Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Retropunch]

I find warframe does the F2P model quite well if you've got a team of people to play with. Mostly everything (except purely aesthetic stuff) can be gained through skilled play, and with a good team of players you can keep pushing forward at a speed that makes it feel not too grindy. Without a team of people you normally end up having to try levels a few times and it can get a bit dull, especially defense missions where you really need to work as a team.

I have to say, I'm pretty against the F2P model in general, just because it's basically the developers integrity vs profit, and sadly profit always wins.

[alexandertnt]

F2P is another one for me too. At first it sounds like you can play free games (which you can), but you quickly learn that there is a price to pay in the form of grindyness.

The thing is I understand why, ultimately they have to make enough money to at least get by, and that means encouraging your playerbase to give you money in some form, which all seems fair.

I was dissapointed by F2P, but mostly because of my unfair expectations. So now I just look at F2P games as having an alternate method of payment rather than being literally free to play.

[Mesa]

All those "survival games in a procedurally generated world".
This concept was fun for the first few times in games like Minecraft or Terraria (to a lesser extent), but right now barely any of these games are worth anyone's time.

I'm not saying there aren't good survival games anymore.
But game devs are blindly jumping on this bandwagon hoping for a quick cash grab and their projects just end up crashing and burning unless they do it really differently.

[Neonivek]

Mostly everything (except purely aesthetic stuff) can be gained through skilled play, and with a good team of players you can keep pushing forward at a speed that makes it feel not too grindy.

You know... except box spaces and unlockers tend to only appear during events.

[Arbinire]

ok, airing out some grievances on the indie scene.  Pretty much anything billed as metroidvania/hardcore sidescroller/platformer/retro gameplay, whether it has retro pixel graphics or not.  I am of the firm belief that the indie companies pumping out these games only played these types of games on super nintendo/sega genesis while really young and never had the "joy" of dropping copious amounts of quarters these systems were actually designed for.  The difficulty wasn't a fun feature to enjoyed, it was a nickel and dime scheme for arcade machines.  That's why when many of those games made it to consoles they had difficulty settings.

As to Free-to-Play, I can be a bit forgiving there because any studio outside of the Asian market desperately wants to avoid the pay to win stigma, so they allow ways to acquire things to pay for through grinding in game.  Some are more grindy than others, sure, but if you want to lay down money, you're paying for convenience.  Subscription games on the other hand, I'm tired of hearing all the same tired arguments about how they're so much better, how your subscription is paying for regular content, or how it's paying for better quality, how it keeps all the "kids" out of the game, etc.  I've been playing MMO's/MUD's since the mid 90's, 3 content patches every 2 years isn't regular content when F2P games are regularly releasing new dungeons/raids/areas/expansions every 3-6 months depending on size because they're trying to get you to spend money.  Quality is subjective and can mean anything from how well the graphics look while using a minimum of resources to whether the gameplay is harder than "don't stand in fire and score the highest DPS score".  And I've never, not once, ever, seen subscription ever be a wall to stop children from playing a game.  In fact I'd go so far as to say from my own personal experience that I've witnessed fewer underage players in the F2P games I've played, because they tend to not have the attention spans to stick to the grindy nature of those games, while adults tend to love that they can spend a little here and there since they have limited time to play.

[Vector]

.

[Arbinire]

ok, airing out some grievances on the indie scene.  Pretty much anything billed as metroidvania/hardcore sidescroller/platformer/retro gameplay, whether it has retro pixel graphics or not.  I am of the firm belief that the indie companies pumping out these games only played these types of games on super nintendo/sega genesis while really young and never had the "joy" of dropping copious amounts of quarters these systems were actually designed for.  The difficulty wasn't a fun feature to enjoyed, it was a nickel and dime scheme for arcade machines.  That's why when many of those games made it to consoles they had difficulty settings.

Honest question--have any examples? I haven't seen any of what you're talking about thus far.

Shovelknight and Volgarr The Viking are the two which jump out at me directly

[nenjin]

Basically everything going on in Kingdoms of Alamur: The Reckoning. There is literally nothing going on in the first 30 minutes of the game that hasn't elicited pained and angry noises from me. Even the tropes, mechanics and sub-systems I like are done so blandly and generically here, it's making me hate the entire design history of RPGs since the 80s that allowed it to be.

[Redzephyr01]

DLC. Some games can get it right, like with New Super Luigi U, where the DLC was as long as the game that it was a part of, and wasn't just rehashes of content that was in the base game. However, most games don't do this, and instead sell individual levels or characters or stuff like that. That was the main reason I didn't like games like Skylanders or Disney Infinity. In the former, the combined cost of all the DLC was over $1000, and I'm not willing to put that much money into one game. I could buy all 3 "next-gen" consoles for that much. I'm fine with free DLC, or DLC that actually adds something substantial, but most games don't do that.

[Vector]

.

[Darkmere]

All I demand with DLC is reasonable amounts of actual content for reasonable prices. Borderlands 1 had more shooty stuff that I eventually got on sale for cheap-cheap. Borderlands 2 has a metric ass-ton of skins and trivial garbage such that I can't tell at a glance what's actual content and what's make-a-dime shovelware with the name attached. Magicka did one new campaign... and about 10 DLC's with random jokey costumes for a buck apiece. Games with one or two DLC labels don't phase me that much... games with 10 or more make me avoid the whole franchise. I also won't pay the same price of the base game for DLC's... Wait til it's on sale and we might talk.

Incidentally, that's the problem I'm running into with Don't Starve's Reign of Giants... it looks like there's enough in there to change the entire game, but with the sale going on it's about as much as the base game so I can't tell if it's that good or not....

[nearlyNonexistent]

Incidentally, that's the problem I'm running into with Don't Starve's Reign of Giants... it looks like there's enough in there to change the entire game, but with the sale going on it's about as much as the base game so I can't tell if it's that good or not....

Don't Starve's DLC is legit. Think of it like expansion packs in the olden days before you downloaded them. Toooons of content.

[Neonivek]

Toons of content indeed

(Sorry, couldn't resist. It was basically set up!)

[Darkmere]

Did you say Tooooons! in a Homestar Runner voice? Because I imagine you did...

[Retropunch]

I only get annoyed by Day 1 DLC or DLC which you actually need to play a big part of the story/miss out on stuff without it. If it's just new weapons/armor/clothes/stuff or a few side-missions which are not really connected then that's fine too.

The problem for me is so many games now insinuate the DLC into the base game itself, so you feel like (or are) missing out on something major without it. Mass Effect/DA really irked me by having major characters/plot points in DLC, but Blacklist managed ok with just weapons and a few completely non-connected side missions as DLCs (which I did buy).

I just wish companies would realize that there is a time and a place for DLC, and that is far, far away from the 'base game'. Anyone that ships games with 'DLC' on the disk should be flensed.