★ TouchArcade needs your help. Click here to support us on Patreon.

Why is there such a hate about f2p games?

01-24-2016, 07:01 AM
#1
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 622
Why is there such a hate about f2p games?

Hey,

I am a long time touch arcade reader and I check out multiple threads every day.

You can't do that thoug without lengthy discussions in most f2p threads about how f2p is bad. I see multiple 1-star reviews for games just because they are f2p. I see people that just comment in threads "f2p, it's bad.".

On the flip side I just saw a comment in a premium game thread about "this game is good, where are th f2p zealots, go buy this game" ( not literally, just from memory).

So there is that side as well.

But then there are the people that get mad about people that voice their concerns for the price of newly released games. "Is it worth it to pay X,99 for this game?" "Dude it is only X,99, don't complain!".

I myself ask for impressions every now and then. Even if the game only costs 0,99 and do not grab the games in question right away. Now you could say that it's not even one euro, but if I buy a few games like these every week plus my normal premium games I come out way higher than I want to in the long term. Even a few cheap games produce a considerable cost if you just buy everything "that looks promising".

Best example for me was Zombiebaseball. The first few pages where so positive in this forum, that I grabbed it after watching the trailer. Well turned out it was so punishing and difficult that I wasted my money, regardless of the cost.

So why is there this hate towards freemium in general?

I get it, most f2p games are bad. I download most of them in a new week and most of the time I delete them after 5 minutes. I also get, that potentially great games suffer from f2p or just plain fail completely. It is often read that they got ruined by f2p and I tend to kind of agree to that sometimes.

But nothing justifies the dozen of comments from people that just hate f2p, they don't even try the game but just rate it 1-star, mostly with a comment which aggressive towards f2p.

But if we look on the other side: I am not even slightly as mad towards bad f2p games that I do not like and insta delete as I am towards the premium games I buy and then insta delete. Worst even I sometimes feel obligated to give them another try or play longer on my first one because i payed money for it.

So the risk free element of f2p is something I really like.

The best of both worlds for me personally are free to try games, (play x missions before purchasing the complete game as iap) but they also get hated on by others and I feel as a developer I would have to ask myself:

If i set this as free on the App Store with iap (even it is a single one which unlocks the full game), I have to run the risk from people that just hate f2p just never bothering to checking them out.

At last I think that these people are a vocal minority, like so very often in the Internet, as f2p games are INCREDIBLY popular as of last year and such. But I am very curious why there is such a passionate discussion about the pros and cons discuss above in the vast majority of threads on the forums.

Cheers!
01-24-2016, 09:19 AM
#2
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 242
That's a good, well reasoned post forsakenxe. I'm all in favour of lively discussion but the f2p debate is getting old now, and will not change anything. There's something for everybody on the Appstore; a great choice of games and payment models. We can choose what we like and leave the rest.

01-24-2016, 09:51 AM
#3
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: Upstate NY/USA
Posts: 2,403
I agree, good post but the subject has been beaten to death. I remember years ago it was which genre of game was better than another with other subjects surfacing later and now we have the f2p vs premium debate/argument. There'll always be something to hash over.
01-24-2016, 03:30 PM
#4
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 164
My guess is plenty of people who congregate to Touch Arcade have an older mentality of purchasing content upfront. Also it doesn't help that some F2P games aren't shy about milking certain players with addictive tendencies for all their worth. I do agree that F2P does have its advantage over premium in being able to try out the game before committing any money. I have, like you, been burned by premium purchases that I did not care for even though they may have been liked by the majority.

My golden rule is the MMO rule when it comes to F2P games. Most PC MMORPG's used to cost around $10 to $15 a month where I live (usually $15 if I remember right) before going the F2P route. If I really enjoy a F2P game I don't mind spending $10 to $20 a month on one F2P game. Of course if others have more money to spend and are responsible then more power to them, literally, if they spend much more. If I download a game and feel it's too heavy handed I usually delete the game. I also like the premium unlock method with some F2P games that are more try before you buy although you could be correct in people who avoid anything F2P overlooking certain titles.
01-24-2016, 05:42 PM
#5
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 14
I started gaming on the Atari 2600,so its ingrained in me to pay upfront for a video game. When I was introduced to the App Store, I would always seek out games without ads or IAP that unlock content. I cant bring myself to give it a chance and will flat out ignore titles based on that alone. Doesnt matter nowadays because some devs are forced to change their games to f2p or put ads in them. Developers should take notice of the Gunman Clive developer and various others who found success on a console digital marketplace.

Last edited by MrArcade; 01-24-2016 at 05:51 PM.
01-24-2016, 07:17 PM
#6
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrArcade View Post
I started gaming on the Atari 2600,so its ingrained in me to pay upfront for a video game. When I was introduced to the App Store, I would always seek out games without ads or IAP that unlock content. I cant bring myself to give it a chance and will flat out ignore titles based on that alone. Doesnt matter nowadays because some devs are forced to change their games to f2p or put ads in them. Developers should take notice of the Gunman Clive developer and various others who found success on a console digital marketplace.
For every successful console/Steam digital indie there are 500 abject failures -- that's the latest estimate I've read from Gameindustry.biz. And I wouldn't be surprised if Gunman Clive did well because it was first released on mobile.

BTW, I'm of the Atari 2600 generation as well. But I'm also an arcade veteran, where I spent many a quarter for 3 measly lives on games I didn't own. Games that were designed, according to Miyamoto himself, to extract as much money from me as possible. Sound familiar?
01-24-2016, 07:34 PM
#7
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 14
The arcade comparison is fair, but it was different. The games were just hard based on how DIP switches were set and not a paywall implemented in game design. When I was in high school, my friends and I were able to get the arcade operator to modify DIP switches on certain games for us. The newer machines were off limits for obvious reasons.

Last edited by MrArcade; 01-24-2016 at 07:41 PM.
01-24-2016, 08:05 PM
#8
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrArcade View Post
The arcade comparison is fair, but it was different. The games were just hard based on how DIP switches were set and not a paywall implemented in game design. When I was in high school, my friends and I were able to get the arcade operator to modify DIP switches on certain games for us. The newer machines were off limits for obvious reasons.
They were also skill based, so if you got good enough you could theoretically play through the game with a single quarter. Then again, to get that good at a game like Donkey Kong, you had to spend a lot of money.

Of course, you also had games like Gauntlet (and many brawlers that came later) that were through and through pay to win, since you could always keep going by pumping more quarters into them. And yes, those games were designed to have paywalls -- that's what boss fights were all about.

My point is that the relationship between gaming and money is more complicated than "we used to pay for games upfront." For me, the question is not whether I'm playing upfront, but whether I'm getting entertainment value out of the experience. I've played many $60 games that felt like a ripoff, and I can think of more than a few freemium games that delivered big time.

Not that there's anything wrong with buying only premium games. I would hope that anyone who does that takes the time to share their favorites on our forums -- premium developers need all the help guy can get.
01-24-2016, 08:34 PM
#9
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 14
I totally agree its a complicated issue. My beef with this whole thing is that devs that make premium games are struggling because of this. They should be able to charge more than 99 for a game in order to stay afloat, provide updates,etc rather than realize they need to change the game mechanics to f2p, ads,etc
01-25-2016, 12:55 AM
#10
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 969
I'll tell you a secret. The hate comes from not wanting to admit we are addicted to them and love them.