What payment model do you prefer for games?

Zyni

Zyni

Member
Registered
Nov 7, 2014
117
7
18
Buy to play, Pay to play (sub), Free to play (or often pay 2 win)... some combine more than one method, like WoW for example. It's buy to play (buy the game/xpac), pay to play (monthly sub), and also has microtransactions (that really aren't so "micro"). I guess you would call it paymium. I do prefer a sub fee to getting nickled and dimed, but I think WoW has gotten a bit carried away with the double/triple dipping. If it was as fun as it used to be I might not mind, but these days, I don't find it worth it.
 
Hmm.. that's tough. I feel like, gameplay-wise, a pay to play is the most fair. Then it feels like no one has a real advantage over someone else. I've only really gotten into a handful of MMOs, though. I played Runescape as my first, then Conquer Online, then Evony (MMORTS), and now I'm playing WoW. All except WoW were free to play, and the only reason I agreed to WoW is because my girlfriend and a few other friends were really into the game back in the day, and they wanted to play with me. Plus, now that I'm a bit older and actually have a job, I don't mind the $15/month fee, but when the game first came out, I just couldn't justify it.

With that said, I still think I prefer free to play. My gaming is so sporadic. I prefer to just have the ability to pick up the game whenever I want and play for as long as I want. I don't like that I have to pay $15 for a month when I may only play once or twice in that month. The next month, I may play 20 days out of the month, which makes it more worth it.

I never play MMOs competitively, so I don't mind the 'pay 2 win' aspect. I simply just enjoy the adventure. I enjoy seeing my character grow, and I really couldn't care less if the guy next to me just paid $50 to get to the end of the game faster than me. It doesn't really affect my enjoyment of the game. As long as the 'pay 2 win' aspect is reasonable, then I prefer that model for sure.
 
Buy to play or pay to play. Free to play games are nice, but more often than not they do wind up being pay to win games. There are only a couple F2P games that aren't pay to win, but those usually have really small communities and aren't that popular. Microtransactions are honestly the one thing I hate, because they are giving gaming a bad name. You'll see in the news all the time that some kid managed to rack up a $1000 bill on a game just because their parents didn't put a password on the account.
 
I have nothing against almost any type of payment method as long as they incorporate it well and are fair about it. I have my personal preferences like I don't like games that ask for a monthly subscription fee, but generally I think businesses should have the right to monetize their product however they see fit. I just don't like it when they do it at the cost of enjoyment for the players who might not want to pay extra.
 
Definitely buy to play. Perhaps pay to play as well...but "pay to win" etc. often feels like they are charging for essential features of the product, so why not be upfront about it? But if the game is actually playable (and winnable) without paying anything and you can simply buy some extras to make it cooler, then it's ok.

P.S. For example Hearthstone feels very playable without paying anything extra, so I have no problem with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zyni
I like the free-to-play with cosmetics microtransactions employed by Valve. All content is free, and buying anything confers zero advantage to the player, it is purely for vanity. Still DotA has made millions, as seen from it's recent 5 million dollar prizepool for its International 4 tournament. Another thing I like about this concept (for Valve games at least) is that you can resell your cosmetics onto the community market after you tire of them, to obtain Steam Wallet which you can spend on other cosmetics/games.
 
I like it when I only have to pay once and then never have to think about anything again. I actually don't mind F2P with an ingame shop as long as its just cosmetics and stuff (like LoL), I think that model is great since it lets me play for free while all the suckers spend thousands of dollars on skins.

I absolutely loathe pay to win models and I boycott all games that run them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zyni
I play, buy to play and free to play. I like the buy to play ones better though. I have subscription games because I think it is an awful idea. What if you can't pay anymore, I guess you can't play the game you spent hours on building a good rep. Buy to play games give you everything so you don't have to pay to have things, unless there is a dlc.
 
I agree that it's a difficult call. Free to play opens up the playing field more so everyone can play, but I guess I can see how with some games you want to be able to weed out those who aren't up to par for a game (like having a cover charge at a bar). It's not entirely fair, though. Maybe a hybrid system where people who pay a subscription can have a special sub-only lobby/clan/whatever, but can also choose to play with everyone who may or may not have a subscription also.
 
I believe there are some games that also have a choice of options. Like paying a sub makes you a premium member but you can also just play for free or buy things here or there in the cash shop. I guess choices are a good thing. I actually prefer the sub model, but I've been looking at some F2P games lately. It seems to be the way of things now.
 
Buy to play or free to play. I don't play regularly, so any by getting any subscription games every few months I'd lose some money. In my opinion Buy to Play is better than Free to Play, because the price might repel the cheaters and griefers off.
 
I prefer to play pay to play games where I can spend $60 on a game and enjoy it all the way through without worrying about any microtransactions in the future. But unfortunately, out industry is headed in the opposite direction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom