Xaviant's Josh Van Veld actually thinks his mistake was how they announced pay-per-match rather than the pay-per-match monetization itself. What reality does this guy live in? Contribute to my channel on Patreon.com/YongYea or by clicking the JOIN button, and you can also follow me on Twitter.com/YongYea for the latest updates. TOP PATRONS [CIPHER] - Nem3sis [BIG BOSS] - Brin - Devon B - January - Phil - UAE-Mohammed [BOSS] - Alex Moretti - Charlie Galvin - Joe Hunt - Jonathan Ball - Michael Redmond - Peter Vrba - Shepard Gaming - Time Dragonlord [LEGENDARY] - Abdulaziz al Senaidi - BattleBladeWar - Gerardo Andrade - Lex Henry - Mark Taylor - Meep - Prismat Dragoon - Theron Webb - Yue

"we were terrified of everybody coming back and overloading the servers..." buddy, you don't have to worry about that.

"We were afraid that the flood of players coming back would crash our servers" Yeah, all 5 of them

"DO YOU GUYS NOT HAVE WALLETS??" - Josh Van Veld probably

Dude, what about cheaters in the game?! Good lord imagine spending money to play a match and dying to a hacker, good lord. And if you think about it, there is more motivation to cheat in this game than any other BR since you don't have to pay again if you WIN!!!!!!!!!

"Let's limit players to one match per day to not overload our servers" Literally nobody plays this shit.

“Our model isnt wrong. Its because we didn’t lie enough” What a psychopath

Sad part is, someone is still gonna be willing to pay for this crap.

As a "Beta Veteran" for The Culling, this is strike 3. The first strike was ruining the game by removing half the content in the form of perks and airdrops, the second strike was The Culling 2, and now this. They already apologized for their actions with shutting down the sequel and handing out full refunds, and completely restarted from build 1 of The Culling to remake the game. Doing this has killed off what tiny community they still had, and Xaviant deserves every bit of ridicule and bullying they get.

"We were afraid that the flood of players coming back would crash our servers" Now THAT is delusional

The only thing they're culling is their profit and player base

I dabbled in the "being an indie dev" thing (made 2 games and have em on Steam) and failed hard. My biggest regret was my inability to grab enough people's attention to give us feedback so we could know where we were lacking and the sort.This dev had and still has that feedback and continues to ignore it. Just amazing how deluded people can be.

"Admirable idea but poor execution, we can use this." - EA and Activision-Blizzard

"We hope this game will last for years to come" It lasted like.....an hour.

"Terrified of everyone coming back" so instead they made it so NO ONE came back lmao

I'm actually honestly thankful for these crazy devs for being so loud about their bad practices because absolutely nobody will think about trying something like this again lol

My favorite part is when he claimed they were worried that they'd be so successful that the servers would get overwhelmed and so it was a good idea to make a crap monetization scheme.

Publisher: _"We're disappointed in how we delivered our message."_ What they're really saying: _"We wish we could re-word and twist this in order to fool everyone into thinking it's good."_

That moment when the things we joked about regarding microtransactions actually becomes a reality... What a sad time we live in

I like his final statement, it basically comes down to this: "If you enjoyed your 1 free match of the day, then you can buy more, and if you enjoy that many battles, then you can spend even more money to get unlimited battles with the monthly subscription, how generous of us right?!"

Step 1: "People like us and are spending money. We should charge more money." Step 2: "Players are leaving for other games that they like better. We should charge more money." Step 3: "Charging more money is pushing even more players away. We should charge more money."

“I was worried about overloading the servers” You mean like with the culling 2 with it’s whole double digit player base?

The fact that so many games these days have “business models” beyond “we make a game and you buy it” is such a sad reality of this industry.

When ever youngyea says "pay per match" my brain keeps replacing it with payper view lol

This continues to be entertaining because I've never seen YongYea this genuinely pissed off.

did anyone tell them their main competitor is both F2P AND doesn't pull any "schemes" to scam players? thanks for making me compare Fortnite to something positively, Josh.

"We were terrified of everybody overloading the servers!" Well, have we got news for you.

