This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

What are your thoughts on the free to play model being applied to console games?

#1levyjl1988Posted 2/11/2013 7:16:43 AM
http://ca.ign.com/articles/2013/02/11/crytek-to-transition-entirely-to-free-to-play-within-five-years

Personally I prefer buying a game for $60 ($100 for CE if it's worth it).
I prefer to buy a product, not a service that can discontinue at any time leaving any chance of replayability void. Seems like the future isn't very time considerate or convenient as servers can shut down leaving any indication of going back to play a particular game locked. I rather pay in bulk than little payments here and there. At least with a bulk of a payment such as an expansion you are getting more quality than packs that seems lazy additions.
---
Check out Canada's only Comics and Gaming Magazine!
http://www.cgmagazine.ca/
#2ARsignal11Posted 2/11/2013 7:22:56 AM
While I fully agree with everything you said, can you blame developers? They are losing serious money to the sales of second hand games more than ever. Every other month, it seems we get a new story about how this developer is going out of business and what not. With the way things are going, gamers really have no one to blame but themselves. Sure, you can make the argument that maybe developers shouldn't be pricing their games so expensively for a 10 hour campaign or whatever, but that's how video games have always been priced.

They need to recoup that lost money somehow and I guess these companies see the F2P method as a serious alternative.
#3CTImpPosted 2/11/2013 7:42:59 AM
My interests lie in a strong single-player experience. I don't feel a free-play-model is right for those types of games. Therefore, I greatly prefer the concept of just paying once and being done with it. My fear is publishers are seeing the success of a game like LoL and they'll attempt to apply that business model to all types of games regardless of genre.

I can imagine a nightmare scenario for single-player games. I'd hate to end up with a F2P 10 hour RPG that had $10-$15 mission and character packs every couple of months. Not only would gamers have to pay more for less. But, support would be pulled for unsuccessful titles prematurely and stories would have to be rushed. Or developers would be forced to stretched out the narrative because no company would want to see their cash cow end.

F2P has a place. Aesthetics in multiplayer only games. Keep it out of everything else. It could be a slippery slope and I don't trust the industry.
---
Like my favorite show The O'Reilly Factor when I post the spin stops here.
#4DarkSymbiotePosted 2/11/2013 7:44:16 AM
That I don't support games supporting F2P models.
---
My Resident Evil 6 Review| My XCOM: Enemy Unknown Review
http://bitly.com/Z2CT6n | http://bit.ly/RJGjrn
#5HakuPosted 2/11/2013 7:51:33 AM
Not a fan. Only have experience of it in multiplayer games, but all too often it turns into pay to win, even when promised not to.
#6CyricsServantPosted 2/11/2013 7:55:31 AM
CTImp posted...
My interests lie in a strong single-player experience. I don't feel a free-play-model is right for those types of games. Therefore, I greatly prefer the concept of just paying once and being done with it. My fear is publishers are seeing the success of a game like LoL and they'll attempt to apply that business model to all types of games regardless of genre.

I can imagine a nightmare scenario for single-player games. I'd hate to end up with a F2P 10 hour RPG that had $10-$15 mission and character packs every couple of months. Not only would gamers have to pay more for less. But, support would be pulled for unsuccessful titles prematurely and stories would have to be rushed. Or developers would be forced to stretched out the narrative because no company would want to see their cash cow end.

F2P has a place. Aesthetics in multiplayer only games. Keep it out of everything else. It could be a slippery slope and I don't trust the industry.


This. The model has its place, but I only see it detracting from a primarily single-player experience.
#7HaganPosted 2/11/2013 7:56:22 AM
Gaming died when it turned commercial, you get rushed half ass games that are bugged, and stupid other series that refuse to die and allow new innovation. F2P will be the final nail in the coffin
---
XBL GT= illidan z
http://www.youtube.com/user/illidanz
#8darkharePosted 2/11/2013 8:09:16 AM
free to play means the developers make money by other means, micro-transactions. the trend right now is full price retail games having micro-transactions in them, and a few free to play games coming out like HappyWars and the upcoming Full House Poker. Ms and Ps3 arent going to give away something free that people are willing to pay $ for, were not going to get free TripleA titles for free with micro-transactions. were going to get more $60.00 retail games with micro-transactions.
---
micro-transactions in $60.00 retail games, it will get worse devs are just boiling the frog slowly so we dont notice.
#9TheBlueStigPosted 2/11/2013 8:50:19 AM
Free 2 play means you get a totally watered down experience without paying, and then you pay for a s***load of DLC to get the real full experience of the game.

No F***ing Thanks. That's already done in some XBLA games and it f***ing SUCKS.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#10PStrifePosted 2/11/2013 9:55:30 AM
The console model was never broke, the problem is that management teams want you to believe that it is broke through the use of manipulative tactics.