Free-to-play is the WORST thing to happen to video gaming.

Bigggg BRIM77

New member
Nov 27, 2011
20
0
0
I've never been so completely dissatisfied in my 20 years of gaming as I am now. Every damn game is now free-to-play, except its never really "free" to play any of these games. You're free to grind for hour upon hours upon hours on end to unlock one item/gun/character. You're free to get bombarded with psychological warfare by the publishers reminding you every second of game play that you're not play at all efficiently and that if you spent money you'd get a mount or faster exp gain. Its more of a "free-to-try".

Free-to-play games seemed like a novel concept to me when they first came out. My first experience with them was in 2009 with League of Legends. I played for two years until Spring 2011 I realized that I had spent over $150 on that game. Originally Riot stated that champions would be priced according to their difficulty, or skill level involved in playing them effectively. I remember when Poppy was released at 1350, but Ezreal, since his abilities were 100% skill shot based, was 6300 IP.

League was the first FTP game I played, and was the first one to turn me off to the idea. I stopped playing shortly after Yorick was released. Upon launch Yorick was an underpowered 6300 IP / 975 RP champion. There were dozens of threads made daily on the LoL forums with the general consensus of "Yorick is bad. Don't by waste your money." Two weeks later on the very next patch Riot gave Yorick what was probably the biggest buff they had given any champion up to that point. Yorick went from trash to #1 pick on Elementz Teir List overnight. Yorick had a good two week run at being overpowered until he was nerfed to a WORSE state than what he originally was at launch.

It doesn't taken a genius to figure out that Riot was quick to give a massive buff to their shiny new champion because no one was buying him. It was this event that made me lose faith in LoL an FTP in general because the game company would rather sell you a new item than fix what they currently have.

Now my experience with LoL aside, I'm still absolutely disgusted with free-to-play games. Developers have realized that they don't need a bunch of people spending $60 for the game at launch (although if they think they can get away with charging for it they will) they just need a few people to spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars on their game. Every little thing in what seems every possible game is now monetized.

Change the color of your weapon in Gears of War 3? $5.00. Want one more character slot in Guild Wars 2? $10. Want to participate in the beta period for Galactic Civilizations 3 which GREATLY helps out developers fix bugs and iron out glitches in their own game so its smooth at launch? Oh that's, no longer free, that'll be $100.

Evidently, in the eyes of the game companies, the gamer is just a money cow waiting to be milked. The Planetside 2 developers are getting ready to celebrate its two year anniversary. What better way to reward its die hard playerbase that stuck it out through two server merges, crappy optimization, numerous bugs and glitches than to sell them a $40 anniversary bundle? "Oh, I don't want that" the player might say. "Perhaps just a thank you?" You don't even get that, the developers instead give you a sales pitch and end it with "Prepare your wallets accordingly." https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/october-anniversary-bundle.204432/


"Perhaps you just haven't found the right one" you might say. Well, I looked at Mechwarrior online, saw multiple golden mechs for $500 and went the other way. I watched some gameplay videos of Tribes Ascend, but saw its ridiculous pricing scheme. Free-to-play games only remind you that they are free until you download them, then they bombard you with things you could be spending real money on. Not only are they pressuring you from the get go to spend an infinite amount of money, but they keep trying to get you to commit to paying them forever through a subscription!

Subscriptions in games made send in the late 90's and early 2000's when server costs were so expensive. Now? There is no reason for them, other than to line the companies' pockets. Game companies still enjoy easy money so they carve out chunks of their game and rent it back to you! In The Old Republic, you can't even SPRINT until level 10 and Planetside 2 will lock out your existing loadouts until you resub! Its disgusting!

Sorry if I seemed to go off rambling, but I think there really needs to be another video game market crash. The greed of the developers and publishers seem to know no bounds.
 

Queen Michael

has read 4,010 manga books
Jun 9, 2009
10,400
0
0
Gotta agree with you, mate; I really hate free-to-play. Say what you will about the old system, but at least any game got greenlighted as long as it would sell. But now they have to change the actual game in order to give it free-to-play elements.
 

MerlinCross

New member
Apr 22, 2011
377
0
0
Free to play is a good system that has a lot of poteninal.

Dota 2 lets you play for free, with only cosmetic changes sold. TF2 also is free to play, and while you can buy weapons, each one has a pro and a con. Heck some people think the given weapons are some of the best in the game since they don't have a downside most the time.

