed enhancement brought to you by Blackhawk’s Desert Ops boots. This additional grenade brought to you buy the Blackhawk Single Frag Grenade Pouch. This 5% reduction in speed, but 90 increase in Assault Rifle Capacity, brought to you by Blackhawk’s D.O.A.V. Vest System. Etc. Etc. The key would be 1) balancing default gear against purchased gear so as not to over-power purchased gear 2) avoid escalating improvements over time aimed at driving sales which would alienate the user base 3) not getting pulled into the almost religiously heated conflict people have when discussing which brand is better.

New systems could be brought into Wildlands that support alternate gear. Rappelling is one gap in game play I have heard several players mention on the form. The dizzying variety of gear the the climbing space would potentially represent another advertising opportunity.

With this revenue the game could have the financial support to grow and improve. User concerns about playability, realism, and improved DLC content could be addressed through sales funded revenue. The game could evolve into a long term tactical sandbox in which tactical and outdoor goods sellers can market and potentially even sell goods through e-commerce.

Wildlands could have a lifespan of half a decade or more with updates and improvements, and lead to a long term franchise that has multiple revenue streams.

Just a thought.
JJ

[zoog.tangodown]

I think they make enough money with DLC micro transactions and other DLC items (like season pass content). If they sell enough DLC all this revenue can be used for improving the game.

Implementing some sort of ad system in the game probably costs way more time (alignment, sales etc) and resources than simply continued selling of DLC items.

[Schicic]

Your asking for a P2W game and Adware. Do you pay for your games with your own money? I know i didn't spend $60+ to see ads saying "buy this crap", or a system in which you need to keep paying them money if you want to keep up with competition or difficulty.

[Twigs_Dee]

Someone needs a kick in the nuts.




Good thing Ubisoft would never do your suggestion, that would force them into a min.period of supporting a game that they never attended to last very long.

[J J Marachev]

Your asking for a P2W game and Adware. Do you pay for your games with your own money? I know i didn't spend $60+ to see ads saying "buy this crap", or a system in which you need to keep paying them money if you want to keep up with competition or difficulty.

Straw man argument.

I never proposed in game advertisement pop-ups or other intrusive ad-ware. What I mean is the offering of for pay DLC, as a promotional opportunity for apparel and equipment manufacturers, with a tie in to real world sales promotion opportunities as a means to support continued development. I'm seeing a lot of request for game play changes on the forums, many of which would be hard to monetize as DLC. So why not utilize the purchasing scheme built into the game as an engine to raise the extra revenue to, as Twigs pointed out, give it a longevity beyond delivered and done. Even if you offered gear that was purely cosmetic, but broadened customization options, that would be cool. The last thing I want is a never ending pay for better gear to play type system that you see in many of the "free" games, as I stated in my post.

Example:
You buy an LVAO-C in game, you get a 2.5% promo-code at WarSports for an LVAO-C upper or complete rifle. Ubi gets 2.5% of the transaction if full filled, for a total loss to War Sports of 5%, but good promotion/advertising. 2.5% of a $1200 upper would $30, and that beats the cost of most DLC. Though again ... direct promotion of firearms sales is a bit tricky from the PR perspective. But perhaps other items, like an ACOG which still clocks in at the $1200 range would be more acceptable. Apparel seems like it's very safe from a PR perspective. They invested a huge amount of money building this virtual sandbox, might be a good place to virtual test/sell gear is all I am saying.

JJ

[Cothes]

I've seen projects with a ton of potential go sideways due to an excess of major brands/labels being involved.
If they invest in a product they also have expectations for said product that the developers must adhere to, usually by law, in some sort of documentation/contract. So this approach is a huge contradiction that shoots itself in the foot. Unless somehow all the investors agree with each other and the developers, usually they want their two cents though.

[J J Marachev]

I've seen projects with a ton of potential go sideways due to an excess of major brands/labels being involved.
If they invest in a product they also have expectations for said product that the developers must adhere to, usually by law, in some sort of documentation/contract. So this approach is a huge contradiction that shoots itself in the foot. Unless somehow all the investors agree with each other and the developers, usually they want their two cents though.

Each manufacturer would want there stuff to be a little bit cooler, or a little bit more prominent. Business folks would make the decision and the contracts would force it back on the debs. Product Management would cave to the profit motive, and the whole thing would go sideways. Too high a chance of that happening.