An excellent reason for Nintendo to not go F2P

#21lordofthenlpplePosted 7/15/2014 11:30:52 AM(edited)
They are better than subscription base models because people dont want to pay a 15 dollar monthly fee for a video game service. The subscription based MMOs often see their games dying and they go free to play to lure in cash shoppers. But I think console based games with a price tag and no monthly fee and pay to win microtransactions is still the superior model for a gamer. F2P almost always means P2W. I mean Capcom tried to introduce pay to win gems into SF vs Tekken, and that suffered from horrible sales. Professional tournaments wont even acknowledge the gems in competitions.You might see me support the business model. But Im not doing it because the model is good. I only do it I am biased towards a particular company. All other things being equal, the f2p model is pretty terrible. If it was a pure cosmetic cash shop. I can see that being acceptable. But rarely do f2p games rely solely on cosmetics.
---
http://english.cri.cn/mmsource/images/2009/07/06/4220xtylnliuye4.jpg
#22MetroidJunkiePosted 7/15/2014 11:33:17 AM
F2P games shouldn't absolutely require you to pay to get anywhere and treat you like you're scum. Rather, they should make paying for the game genuinely enjoyable.
---
If you believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and you're not ashamed, put this in your signature.