That said, both are from Valve so take that for what it's worth. The problem is most free to plays use a broken system to cater to 'whales'(players that will pour a lot of money into the game). At one of the conventions last year I think, there were a number of panels about how to cater to 'whales'(I hate this term).

So with most the funding coming from this small player base(but is spending up to 50x the normal players) you're going to cater to them more than the non paying players. Problem is this mass of spenders does have a limit, so it's kinda a race to see who can snag the most of them and keep them. Along with finding out how to attract non-'whale' players to the game as the old ones quit in frustration. Because all the power in the game is meaningless if you have no one to brag to about or in some cases, use on.
 

Mezahmay

New member
Dec 11, 2013
517
0
0
While I agree that these tactics are unacceptable in retail releases with an up-front cost, games that are free to download need to make money somehow. Good will from the community does not pay staff or maintain servers, but money generated from good will from a community can. While that does not mean games with no cost to download have carte blanche to charge whatever the hell they want for whatever the hell they want, I'm pretty sure people naturally don't latch onto these price schemes because they don't feel the value is there.

Free to play can be an excellent system that allows for better price discrimination among a game community. Just because the current system views free to play as gate the content off until they pay doesn't mean that's the way it has to be. For example, one of my favorite mobile games, Jetpack Joyride, has a system where you get a small amount of coins for watching a video advertisement. It also has a low-cost permanent purchase that doubles coin in-take as well as making coins very easy and fun to grind through game-play without paying a cent. Extra Credits has [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwI0u9L4R8U] a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0] few [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXA559KNopI] videos about the state of f2p if you'd like to watch it. They're a little old but still relevant.

A middling example that comes to mind is Warframe. I have a lot of time spend playing in Warframe. If you look at its platinum price system, that scale sucks really hard. But it has a log-in reward that reduces the price by 20%, 50%, and 75%. THAT is what the price scale is better balanced for and everything except platinum itself can be earned through grinding. You could spend $20 on a huge discount and buy all the warframe and weapons slots you could ever want on top of several extra color palettes and a few rare mods. Outright purchasing weapons or warframes also gives you the catalyst to get the most out it and comes with a slot, but the price structure is completely disproportional to the amount of time or skill required to earn the warframe through grinding. In short, I find this game quite rewarding to pay money into even if it isn't completely balanced.

Since you already mentioned LoL, I'll give an example of what I think is bad monetization: Hearthstone. That game literally sells power. Every single card is worth dust which can be used to make any other card in the game. However, this [http://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Crafting#Crafting_and_disenchanting] is the price breakdown. That means if you don't get a legendary from the starter packs you get from playing the tutorial to earn a ton of dust early on, you're screwed since the gold you earn to buy packs is doled out at 10 gold every 3 victories and 40 from a daily quest. Casual mode, while less stressful due to the lack of ranking, is also riddled with players with stupidly high-powered cards that stomp noobs without new players really learning anything from being defeated since rarer cards are objectively more powerful and offer high level players deck synergies the basic cards lack and cannot effectively combat. This was made a lot worse once the Naxxramas "adventure" finished and now the meta is dominated with powerful deathrattle decks. I guarantee this will get even worse once the expansion is released. I'm willing to bet real money Blizzard makes that set of cards inaccessible in the standard card packs so everyone, even veterans, have to pay a ton of gold or money to get a new complete set.

Bigggg BRIM77 said:
Evidently, in the eyes of the game companies, the gamer is just a money cow waiting to be milked.
What exactly did you think the relationship between game publishers and the market was before? While it's nice when (usually) a developer has community interaction, it's primarily been a cash-based relationship from the get-go.
 

DementedSheep

New member
Jan 8, 2010
2,654
0
0
For the most part I would prefer to pay a fee up front and that be the end of it and I don't think I've seen a single player FTP done in anyway that wasn't terrible. I had dungeon hunter 4 for a little while because there aren't a lot of games for my tablet (RT) and I wanted a 'bored while waiting for class' game but it was shit. I would have actually bought it if you could buy a version without the stupidly long waits unless you pay to speed it up every time you upgrade gear (which you need to do a lot and can't progress until you do).

However I don't have any particular hatred for FTP itself unless it's done particularly obnoxiously like DH4 was or it's Pay to Win in multiplayer. Of course you aren't going to get everything for free. You don't spend 10's of thousands or more on making a game and then give it away. Even if server fees are a non issue now (I don't know if that is true since I have no idea how much it would be costing them) a lot of on-line games add content. I prefer a decently done "FTP" over a sub fee and I go into them with the understanding that if I actually like it I'm going to spend some money on it. I don't have a lot sympathy for those who suddenly realise how much they spent because they kept buying without thinking especially when they played it for 100s hours and really didn't spend that much for how much play time they got.

