Easy Company

EA's Ben Cousins on the free-to-play revolution

Feature by Dan Pearson Contributor

Published on March 3, 2011

GamesIndustry.bizDo you think that the platform holder situation will ever change? I know recently some people have been saying that they need to evolve - that it's unlikely to happen this generation but that we might see something of a sea change in the next generation. Presumably that's something that the publishers would welcome?

Ben Cousins

I hope that the platform holders realise, and I'm sure they do, that at the minute the power they hold is the service and the accounts on PSN and Xbox LIVE. So they're already in a sort of software as a service model - it just happens to be attached to a piece of hardware.

So I really hope that they're able to extend that out. It's fantastic to see Sony allow the PlayStation brand go onto non-Sony hardware with the stuff that's happening on Android phones. I really hope that happens, and I'm sure it will.

GamesIndustry.bizWhat about streaming services like OnLive? Is that something that you're interested in?

Ben Cousins

We watch them with great interest. My question is - a game with the sort of experience like we can offer, we're quite core, do those people mind waiting twenty minutes for a download?

I'm not sure how many more users you'd get from a twenty second wait as opposed to a twenty minute wait.

GamesIndustry.bizBut in terms of broadening your market because of reduced tech requirements? These machines here look pretty high end.

Ben Cousins

Battlefield: Play4Free runs at full detail on a $600 netbook. It's pretty generous with the system requirements. It'll basically run on anything.

GamesIndustry.bizWhat's the monetisation focus for Battlefield: Play4Free? Is it purely cosmetic or will you be offering in-game advantages? I know in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 players were able to pay to unlock classes instantly.

Ben Cousins

The free-to-play shooter genre is quite established now. There are about five or six competitors. We all basically do the same thing. We offer customisation options so you can look cool, we offer items which allow you to progress faster in the game and we also offer items which give you a small advantage.

This is completely accepted by the users. There's been a real change in behaviour over the last year and a half. You can see that in Team Fortress 2 as well - you can buy a small advantage and people are fine with it.

GamesIndustry.bizThat was certainly true in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 - nobody seemed too bothered about it because hardcore players and early adopters wanted to play through and unlock organically anyway, whereas people who picked up the game later were able to pay a pound or so to get parity with their options. Also, the weapons didn't really progress linearly from bad to good - it seemed to be more about widening your options.

Ben Cousins

That's exactly right. People have a preference and a playstyle. Often those weapons give people the opportunity to embrace that.

You can have a weapon which is very good at close range, but terrible at long range if that suits your play style, and vice versa. It's difficult to say if these are advantage giving items. They certainly allow some players to achieve more kills, but it's debatable. Free players in these games can be extremely dominating, if they're skilled.