Gaming Can't Exist Primarily As F2P. Here's Why.

EA's chief operating officer Peter Moore thinks that the future of our hobby will run on a Free-To-Play system. Forum posters everywhere cried in the streets, believing the end of video games to be near. As the easily frightened clamp their hands tight and pray for an industry crash, they forget that the F2P model isn't a sustainable path for all video games.

Fitting A Square Into A Triangle. 

Certain genres can't exist on microtransactions, at least not adaptable enough to make money. Fighting games would have players buying move sets, stages, characters, balance patches, and other essentials that routinely come packaged. The community will laugh and go right back to the older games. 

For some genres like MOBA games, it can work. For others, the business model is too different and too flimsy to be profitable. Look at how having sizable character DLC hurt Street Fighter X Tekken. 

We Aren't Stupid. Well, Not All Of Us.

Yeah, we buy DLC that isn't always fair, but that pales in comparison with what a F2P system would have us do. There's a different between begrudgingly buying a locked level and buying ten locked levels, five weapons, two pieces of armor, and Act 2 of the game. Some of us will add up the cost and find it not worth the trouble.

The hardcore gamers won't spend ten dollars spread out to multiple games. Having to buy single player games just once makes more sense then spending triple over time. Sure, the casual gamers may do this for one title, but they don't invest enough to make up for the rest.

Casual Gamers Are Smart Too

Say Game A, Game B, and Game C get released. Casual Guy downloads B. He spends about twenty bucks overall on that one game. Since he doesn't play as much as Mr. Hardcore, he doesn't think there's any reason to invest too much money since he's not investing too much time. 

My casual gaming family spends a few bucks on Farmville, but they don't deviate to many other games. With a far more crowded market, less F2P games will get any trickling funds. If this bleak future somehow comes to fruition, we should prepare ourselves to play only six titles. 

F2P = P2W

It's rare that F2P games don't equal Pay-2-Win. Often, only mediocre choices are open until the player buys the appropriate items off the cash shop. The game then devolves into whoever has the most money to spend on virtual gear.

Imagine that for just about every video game genre imaginable. I doubt the consumers will be happy about having to buy in-game stuff for every title if they want to have a fighting chance. Unlock systems are a better solution, but they ridiculous hours of play time to open anything good.

So can we please calm down about what one guy at one company said?