The Culling: of a fanbase

Goddamn, I remember when The Culling first came out I though it looked really promising and fun but I was staved off by just how many negative reviews the game had from people who had played on Steam. I contented myself with watching other people play (what I can assume were best case scenario matches where everything went right, there were no bugs, things were relatively balanced, and it's not like I was the one waiting in a queue) in the hopes that I would eventually feel comfortable enough to get the game after it seemed to reach a stable positive state. But that day never came, and for the longest time it stayed on my wishlist as super huge "maybe" and when games stay like that for too long eventually I cut those titles loose. I would see it every now and then and think "maybe" again but I eventually forgot about The Culling. Now seeing the audacity of this business model and monetization strategy I can safely say The Culling is nowhere close to my watch list. It is officially buried in the ground for me now.

Imagine your product being so bad you have to advertise the payment method for it. And that payment method is worse than the actual product.

Xaviant: “We’re bringing the Culling back!” That fish from Spongebob: “How many times do we have to teach you this lesson old man”

The thumbnail of this video made me think that Yong had seen the TLOU2 spoilers "What the actual f*** Part 2"

Man, this is from 2020? Along with everything else that's happened, this is one rollercoaster of a year

The very word “culling” is appropriate for what they’re doing to themselves.

"I was worried The Culling would be TOO popular!" Yeah....

If they ever made Kitchen Nightmares or Bar Rescue style show about video games companies/developers, Xaviant and "The Culling Origins" would have to be episode 1. The set-up is perfect: 1) An interesting sounding company name 2) A company on the brink of financial ruin 3) An owner whose in complete denial/out of touch with reality 4) A series of bad decisions made by said owner that led to where they are now Someone should totally make web series like this

Videos like this why I love your channel. Amazing voice, clear, well written, and good comedic timing. Hell a lot of times I felt I was finishing your thoughts because on the same page! Well done

EA: I am the greediest company! Bethesda: No, I am! Xaviant: Hold my *S C H E M E*

"I don't think there exists a player that wants to play our game every day"* Bro then pull the fking plug lmao

Ace Combat Infinity did this with their Sortie Fuel system. You had 3 charges that each take 4 hours to recharge. You could buy extra charges for $1/match. This was way back in 2014 on the PS3.

Actually... I was wrong saying this is an exclusively mobile monetisation scheme. On PS3, the "Tekken Revolution" free-to-play model worked similar to this. There's a few exceptions ad rationalisations which aren't applicable to The Culling, though: -Free tokens had a cap on how many would store, but replenished one every 20 minutes or so, whether you're playing or not. First time starting the game gives you a full stock of free tokens. -Premium tokens don't have a cap, and can be gained through both online and offline gameplay, as well as being given out at times for events and other reasons. -Premium tokens also give a small XP boost for gameplay where one was spent. -It's a fighting game, not a Battle Royale. Oddly, this doesn't make as much difference as you might think - a player can get beaten in a first match, or have a string of 10+ victories, and get a similar range of value out of 1 token. But the style of gameplay matters for perception. -THERE iS NO UPFRONT COST OF ENTRY. -This game's primary target audience is an *ASIAN* market - mostly Japan and Korea. These markets have a tendency to be more forgiving of this kind of monetisation model. -You can literally gain tokens faster than you spend them if you're a moderately above-average player and can run 3 wins for every 2 losses, or better, as your usual gameplay (matchmaking will gradually try and shift to you winning 50% of the time but not in a strict "throw you against overly-tough opponents" way like some matchmaking systems do).

Just another day

"We were afraid of having too many players, so we made it so instead we would have no players!" big brain IQ move

EA- We have the most monetization in our games! Activision- Hold my beer. Xaviant- Hold my beer after you pay me $5.

Is it just me or does that picture of Van Veld make him look like he's stoned out of his mind?

"We were really scared there would be too many players, and we'd have to actually provide a good play experience. Luckily, we managed to shut that down before launch this time."

YongYea’s new catchphrase: “You’ve lost your god damn mind”

You were really on form here, Yong Yea. Great stuff!

He was so scare that people wouldn’t play, that he had to make sure that no one would.Real Genius

Somewhere at EA... “Are you taking notes?”