I also don't really understand you expecting the developers to thank you for playing their game.
 

crypticracer

New member
Sep 1, 2014
109
0
0
I would say it's "always online" but FtP beings so is a totally valid point.

I think free to play could be amazing, but yeah right now it's just horribley misguided. I had several more thoughts on who it could be done right, but I'm having a hard time putting them into words...
 

Bigggg BRIM77

New member
Nov 27, 2011
20
0
0
DementedSheep said:
I also don't really understand you expecting the developers to thank you for playing their game.
It's not that I expect the developers to thank me for playing their game, it's the cheeky smartness comment they made that shows a complete lack of respect for their player base. After buying chips and a pop I don't usually notice or care if the cashier at 7-11 says, "Thank you, come again!" but I sure as hell would take offense if the cashier said, "You're not a loyal customer unless you spend $40 next week. Prepare your wallet accordingly."
 

squid5580

Elite Member
Feb 20, 2008
5,106
0
41
Mezahmay said:
While I agree that these tactics are unacceptable in retail releases with an up-front cost, games that are free to download need to make money somehow. Good will from the community does not pay staff or maintain servers, but money generated from good will from a community can. While that does not mean games with no cost to download have carte blanche to charge whatever the hell they want for whatever the hell they want, I'm pretty sure people naturally don't latch onto these price schemes because they don't feel the value is there.

Free to play can be an excellent system that allows for better price discrimination among a game community. Just because the current system views free to play as gate the content off until they pay doesn't mean that's the way it has to be. For example, one of my favorite mobile games, Jetpack Joyride, has a system where you get a small amount of coins for watching a video advertisement. It also has a low-cost permanent purchase that doubles coin in-take as well as making coins very easy and fun to grind through game-play without paying a cent. Extra Credits has [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwI0u9L4R8U] a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0] few [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXA559KNopI] videos about the state of f2p if you'd like to watch it. They're a little old but still relevant.

A middling example that comes to mind is Warframe. I have a lot of time spend playing in Warframe. If you look at its platinum price system, that scale sucks really hard. But it has a log-in reward that reduces the price by 20%, 50%, and 75%. THAT is what the price scale is better balanced for and everything except platinum itself can be earned through grinding. You could spend $20 on a huge discount and buy all the warframe and weapons slots you could ever want on top of several extra color palettes and a few rare mods. Outright purchasing weapons or warframes also gives you the catalyst to get the most out it and comes with a slot, but the price structure is completely disproportional to the amount of time or skill required to earn the warframe through grinding. In short, I find this game quite rewarding to pay money into even if it isn't completely balanced.

Since you already mentioned LoL, I'll give an example of what I think is bad monetization: Hearthstone. That game literally sells power. Every single card is worth dust which can be used to make any other card in the game. However, this [http://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Crafting#Crafting_and_disenchanting] is the price breakdown. That means if you don't get a legendary from the starter packs you get from playing the tutorial to earn a ton of dust early on, you're screwed since the gold you earn to buy packs is doled out at 10 gold every 3 victories and 40 from a daily quest. Casual mode, while less stressful due to the lack of ranking, is also riddled with players with stupidly high-powered cards that stomp noobs without new players really learning anything from being defeated since rarer cards are objectively more powerful and offer high level players deck synergies the basic cards lack and cannot effectively combat. This was made a lot worse once the Naxxramas "adventure" finished and now the meta is dominated with powerful deathrattle decks. I guarantee this will get even worse once the expansion is released. I'm willing to bet real money Blizzard makes that set of cards inaccessible in the standard card packs so everyone, even veterans, have to pay a ton of gold or money to get a new complete set.

Bigggg BRIM77 said:
Evidently, in the eyes of the game companies, the gamer is just a money cow waiting to be milked.
What exactly did you think the relationship between game publishers and the market was before? While it's nice when (usually) a developer has community interaction, it's primarily been a cash-based relationship from the get-go.
I have found Hearthstone to be more than fair for the most part. I am a completely F2Per who has most of the collection of cards (including most legendaries). I have begun using a deck with a huge dust cost (Wallet warrior if you are in the know) and get absolutely reckted by Zoo decks most of the time (a deck with a very low dust cost and uses no legendaries where mine uses like 6). Sure a player without Naxx is going to have a tougher time than someone with it but not an impossible one. Luck and skill is what is going to separate a good player from a bad one no matter who has what cards since even the basic cards can take out the biggest legendary.

