• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Free vs Paid Games

FlameChrome

[color=#7fffd4]IDK what to put here[/color]
  • 1,152
    Posts
    8
    Years
    Games at one point you use to have pay to own it or play it for a round or 2. Now a days its a mixed bag of subscriptions (like psnow and gamepass), paid games (thats most likely got some to lots of dlcs), or even completely free to play but with so many microtransactions (the biggest being gacha games) or they have so many ads baked in (mostly mobile games). Which do you prefer? Do you prefer it go back to the old days of you buy it and thats it, or would you rather have a free game and buy the dlcs or even the games be cheaper because of dlcs? Wut are your thoughts on games now a days?
     
    I prefer the old days.

    The days where you didn't have to deal with ads and sleazy marketing tactics to make a continuous dollar off of the common video game player.

    Where the game you paid for was all that it was, the game you paid for.
     
    Personally, I have a bit of a fond spot for "pay and that's it", but that model itself isn't perfect either.

    Because, nowadays multiplayer is considered part of the experience - and in fact, the latest few major games to trend were all multiplayer heavy to some extent - which makes the "pay and that's it" model a bit inefficient, because multiplayer usually means servers, continuous dev time being used to identify and prevent cheating, a bigger concern on the balancing part of things (something that's balanced in single player won't necessarily be balanced on multiplayer and vice-versa).

    So the online experience has a tendency to inflate costs which makes a subscription model be favorable to a lot of multiplayer games.

    The thing with microtransactions is in part predatory business practices (much like a number of other industries, there are a small number of players that pay absurd amounts of money for those) and in part a market fit.

    Due to being relatively easy to spoof reviews in mobile app stores / PC game stores and the relative lack of quality control in those same stores compared to regular consoles, there are a lot of duds or just generally crappy games in the platform, which means that in general people are less likely to pay for mobile games and that's why the freemium models have arrived - unless you can afford a big marketing campaign or have some sort of accolades and external approval, having a mobile game have the "pay once play forever" model is generally not a good financial decision.

    Now, of course ads are a perfectly acceptable alternative to microtransactions - and is the one I prefer - perhaps with a "Pay X cash to get rid of ads forever" option.

    And finally, I consider DLC to be a good thing in general. In the olden days, if you had some extra content or some new ideas related to a previous game you had, you had to either get enough to make a sequel, or you had to mostly repackage the original game with a few changes sprinkled in cough cough Pokemon cough cough.

    DLCs allow creator to have more control about any extension of their work, while allowing a fairer price to players. While there are game shops that "abuse" this system, you'll have abuse in any payment model.

    tl;dr:
    - "Pay once play forever" is good for single player games on console
    - Subscription models are good for multiplayer games on console
    - Microtransactions are predatory and just generally bad
    - Ads are nice freemium alternative for games that are not on console - preferrably with either previous option as a way to get rid of ads.
    - DLC is a good way to extend games
     
    I don't play mobile games.
    Used to play a couple f2p games, but never used the microtransactions.

    DLC's are fine imo, but some devs go a bit overboard. Like BL2 has 46 paid dlc's. Most of it is cosmetic, but still.
    Personally I prefer new content DLC over cosmetic DLC, but that's just preference. In my experience, the cosmetic DLC's I did get I usually ended up not using at all xD

    I do dislike it when a dev scraps something from the game, not because they didn't have time to implement it, but so that they can add it as DLC. DLC should be additional content, not content that got scrapped for greed.
     
    Back
    Top