It’s 2020, I’m about to buy a GameCube and play that for the rest of my life.

Damn i cant stop watching your video so informative and the way you convey your thought in a clear and aritculate way! I guess i am just so bad at communicating

You know, one thing I can appreciate about this whole situation is that the dev's haven't sugar coated anything. They've been blunt and honest. Shame they botched it so badly.

This whole situation reminds me of the meme of that guy riding a bike and puts a stick across the front tire, and then falls down.

The Culling Dev's: Don't you guys have wallets.

To be fair, a free token whenever you win is pretty decent. one winner out of 2 players in a match? Pretty decent odds. (Read with a sarcastic tone. Then think before you reply. Feel free to delete your dumb response to avoid looking dumb).

To me, this is an interesting situation. I'm not so certain that pay-per-match is the core problem here. There does seem to be a consensus that this is a dead game that needed to stay dead, so that may be coloring people's views here. I was a teenager in the early-to-mid 1980s when arcades were big, so dropping quarters into an arcade machine is not a foreign concept to me, and that system could be quite suitable for an online game that is designed in a way that makes sense in that context. Part of the problem here is that there is a base price for the game, so it is comparable to an arcade having a cover charge to walk in the doors; that is problematic, and I think it contributes to the backlash. The monetization scheme wouldn't be nearly so bad if the game didn't have a base price. This game also has a subscription option, which, to me, is perfectly acceptable if a game doesn't have an initial cost, and as long as the cost is a good match for the quality of the game (which probably isn't the case here), and as long as it isn't combined with other monetization schemes. In this situation, a pay-per-play option as an alternative to a regular subscription might offer a good value for casual or sporadic players who don't want to pay a monthly fee. I think something like this could work if the game is good enough to justify it, is designed much like an arcade game so that it is compatible with a pay-per-play feature (and has multiple matches per quarter, as arcade games usually had three or so lives), has a subscription option for regular or frequent players, has some level of free content to help it attract new players, and doesn't combine these with any other monetization schemes (i.e. an initial base cost, cosmetic microtransactions, or the evil loot boxes). I wouldn't count this out as a fair and viable monetization scheme for the right type of game, but judging from the negative reactions, The Culling isn't the right type of game, and the whole situation was handled very badly. This could well be the end for this developer, and perhaps it will serve as a cautionary tale for others. It will be interesting to see how it develops in the near future.

Android Wilson just found his soulmate. Oh, wait. They don't have souls.

EA: (furiously taking notes)

And just like that, two months later, Xaviant was no longer even a thing if their last updates regarding server maintenance meant anything.

getting this back in my recommended at the end of 2020... oh how i miss when this was the biggest thing we had to gripe about

Xaviant: "hold my beer!" Everyone: "wait what? We didn't say anything" Xaviant: "just hold my goddamn beer!!!"

"The Culling" is a fitting name for it since that's what they seem to be doing to their player base

Lol, your closing remarks...I'm trying to play a game but you got me cracking up

10 matches per day? I go through that many matches in Apex with in 5 minutes 🤐

A wise man once said “if you don’t like it, don’t buy it.” Let it fail. Only then will they learn.

Joke of the year "Over loading servers"

How about making the game paid, people pay for it ONCE, and play the damn game?

As we say in the UK, "You can't polish a turd, but you can put a little bit of glitter on it!"😆

Ah yes, The Culling 76 is coming along nicely.

This must never be normalized. EA and Bethesda are watching with hungry eyes.

I'm watching this video for the second time, but in December 2020. This was the longest year ever.

I never considered that developers would intentionally post awful initial monetization strategies then dialing it back slightly to appear considerate to the player base. That's the "better by comparison" manipulation strategy right there.

"we were kind of terrified of everybody coming back, overloading the servers" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Microtransaction memes turned into reality. "0.99 for another clip of ammo" is next.

anyone knows where I could get that cyberpunk figure?

If y'all didn't know tekken did this in tekken revolution back in 2015, although the initial game was free. You were given 5 tokens, which I can't remember if you kept from winning. But they also had premium tokens which you bought but you only could keep them if you won.

