Usually free to play means, that you get the copy of the game for free and can go online, but buy items or other stuff in the game. Some also include games you pay an initial price, but don't pay for online. MH Tri is the second, but not the first. Don't know, in which category Warface falls.

There's no way F2P can be as successful on consoles as it is on PCs for the very reason that it is much more accessible on a PC than console.

thank you for typing out what I wanted to say.

Totally agree.

One recent example for me is Tribes Ascend (BUIG FAN OF THE ORIGINAL GAME). I recently got a laptop that can handle the graphics lol. So when i join the game I need to unlock over classes of armor and full packs of weapons. TO unlock stuff you need to buy gold and earn experience throughout the game.

Basically I am like  afghani rebel with an old AK-47 fighting against a modern US soldier.

yeah i did not play a lot of f2p, i only have a lot on my smartphone but like someone else said, if a developer makes such a game, he has in his head "how can i make this character or level or modus to get people paying for it".

if a developer makes a game for 60 bucks, he thinks "how can i make the whole game a good game", but he doesn't have to think about how he can get people to pay for something in the game.

so, if you wish to play the game for free, you will see on every corner that it could be much better with this or that or whatever. and it can't be perfect if you play it for free because then, nobody would buy these things in the game. ok you could spend 60 bucks in the game because as retail game it would have cost the same but i'm not sure if the same game woud have been better as retail game then.

i really don't know, i should try some on pc to get an idea but i can't imagine the games are as good as retail games. not even when i put the same money in it (and i don't like to have to think 50 hours in that game if i should buy this or that and search in forum if it is good or money wasting and 30 minutes later i have to buy the next and have to look if it is good and so on...)

maybe great for many people who like to get a game for free or a lot cheaper and can live with a little bit worse quality in general, i don't like the idea to get a little bit worse games just to get them cheaaper or even for free.

I dont think they are against it, at least with Sony and Nintendo, but they might be doubtful in how crytek plans to implement it.

That was the best comment in the entire thread.

Others have said it in greater detail. Free to Play is basically shovel ware of the most obnoxious sort. If this developer were genuinely earnest in their desire to bring this game to these platforms. They could have substituted their free to play model with a subscription based model, and split the profits with the manufacturers. This reads like they are in the business to fleece consumers, and the manufacturers aren't having any of that. Good for them. I am sure it would have been a real headache for Microsoft to handle a hundred thousand one dollar transactions.