3 ms·

Translate what you like, it doesn't change my point: Free to play is not inherently predatory. There's a big difference between free to play and using as many

Translate what you like, it doesn't change my point: Free to play is not inherently predatory. There's a big difference between free to play and using as many dirty tricks as they can to fleece as much info as possible (and/or being pay to win), and a company that genuinely makes a free to play game and makes money off skins, because it made better business sense than charging $50 up front.

nottorp 2y ago
> Free to play is not inherently predatory. See below. > genuinely makes a free to play game [...] because it made better business sense than charging $50 up front. So the free to play model fleeces you for more money. It's not predatory. At all. Honest.
- bburnett44 2y ago
  I’m not disagreeing with you that it’s predatory but I think the point is that by not charging up front, you get more people in the door. And even if each of those people spend less than the upfront would have been, there are so many more of them that you make money. That basic philosophy isn’t bad, it’s what most tech platforms are based on
- DEADMINCEDOS 2y ago
  > See below. See above. > So the free to play model fleeces you for more money. It's not predatory. At all. Honest. Ah, I see the cause of the misunderstanding. You're assuming the free to play model fleeces people for more money always when that simply isn't true. It's obviously true when companies are playing dirty, but not all companies do. Consider little indie studios, for example. Quite often, free to play can end up costing people less money. Case in point, I played CSGO for 10+ years and spent less than $5 on it. If I had bought the game when it came out it would have cost $20 or so.
  - nottorp 2y ago
    > Consider little indie studios, for example. The little indie studios that I buy my games from are all pay once? > Quite often, free to play can end up costing people less money. Case in point, I played CSGO for 10+ years and spent less than $5 on it. If I had bought the game when it came out it would have cost $20 or so. Someone else paid $2000 for hats or whatever CSGO sells in the same period to cover the $20 you and other 98 players haven't paid. And the game design and development effort went towards making those hats so the whales can buy them. Any free to play game would have been completely different if it were designed as a pay once game.
    - DEADMINCE 2y ago
      > The little indie studios that I buy my games from are all pay once? Why are you going out of your way to disingenuously interpret comments? It's strangely super-defensive, your comment history shows it isn't a rare occurrence. No, maybe not the little indie studios you specifically buy your games from, but plenty of indie studios offer free to play games. Go browse Steam or something before commenting more on this subject please. > Someone else paid $2000 for hats or whatever CSGO sells in the same period to cover the $20 you and other 98 players haven't paid. Because they probably had disposable income and wanted to. It doesn't mean they are being fleeced, anymore than Balanciaga is 'fleecing' people here. I take 'fleecing' here to mean conning, and there is no con happening. It's an honest transaction that people can take if they want to. > Any free to play game would have been completely different if it were designed as a pay once game. No shit, business models evolve. That doesn't mean all free to play games are inherently predatory. That's honestly a very foolish assertion to try and make.
      - nottorp 2y ago
        > Go browse Steam or something before commenting more on this subject please. I don't look at free games, I'm not that rich. > No shit, business models evolve. That doesn't mean all free to play games are inherently predatory. That's honestly a very foolish assertion to try and make. But they are. And not only for the whales that pay 2000 for the hats. Do you realize that any "free" title is designed to waste your time to keep you playing? Why do you think they are all endless $ACTIVITY or competitive multiplayer? Is your time worth that little?

nottorp 2y ago

> Free to play is not inherently predatory. See below. > genuinely makes a free to play game [...] because it made better business sense than charging $50 up front. So the free to play model fleeces you for more money. It's not predatory. At all. Honest.

bburnett44 2y ago
I’m not disagreeing with you that it’s predatory but I think the point is that by not charging up front, you get more people in the door. And even if each of those people spend less than the upfront would have been, there are so many more of them that you make money. That basic philosophy isn’t bad, it’s what most tech platforms are based on
DEADMINCEDOS 2y ago
> See below. See above. > So the free to play model fleeces you for more money. It's not predatory. At all. Honest. Ah, I see the cause of the misunderstanding. You're assuming the free to play model fleeces people for more money always when that simply isn't true. It's obviously true when companies are playing dirty, but not all companies do. Consider little indie studios, for example. Quite often, free to play can end up costing people less money. Case in point, I played CSGO for 10+ years and spent less than $5 on it. If I had bought the game when it came out it would have cost $20 or so.
- nottorp 2y ago
  > Consider little indie studios, for example. The little indie studios that I buy my games from are all pay once? > Quite often, free to play can end up costing people less money. Case in point, I played CSGO for 10+ years and spent less than $5 on it. If I had bought the game when it came out it would have cost $20 or so. Someone else paid $2000 for hats or whatever CSGO sells in the same period to cover the $20 you and other 98 players haven't paid. And the game design and development effort went towards making those hats so the whales can buy them. Any free to play game would have been completely different if it were designed as a pay once game.
  - DEADMINCE 2y ago
    > The little indie studios that I buy my games from are all pay once? Why are you going out of your way to disingenuously interpret comments? It's strangely super-defensive, your comment history shows it isn't a rare occurrence. No, maybe not the little indie studios you specifically buy your games from, but plenty of indie studios offer free to play games. Go browse Steam or something before commenting more on this subject please. > Someone else paid $2000 for hats or whatever CSGO sells in the same period to cover the $20 you and other 98 players haven't paid. Because they probably had disposable income and wanted to. It doesn't mean they are being fleeced, anymore than Balanciaga is 'fleecing' people here. I take 'fleecing' here to mean conning, and there is no con happening. It's an honest transaction that people can take if they want to. > Any free to play game would have been completely different if it were designed as a pay once game. No shit, business models evolve. That doesn't mean all free to play games are inherently predatory. That's honestly a very foolish assertion to try and make.
    - nottorp 2y ago
      > Go browse Steam or something before commenting more on this subject please. I don't look at free games, I'm not that rich. > No shit, business models evolve. That doesn't mean all free to play games are inherently predatory. That's honestly a very foolish assertion to try and make. But they are. And not only for the whales that pay 2000 for the hats. Do you realize that any "free" title is designed to waste your time to keep you playing? Why do you think they are all endless $ACTIVITY or competitive multiplayer? Is your time worth that little?