Throwing a wad of cash at HS isn't going to help you for a variety of reasons. First is the packs you buy are 100% random. 1 time for my B-Day I saved 2K gold over the course of weeks. Bought 20 packs on it and got 1 legendary (Malygos who isn't very good for most classes). Another time I bought 3 packs and got Tirion and Black Knight. And last time I bought a pack I got a golden legendary which I dusted for a normal (it was a double). These were gained inbetween buying tons of packs for a little dust and the odd good card I needed. So throwing $$ at it just improves your odds of getting THAT card you think you need (usually because someone beat you with it) but doesn't guarantee it.

Now remember how I said I was running a Wallet Warrior loaded with legendaries? Do you think I slapped it together and just started winning til I was swimming in gold Scrooge McDuck style? The answer is no. It has taken time to learn how to play that deck. Each deck/class needs to be played by someone who knows how to play it. You can't throw $100 bucks into it and go to hearthpwn and build your deck and be in the legendary bracket within a week with no losses. You have to be able to anticipate which cards your opponent might play and be ready for them. Money won't help you with that only experience. And while you are gaining that experience you can make gold (its 40, 60 or 100 quests btw) by playing in ranked. Which is where everyone should be since the matchmaking is a lot more fair than you will find in casual.
 

Elfgore

Your friendly local nihilist
Legacy
Dec 6, 2010
5,655
24
13
Free to play bothers me only when it actively slows either progress or puts things that are absolutely needed to play the game. Examples would be The Old Republic, where if you aren't a subscriber your .exp gain get's halved at level ten. Making an already grindy game even more so. Another would be Wizards 101, which had areas locked behind pay walls. I've heard Age of Wushu and a some other FTPMMOs do this.

I'm fine with both Smite's and LoL's payment options. Only champions and various cosmetic items are locked behind pay walls. Everything else is available. Hell, Smite let's you have every god and every god to come for only thirty bucks.
 
Aug 31, 2012
1,774
0
0
Eh, I've no complaints with any of the FtP games I've played, I either like them or I don't and then I stop playing, nothing lost.

I've really liked Neverwinter and it cost me absolutely nothing, I wanted some extra character slots and paid £5 for it. In a game that I've got everything else completely free and I know I like, I don't really care. Most games are "pay upfront and if you don't like it, tough shit", it's part of the reason I mostly buy exceptionally cheap on Steam sales and Amazon.

The GW2 example you give is pretty irritating though, I just paid full (ok, half in this case) price for the game and you only get 5 character slots (IIRC)...gits.
 

SSJBlastoise

New member
Dec 20, 2012
500
0
0
The only FTP systems I've played that I don't like are ones like in Blacklight: Retribution where you can rent guns with the in game currency but in order to use them permanently you need to spend real money which is really stupid.

I feel like World of Tanks has a pretty good model. You can buy pretty much all the tanks in the game with in game currency besides the premium tanks which are supposed to be average (though some are borderline OP) and earn more credits than regular tanks. You don't need to pay a cent to play and it took me a year and a bit before I thought I might spend some money on a premium account to help speed up the grinding process.
 

DementedSheep

New member
Jan 8, 2010
2,654
0
0
Bigggg BRIM77 said:
DementedSheep said:
I also don't really understand you expecting the developers to thank you for playing their game.
It's not that I expect the developers to thank me for playing their game, it's the cheeky smartness comment they made that shows a complete lack of respect for their player base. After buying chips and a pop I don't usually notice or care if the cashier at 7-11 says, "Thank you, come again!" but I sure as hell would take offense if the cashier said, "You're not a loyal customer unless you spend $40 next week. Prepare your wallet accordingly."
Eh, I took that comment as tongue in cheek. Kinda like all the wallet jokes with steam but I see your point.
 

Mezahmay

New member
Dec 11, 2013
517
0
0
squid5580 said:
Ugh...it pains me, but you have caused me to reevaluate my stance on Hearthstone's monetization strategy. Everything is available through time, and over time your skill level increases through iteration. My entire argument's validity hinged on time being a limiting factor for successful play, which is only true to an extent. It actually wasn't as bad as I initially thought once I did the math for gold accumulation. I identify as a TCG enthusiast even though I have not had the community or funds necessary to participate for several years. I also have not been playing Hearthstone extensively or consistently primarily due to scheduling constraints and a personal bias against it for effectively killing the Scrolls community, so my perspective is limited and tinted negatively. I suppose you are right and the game opens up more once you get enough cards for one's skill to show through.

