News

Castle Doctrine Contest Lets You Steal Real Money From Players

| 23 Jan 2014 02:23

What better way to celebrate the release of a competitive home invasion game like The Castle Doctrine than a crime spree with real cash on the line?

Jason Rohrer's The Castle Doctrine is a somewhat controversial game, with a new marketing strategy that's equal parts twisted and brilliant. The game is an asymmetric MMO that gives you a house and a family, and tasks you with keeping them (and your possessions) safe from harm. You have a limited pool of money with which to buy defenses for your home, and when the cash runs dry you can attempt to break into somebody else's home and steal theirs. With the buy-in alpha coming to a close, Rohrer has started a contest to sweeten the deal: for the next five days, the in-game cash you steal will be worth a real-world payoff. Assuming you can hold onto it.

The money comes from The Castle Doctrine's alpha earnings. Rohrer has set aside $3000 to be proportionally divided among the players based on their house's net worth on January 27. The exact exchange rate will fluctuate as money enters the system, but at the moment $160 of in-game currency is worth $1 in real life. Since players start the game with $2000, you would actually make a profit of four dollars (assuming the rate stays constant, which it won't) if you buy the game now and simply avoid losing money. Easier said than done, of course.

Every player with some money will get a slice of that $3000 incentive, but the top thieves will win a variety of bonus prizes. The eight most valued players will receive a real-world version of an in-game painting of their choice, with other defense-themed prizes including gift cards to a gun store and Jason Rohrer's own extendable police baton.

If you think you've got what it takes to protect your household from all challengers, you can buy The Castle Doctrine at its alpha discount for $8. The game will hit Steam on January 29, for its full price of $16.

Source: The Castle Doctrine

RELATED CONTENT
Comments on