bit-gamer.net

Critical Hit: Everything is Free

Comments 1 to 25 of 28

Reply
Kenny79 25th June 2011, 08:16 Quote
When you hear free to play, poor quality is the first thing that springs into my mind.

I've never even played any f2p games though!

/First.
jrr 25th June 2011, 09:39 Quote
yay for more people getting to play this game

boo for selling in-game stuff
Goty 25th June 2011, 10:08 Quote
Quote:
... the end-goal is unquestionably funding a brand new swimming pool of money for corporate skinny-dipping purposes...

Or... you know... making the game free for everyone to play. Yeah, maybe that.
asura 25th June 2011, 10:31 Quote
A post on F2P without even a mention of KoL? Forshame!
Bauul 25th June 2011, 10:35 Quote
What is considered an acceptable micro-transaction differs a lot between western and eastern gamers. I once saw a speech by an MD of a South Korean mobile games developer, and he explained how he found it a real culture shock coming over here and seeing how most people dislike the idea of micro transactions that buff gameplay.

For example, he said there was a popular F2P football game in Korea where it was obvious that if you spent extra money on special shoes for Rooney, he should be able to run faster as a result. Micro transactions that didn't give you any sort of advantage just seemed pointless.

No doubt publishers look at the huge amounts of money eastern gamers dump on micro transactions and can't help but be tempted to try the same in the west.
soopahfly 25th June 2011, 11:01 Quote
But you can play discreetly my lord!

When I see those adverts, I wonder if I have absently wandered on to one of those websites with the wife in the room....
Autti 25th June 2011, 11:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goty

Or... you know... making the game free for everyone to play. Yeah, maybe that.
No. Free to play games generate far more revenue through micro transactions than a full fee paying counterpart.
They do it to make more money, not to be philanthropic and let everyone enjoy their game.
PabloFunky 25th June 2011, 11:40 Quote
Nothings free.
FelixTech 25th June 2011, 11:46 Quote
I suppose it's not just uncertainty, but the fact you can be pretty damn sure the if you want to play the whole game it WILL cost more than a standard game.
lewchenko 25th June 2011, 11:49 Quote
I have no problem with F2P plus microtransactions as a model... but what I do have a problem with is dumbed down games for the masses.

Take Battlefield Heroes.... simplified to the point of being boring and graphically dumbed down.
Even the latest battlefield F2P (which I tried to like) was dumbed down and had ignorant flaws such as not being able to change your class without creating a new character... unforgivable for a battlefield game.
Age of Empires Online looks like it has ipad level graphics too... compare that game to RTS games such as Supreme commander 1/2 and it starts to look like a 1990's reboot.

So unless the quality, depth and complexity increases, with graphics to match them Im not that interested.
David G 25th June 2011, 11:49 Quote
Gaming is business, and the best business strategy is always to make it as easy as possible for your customers to part with their money. And as schemes like direct debit have shown, people prefer handing out smaller amounts of money more frequently to handing out big sums once.

From the gamers' point of view, it also (should) motivate the publisher to continuously improve the game and give quality post-purchase support, otherwise the revenue stream dries up.
leveller 25th June 2011, 12:13 Quote
When Microsoft is copying the PC F2P model on 360 then you know what the future will be. I think it's great.
Instagib 25th June 2011, 13:17 Quote
If anything, I think F2P games are a more honest breed of game than the type the more mainstream games are becoming now. Atleast with a F2P game, i know i will have to pay extra for alot of the content. I'm not paying £30-40 for, what i assumed to be, complete games, only to find that they've have large portions hacked off for the sole pourpose of selling it back to me as DLC.
Omnituens 25th June 2011, 13:22 Quote
There are already server plugins popping up that auto-kick and ban people connecting with a F2P account.

:(
sotu1 25th June 2011, 13:56 Quote
F2P works for me. Quality definitely needs to be there though. I don't think there's much room if any for subscription models and I think the box product will slowly give way to games as a service model. Adapt adapt adapt.

Also, it's a mentality thing. F2P is mahoosive in the East.
DbD 25th June 2011, 14:25 Quote
Global Agenda went FTP - they got it about right - you can play for free but a fairly small one off cost to "Elite Agent" status doubles your rewards from everything you do. On top of that the have various different types of money to allow you to get better gear. can pay to allow you a short cut for getting the very best guns. No problem with that model at all.
SexyHyde 25th June 2011, 19:42 Quote
I paid for tf2, but like its free to play model. All the items that can be used as an advantage (weapons) can be found by playing the game (free), traded with someone else (free), created / crafted (free) or purchased. There are a few items that can only be bought but they are cosmetic only (hats/outfits). Valve have a four year old game and have for a number of years supported and updated it far beyond any company has with any other game for no end user cost. And this game has had so much extra content added and things change that some other games companies would have released it as a while new game.

I can't stand free to play models have game changing items that can only be bought as
Andy Mc 25th June 2011, 20:38 Quote
I've not played this in AGES as I've really gone off it with all of valves additions. It looked like it was going to a freemium pricing structure ages ago, supprised it took valve this long to roll it out.
GiantKiwi 26th June 2011, 06:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omnituens
There are already server plugins popping up that auto-kick and ban people connecting with a F2P account.

:(

I'm sorry but i think thats fair enough, if they dont want you there in the long run they are paying to run the server, choice is theirs to make.
badders 27th June 2011, 08:30 Quote
From a business point of view, turning a game whose sales are probably dwindling by now, into a game which produces a constant revenue stream is a great idea. As long as Microtransactions generate enough revenue to pay for the costs of hosting content and paying developers, TF2 will be as strong as ever.
PingCrosby 27th June 2011, 15:12 Quote
Its all down to Garcia Hotspur.
Grimloon 28th June 2011, 00:50 Quote
The Champions Online free to play version appears to have the same initial content as the pay to play version so far. It has been restructured a touch but is essentially the same. There were always micro transactions in the game, it's just a touch more evident now.

Going in to more detail would be hitting "wall of text" territory but it's well worth a look. It either works for you or it doesn't but this time it costs nothing other than bandwidth to check it out.
OCJunkie 28th June 2011, 20:46 Quote
I personally don't like it but you have to admire free to play for the brilliant marketing strategy it really is.
The only problem I notice with it is the rift that sually develops between free and paid users because of the imbalances created by the "paid" content. But of course that's the whole point, so hard to get around it...
Mr. Perfect 29th June 2011, 01:09 Quote
World of Tanks is free to play and Bit Tech has been pretty upbeat about that. It's the perfect example of this sort of thing done right. Everything in the game is already purchased with credits that you earn from playing, so having a few things show up that require gold isn't some big immersion breaker. the currency symbol next to it just changes from the color silver to gold. Aside from a few $31 tanks that are complete dead ends(Seriously, $31 for ONE tank that doesn't unlock anything in the tree), the other things you buy can generally be earned through playing. Or at least something similar.

Personally, when WoT surpassed Fallout New Vegas($50 game) in hours I'd played(200!) and I hadn't payed a single cent for it, I threw them $50. Only used about $10 of it on extra garage slots so far.
leveller 29th June 2011, 09:28 Quote
World of Warcraft just went F2P as well ... well, to level 20!
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums