Submitted by john2 1149d ago | opinion piece

In Ubisoft's defense - Modern '$60' games are already taking advantage of the F2P model

DSOGaming writes: "Now I know, this whole thing sounds a bit harsh but what we actually see here is what most publishers are doing these days. Do you really think that your triple-A high priced games are 'full' games? Didn't Mass Effect 3 teach you anything? Have you forgotten about Oblivion's Horse Armour DLC? Have you forgotten why DICE decided not to offer mod tools (and no, that was not due to the engine's complexity)? Or how about the Battlelog requirement? Have you forgotten all those unrealeased games that have Day-1 DLCs already?" (Next-Gen, PC, PS3, Ubisoft, Wii U, Xbox 360)

Th3 Chr0nic  +   1149d ago
No idea why the article mentions battlelog since there is no charge for it or anything. not very relevant at all
Ducky  +   1149d ago
Basic features are free, but there are premium exclusive features, such as being able to save a battle-report, or wiping your stats.
Also, Battlelog's design itself reflects a few F2P games which require a browser plugin.

Battlefield3 might as well be a F2P game considering it's been on sale for $10 and they've divided their player base into two tiers, and that's essentially F2P territory at that point.

Uncharted3's multiplayer also follows the F2P model with all the cosmetic stuff they have going on. I figure Sony will make it so eventually down the line, just like how Valve did with TF2.
#1.1 (Edited 1149d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Th3 Chr0nic  +   1149d ago
i have to disagree slightly. F2P and microtransactions rely on ...well... microtransactions. all the extrea features in battelog are a one time lump purchase at $50 for premium and u get all those extras not just a few. now if you had to pay 1-5 bucks for several different things like a diff camo pack(s) then i would agree.

also the 10 dollar sale was just for the base game not the premium edition that is 50-60 and has the game plus premium membership.

also there are so few servers that run the premium only player base that it doesnt really make a difference. the only time premium members get a real perk that makes a difference is the 2 week early access to expansions.

perosnally i love battlelog, ive played EVERY BF game and when BF2 was released on PC the ingame menu/browser was the biggest problem for 3-5 months. i quit playing untill they fixed it. the menu froze literally every 2-5 seconds and it took minutes just to move the mouse cursor across the screen. battlelog has eliminated or avoided a lot of potential ingame bugs.

Edit: just to be clear im not saying i enjoyed having to pay an extra 50 for all this stuff, it sucked lol but i do like the 2 week early access to expansions. Im just pointing out that it wasnt the same as a microtransaction.
#1.1.1 (Edited 1149d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report
Ducky  +   1149d ago
^ Most F2P games have systems where you buy a bulk of special in-game currency from somewhere between 5 to 40 bucks. You then use that special in-game currency to buy items. That in-game currency is used for micro-transaction, but you still initially make a relatively large purchase.
DLC can just be seen as a $15 pack.
With premium being the larger pack.

In an F2P game, you can expect paying members to have a few exclusive cosmetic items, and a few other perks that don't affect gameplay directly. In some bad cases, you can expect paying members to have weapons or items that do directly affect gameplay.

That has become the case in many games including BF3, where players who have either bought DLC or premium have access to a larger arsenal of weapons that can be used against 'vanilla' players.
It might not behave completely identical to other F2P games in terms of purchases, but it does play like one in terms of separating the community based on how much they've paid.

As for battlelog, I actually prefer it over in-game server browsers too. However, it is also required for single-player as well. It still feels like a forced feature, especially when you have to sign in twice and use two different friends list.
#1.1.2 (Edited 1149d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
NYC_Gamer  +   1149d ago
I'm fine with F2P long as it's done correct
Th3 Chr0nic  +   1149d ago
origin and battlelog friends lists were merged about a month ago if thats what you mean about signing in twice.

I never notice origin as i dont start it i let battlelog start it for me when i join a game

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Gems of War Review | Hardcore Gamer

32m ago - For lots of folks, casual games like Puzzle Quest are as deep as they ever go into gaming, but th... | PC

Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 Review – A Well-Rounded Shooter With A Lot To Offer | MP1st

32m ago - MP1st - With an extra year of development time and a jump to more powerful hardware, it’s perhaps... | PC

The Five Must-Play Exclusives for Xbox One in 2016

Now - With the holidays quickly wrapping up in 2015, it is time to look to the future. 2016 is already shaping up to be massive for games, and both Sony... | Promoted post

Star Wars Battlefront Review- PCMag

32m ago - Star Wars: Battlefront is a decent shooter that injects a handful of gimmicks to keep the gamepla... | PC

Divinity: Original Sin Enhanced Edition Review | Game Podunk

32m ago - Divinity: Original Sin Enhanced Edition brings a genuine depth that many RPGs have seemingly forg... | PC

Review: "Star Wars: Battlefront" Is A Solid Shooter, But A Bit Light On Story \ Comic Book Resources

33m ago - While "Star Wars: Battlefront" is fun if you like to shoot people online, it is a little on the l... | PC