What do you think about F2P model?

[laemu]

F2P games as has been noted grossly suffer from either.

1. Pay 2 Win.
Many games start off relatively innocent (my example is combat arms, where at the start payed guns were a little bit fancier but later newer became outrageous beasts, although its nature as an FPS means even the free guns are deadly in a skilled players hand) and eventually newer and newer payed items are released, with each new item obviously being stronger than the last until the advantage a player gains from a payed item vs free is insurmountable.

2. 'Demo Mode'
Severely gimped free gameplay, to the point where it is just a hook to get people commited. Im looking at you, Runescape! In this case the free serves as a demo, with the Payed parts functioning as an unlocking system for the complete games. Sometimes it is not this severe, but many games reduce to a total grindfest if you wish to progress using only free items, whereas paying for the superior items removes a lot of difficulty from the game and makes its a breeze.

Some problems i find with the F2P model with payed benefits are.
- The value u invested in the game remain attached to your account only. So if said account gets banned or abandoned for whatever reason, the value is lost. Also the ensured quality of such games is often questionable, as they don't 'owe' the free players anything but have to maintain good standings with the paying players.
- Game often feels incomplete, but if you are willing to pay, a simple tallying of money would lead you to realise just spending the money on a one time purchase of a full game is often better.
- Skill is often replaced by money. This just does not feel right.

All in all, F2P games are played by those who often cannot afford a full game or who want to play a game with large communities. I have found that many F2P games are not worth my time and I would gladly pay for a superior overall experience, not just an artificially generated advantage (Pay2Win)

Thanks for reading my reply.