I smell a conspiracy. Just a few weeks after Crytek saying that they are going free-to-play in the future, now Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli reinforces the idea and states that the platform holders just aren’t willing to accept digital-only and free-to-play online games.

Cevat Yerli told CVG that free-to-play online games aren’t widespread on consoles due to reluctance shown from Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo. Although Crytek sees the future of consoles as free-to-play, that vision isn’t shared by the console manufacturers. He even says that Crytek approached them about bringing free-to-play PC shooter Warface to consoles and the answer was unenthusiastic:

“Eighteen months ago we talked to Microsoft about doing a free-to-play version of Warface, and then again 12 months ago, and then again six months ago. It was the same with Nintendo and Sony.”

Cevat Yerli adds that the way to solve this is by discovering how Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and others can cut ties with retail, highlighting retail as the major problem in the industry.

[Source: freemmostation]

===================================

I wonder if this guy even realizes that even though "DD" is growing that Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo still make a enermous chunk of their revenue by way of retail? Off course they're not just going to go F2P and DD entirely right off the bat... Not too mention that puting Warface on their systems probably wouldn't do shit to help convince them considering how crowded that market is.

Free Realms and Dust 514 would indicate that Sony isn't entirely against F2P, at least.

Well, I know Sony isn't against it by any stretch of the imagination, Free Realms and DC universe, 2 F2P games are on PS3 and DUST 514 is coming soon. Microsoft is a little more restrictive with these kind of things, but I thing both will fully embrace it, eventually. It's just the way the market is going. As for Nintendo? I have no idea, but I imagine they'll follow the other 2 if they want the most 3rd party support they can get.

don't know, if free to play would bring enough money with sold items, the manufacturers could get a nice chunk of that as well and wouldn't need the retail income anymore. but with that, all or many of the ebgames and whatever would close their doors, if there wouldn't be any game shops in malls and so on anymore, people wouldn't buy so many consoles for their children anymore for christmas or whatever.

many people have to see it with their eyes to purchase it, not everyone would shop on amazon then to buy the kid a console

i believe no strong retail means less sold consoles. i don't believe nintendo/microsoft/sony want that.

I don't get why MS or Sony are sceptical towards F2P as it's a highly profitable revenue model which also cuts the retail off. But I am just happy they are sceptical because I hate F2P.

Didn't Iwata say the wiiu was set up to support free to play?

i just don't get why sony is so adamently against f2p games?!?  I mean, Motorstorm RC and treasures of montezuma blitz have already shown it can be a sucessful business model on vita.  sony should at least give f2p a chance but noooo ... bunch of greedy assholes they are.

Everyone is entitled to there opinion i guess.

Wasn't Monster Hunter Tri free-to-play?
If I get the concept of F2P correctly then it was and that would mean Nintendo isn't against it. Right?

Don't throw Nintendo into this. Gorsh, man cut the damn company a break.

They've been free to play since as long as they've been doing online, and in the future they'll leave it up to 3rd parties, which is the way to go.

Some people