Thank you for the added perspective, even if I did waste over an hour trying to post a reply that defended my point.
 

KoudelkaMorgan

New member
Jul 31, 2009
1,365
0
0
Regardless of the mostly awful games ftp has created, motion controls are the worst thing to happen to video gaming. Yes worse than the Virtual Boy, worse than touch screen controls on a tablet, and worse than those god awful Atari Jaguar commercials.
 

crazygameguy4ever

New member
Jul 2, 2012
751
0
0
I mostly agree. but DC Universe Online is good. it's a fun game that doesn't require you to pay a dime if you don't wanna and yet doesn't block anything except DLC which you have to pay for in regular games too.
 

MerlinCross

New member
Apr 22, 2011
377
0
0
Mezahmay said:
What exactly did you think the relationship between game publishers and the market was before? While it's nice when (usually) a developer has community interaction, it's primarily been a cash-based relationship from the get-go.
I'm not sure if it's been this blatant and in your face about it, especially the in you face about it. Some games are showing you ads for things you could be buying when you log in or even in the middle of play. "BUY BUY BUY"!
 

CpT_x_Killsteal

Elite Member
Jun 21, 2012
1,519
0
41
Yeah, Free to Play has become a cancer to this hobby. I prefer to just buy the game and have all it's features there for me to unlock at a decent pace, as opposed to Planetside's 20 hours straight for a fucking sight. God help you if you want a foregrip or vehicle weapon.
I'm just so sick of psychological attacks. I just want the game to be about fun and not about draining my bank account. I can tolerate the pricing scheme of LoL, barely, but anything beyond that makes me want to stab something. Then there are the games that try the "sex sells" routine and are brimming with scantily clad seductive looking women, or just run ads with them.

I understand that F2P has allowed some games to be made that couldn't be made in any other scenario (MOBAs for one). But 90% of them are just scams playing on psychological tricks to take your money. It's a giant fucking pain in the arse, and talented devs could be working on something brilliant rather than a cash cow designed to attack people's psyche.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
There are good and bad things about F2P games. The more awful practices generally are the Pay-to-win style games. Paygating content that affects the mechanics of a game is ludicrous at best and insane at worst. I understand that if players never contribute a dime to the game then the developer spent all that time on something that doesn't pay out. That being said, one shouldn't gate players from content at all.
Now not speaking of pay-to-win/paygated content, I wholly feel if one enjoys a free-to-play title, one should consider spending a few bucks here or there on the game since you got it for free and its only fair since you're using their software and servers. Its a donation in a sense and you get rewards out of it. And liking their attitude or not, the developers/publishers who made said game available to you do deserve some compensation for providing you with a game and servers to play on. Thats if you enjoy the game. If you don't enjoy it, uninstall it. Its not going to hurt gaming as a whole, and thats the best way to vote with both your wallet and your time. Pay for the content you enjoy, play the content you enjoy, stay far away from the content that is toxic to the idea of "free-to-play".
These aren't charity organizations that don't turn a profit for the work they do, they're businesses that exist to make money and the people who work there aren't volunteers. In other words, just because its called "free-to-play" doesn't mean you should expect all content to be free to have. Either you invest your time, or your money (the best games give you the option to do both) to get the most out of the game itself while offering vanity items or accelerating your rate of content unlocks for a fee. The worst of F2P, as mentioned previously, gate the best content that affects gameplay behind a paywall which ultimately hurts the game itself and locks out players who aren't fortunate enough to have disposable income.
Free-to-play isn't the worst thing to happen to games, monetizing every damn aspect of gameplay (I'm looking at you EA's Dungeon Keeper mobile) is the worst thing to happen. It takes the shittiest practices and amps them up to ridiculous degrees. Never charge a player for mechanics in a f2p game. Its just unsound, and dirty business all around.
On the flip-side, gamers shouldn't expect a company to just hand a game to them for free after working on a title. I've always said a game designer and their parent company (or in the case of indie titles, just the dev's) should always be compensated for their work unless they specifically state that the game is a "thank you" for loyalty or whatever. I don't work for free except in volunteer or charity work and likewise I don't expect to get free things from anyone. Its nice when/if it happens but it should never ever be expected.