Free to Play vs. Pay to Play

(sentimentalDime) #1

I’ve seen a lot of people, both in game and here on the forums say they’d prefer paying for the game, and having every/most mercs unlocked straight away, so I decided to make it into an actual poll just to get a more accurate statistics of how many people would prefer it to be P2P

(Feley) #2

Altough I love when things are unlocked with levels (so levels could serve purpose) I would never want any game to be Pay to Play, it basically means money gives people adventage, and games like that never/barely lives…

(SteelMailbox) #3

Currently the game’s population is average but if it wants to grow up then it needs to be F2P.
If the game was P2P then the population will be decreased and the game will suffer so ATM the F2P way is the only thing they can really do to make the player count grow.

(Litego) #4

Personally would prefer P2P, but it’s probably not a viable business model in today’s market so I’m fine with F2P.

(sentimentalDime) #5

@Feley
I think you misunderstood what i was trying to say… I meant Pay to Play as in you pay a sum of money to get access to the game.

(Feley) #6

@Feley
I think you misunderstood what i was trying to say… I meant Pay to Play as in you pay a sum of money to get access to the game.

[/quote]

Ohh, sry then lol (typing before thinking)… But yeah, my answer is still as it is… If you make starting price for game high, many people will think, wow there are better games, also there wouldn’t be any space for making mistakes like some bugs… Moreover, if you make starting price low, people will think its a crap game because of low price.

There aren’t many options to success in gaming bussiness (only free games, new styles and ideas which differs from others games very very much, or previous huge success of company which produces games and success of same game franchise)

(DMaster2) #7

Publishing online fps as buy to play (hi Overwatch) is a terrible idea imho. You lose TON of potential population that way. Just make a good f2p model and you get your income, see how much games like Hearthstone and LoL make (also DB is an excellent f2p model).

(Fuze) #8

@Feley
I think you misunderstood what i was trying to say… I meant Pay to Play as in you pay a sum of money to get access to the game.

[/quote]

You’re both using the wrong terminology. What you’re referring to is Buy2Play. What he is referring to is Pay2Win. Pay2Play being a game that requires a subscription. With that said, I don’t mind that DB is Free2Play, but I wouldn’t mind if it was Buy2Play.

(Eox) #9

Seriously, I wouldn’t even have tried DB once if it wasn’t free to play.

(Mister__Wiggles) #10

It’s fine as is, RNG can and will be tweaked. Move on.

(MarsRover) #11

I wouldn’t be here if DB wasn’t F2P. I watched a TotalBiscuit video and was slightly interested. Modern online shooters aren’t my thing and I don’t think I would consider shelling out money for DB based on opinions alone.

(Sinee) #12

Pay-to-play would be a nice step in keeping hackers out. NGS is doing well though, but I would definitely pay for DB for that alone.

(Daergar) #13

F2p, won’t have a playerbase otherwise. Same reasoning as in any f2p mmo; people spending money need less fancy-looking, non-spending, players around in order to compare favorably. :wink:

(Sir_Slam) #14

Excluding all external variables such as hackers, player count ect, each model has their own merits. Assuming both are priced right, its all the same really. Granted F2P allows me to play before I invest money, which is nice.

(avidCow) #15

I think they have struck a good balance between the cost of mercs and credit grind, but the loadout/skin system is garbage.

(Terminal_6) #16

If I had nearly everything the game had to offer when I bought it, I wouldn’t really have much reason to play. Right now I’m grinding back up to 100,000 credits so I can buy the last merc, Rhino, and maintain a 50,000 credit cushion.

(gg2ez) #17

With an already tiny playerbase, DB doesn’t need P2P or B2P slowing its growth.

(retief) #18

If I had to pay before I could play dirty bomb, I wouldn’t have picked it up – there are too many other really good free multiplayer games. If my friends had to pay, I would probably be unable to get them to try the game.

(Feley) #19

[quote=“Fuze;108823”]
You’re both using the wrong terminology. What you’re referring to is Buy2Play. What he is referring to is Pay2Win. Pay2Play being a game that requires a subscription. With that said, I don’t mind that DB is Free2Play, but I wouldn’t mind if it was Buy2Play.[/quote]

Yup, first time I read post… I was instantly thinking of Pay to Win, that’s why I got confused :persevere:

(Lumi) #20

If the game would turn out to be a one time fee game, such as a CoD or a Battlefield, I’d still want it to have a similar progression. It already felt like everything gets unlocked too fast and now I’m sitting on my ass, turning my thumbs around waiting for another merc that I’ll be able to unlock. (FYI I never spent a cent on the game)