He’s ascended from pay-to-win to play-per-play

This guy must be holding a PhD title. (Permanent Head Damage)

They legit used the angry birds font on the word Origins 🤣🤣

“What the hell kind of logic is that!?!?” Congrats YY- you are now a meme!!

Calling it here: They file for bankruptcy around November.

We've gone full circle back to arcade monetization.

I love how the article basically has him begging people to TRY his game to see if they like it when the history of the franchise is completely marred. Not only does this model make me not want to even wishlist this game let alone try it, I’m stumped as to why he thinks that this game is worth trying in a world where the likes of Fortnite & Apex Legends exists. Like why does the Culling deserve the attention & money that I could be giving to Fall Guys or Rocket League or Final Fantasy Online or Overwatch or Hunt The Showdown or any number of games that if they aren’t more original at best, they are more affordable at least? It’s wild that he can’t even assure fans of this franchise in particular why they should have more confidence & invest in this new endeavor when the path to it is paved in broken promises, ignored feedback & poor development.

It seems to me that many game companies are like isolated to the players and just see what people are playing and making games similar but also never hearing what players actually want and what type of games they want to see.

i remember the whole culling community revolting after literally the first hand to hand combat update. combat was fluid fast and fun, after it was heavy clunky and inaccurate. that is what caused the initial drop when everyone realized they didn't listen to the community at all. They have been in their own little world since the day of the first major patch. its sad... the game actually had alot of great touches my favorite was the animations running through bushes.

“Improving upon garbage doesn’t make it any less garbage” Recycling: Am I a joke to you?

"We release a new game, we don't expect there to be many players who will want to play a lot. So we built in a restriction for those players we do have that they can't play much anyway." Wut?! Make this make sense to me....

Lmao you made my day this is so hilarious 😂 earned you a new subscriber

It's like they're trying as hard as they can to get people to hate them.

"We were kind of terrified of everybody coming back, overloading the servers." Let that sink in :D

I cant imagine anyone is going to play 10 matches of this game a day. I cant imagine anyone playing 2 matches per day.

Its close to a subscription model, honestly if it was 3 weeks it might be a good idea, the game isn't selling cosmetics or loot crates as far as I know and all that stuff needs to be earned in the game. They'd probably have better luck with a more regular subscription system or since its a battle royale just making it free and selling cosmetics. Main issue isn't really the monetization even but the game itself. If it gave the value of a battle pass from similar games and was a lot of fun a subscription type thing might actually save money but their product just doesn't seem good enough for it.

EA be like: "WRITE THAT DOWN WRITE THAT DOWN!"

I get what he's saying. He didn't have the money (or was afraid of going too deep into the company coffers) to maintain the servers, and he wasn't converting enough players into sales via loot and camos etc. F2P can really work, but only with either a high rate of sales per player or a massive volume of players with a modest turnover of sales per player (or both). They obviously had shitty sales and were losing their nut to server costs so decided to cut player numbers and try to milk the dolts that hung around. Shitty business model, just let it die.

Don't really think that's the first time this method happened though. Still remember when back in the 2000s that online Yu-Gi-Oh used to have to buy a pass of like 30 matches. It died so that probably speaks for it self. Though I kind of want to know how that game did financially back then.

I often wonder why more developers/publishers don’t go the same route? Paying for ammo in CoD or Battlefield. Paying for car upgrades in Gran Turismo. ?!?!? I’m sure there are plenty of players who would be willing to pay to pay again to keep on playing.

EA: we present monetisation in games like it’s a good thing. Activision: hold my beer. Bethesda: hold my beer. Warner Bros: hold my beer. Some company no one gives a shit about: I’ll charge you to hold my beer.

Xaviant: "There are regulars here. Five dollars a month! How do you have hours of time to play this, and not $5?! What are you doing with your life where you have hours to play games and not $5 for the content you're playing?" LOL

"They regret ... how the announcement was made" Saw that coming a mile off! This happens all the time, sometimes even more egregious than here - e.g. "we're sorry we accidentally told the truth". I expect he wishes they'd used the well-worn other method of announcing crap: "This introduces *consumer choice* - players can choose how many matches they have available, rather than being forced to have unlimited matches!" EDIT: 17:57 Sorry, I spoke too soon!