Pokémon Go fans concerned about the game’s future under new ownership have launched a campaign highlighting the need to protect the app and its community from the addition of predatory monetisation practices.
Yesterday, a Bloomberg report stated that Pokémon Go developer Niantic was looking to sell its gaming portfolio to Scopely, the Saudi-backed mobile publisher behind Monopoly Go.
The news sent shockwaves through Pokémon Go’s community, and generated fears that the move would be a profoundly negative one for the game’s long-term future and its players.
Why? Well, while criticising Pokémon Go developer Niantic is a common past-time for many of the game’s fans, it didn’t take long for players of other Scopely games to sound the alarm that things were likely to get a whole lot worse.
“For those unfamiliar, Scopely is known for games like Marvel Strike Force and Star Trek Fleet Command,” reads a thread by user Tetrylene on top Pokémon Go fan reddit TheSilphRoad. “Many from those communities have voiced concerns over the overtly aggressive monetisation tactics, including paywalls and pay-to-win mechanics. I know this potential shift personally fills me with dread.”
“Oh… dear…” wrote Pokémon Go fan misskass, responding to the initial report that Niantic’s games were up for sale. “I play another Scopely game (Marvel Strike Force) and the quality is declining year after year. Pokemon Go is effectively free to play, but Strike Force is powerfully pay to win. Like, no access to any of the top characters for 6+ months after they release kind of pay to win. And then when you can access them, they’re instantly powercrept.”
Another fan pointed back to a post on the Marvel Strike Force reddit from five years ago, similarly warning fans of that game what Scopely would likely change based on how it had previously taken on Looney Tunes: World of Mayhem and tightened the screws of monetisation.
“Was coming here to say the exact same thing,” agreed reddit user Todd999430. “I played Marvel Strike Force prior to Scopely acquiring the game and then a year or two afterwards. Marvel Strike Force went from a game for light spenders to compete to ‘unless you’re dropping $500 a month, you can’t be in a top alliance’.”
For Pokémon Go players, many of whom play the game as part of real-world communities made up of friends and acquaintances met over the past nine years, the idea of the game’s ownership changing is real concern.
“Beyond being the only real game I play anymore, it serves as a major conduit for me and my friends socially to connect and meet-up over,” Tetrylene’s post continues. “I run a local group with them, and the idea of the group eventually dwindling as people are alienated (instead of slowly and gradually growing as is now) is genuinely bleak to think about.
“I’m sure it’s the same for many of you here – the game is a big reason a lot of us have been motivated to exercise, make friends and explore new places. I know I don’t want to lose that to a faceless group of investment fund board members.”
In response, the Pokémon Go community is being encouraged to make its feelings known to The Pokémon Company – the franchise’s overall owner, who will undoubtedly have an opinion on which company takes on the still lucrative and high-profile game.
“The World of Warcraft and old school RuneScape communities have shown several times that it’s worth kicking up fuss about negative changes. Those communities have managed to redirect the course of their respective games on several occasions,” Tetrylene continued.
“Yes, trying to exert some influence on such large-scale business deals between entities like these might seem daunting, but we have to try. Bad press / user complaints will at least be a factor of consideration, however small, it will surely be noted in discussions. If nothing else, it might make TPC more cautious and tighten the reigns of a new representative of their carefully managed brand.”
Tetrylene’s thread encourages Pokémon Go players to message The Pokémon Company to express the need to preserve the game’s integrity without additional monetisation features, highlight the community-driven nature of the game, and flag the potential damage to The Pokémon Company’s own brand should Scopely be allowed to do to the game what it has already done to others.
Eurogamer has contacted The Pokémon Company for comment on the potential sale, but did not receive a response. A Niantic spokesperson declined comment.
