What do you mean, exactly? 

To me, it feels like the free to play part is nothing but a glorified demo. And if you want to play the full game, you end up paying more than if you'd buy a "regular" game.

Oh, I'm well aware that all of these issues are not in every F2P game. The issues don't need to all be in every game to be issues. :P

I personally voted for the "nickel and dimed" option, but my main gripe is really a combination of that and the "I don't want to pay for something in a free game." I only ever really get into games like DotA 2 where all content is cosmetic in nature. My gripe is that I would gladly pay for the overall content in the game, but when all of that content is given to me for free, I don't find cosmetic items to be worth their price individually. When I buy them, I don't do it because I think I'm getting dollars worth of entertainment, I do it because I feel like I'm helping to donate to the game I like and am getting a little present for my donation. And I don't like that for some reason.

The Spambot has spoken.  All other opinions are thus void.

You should add the following poll option.

"I don't like multiplayer only games."

I might try a F2P single player game with a great story and lots of exploration. But I'm not going to play a F2P MMO when I already don't want to play a regular MMO.

The only free-to-play game I play is League of Legends. I refuse to pay for anything. The skins are extremely expensive, and most of them look bad anyway. Since they are just cosmetic and have no impact on the game, I can do without.

It sucks to have to save and save your points to be able to buy runes and characters, but individually they are all far too expensive to be able to justify buying. Besides, with the way they are always tweaking the game, you never know if a character you just bought is going to get nerfed to the point of uselessness. It happened with me just two weeks after buying a character. At least I only lost points, and didn't waste real money.

Well, when I play some newer free to play games like Tribes: Ascend, I don't feel like it's holding me upside down and shaking out the contents on my pockets. The people who do pay for stuff all the time don't have the upper hand, just more variety in what class they can pick, and Tribes in an awesome game that I feel is on par with some of the best multiplayer shooters out now, from all business models. 

Bad game design by nature. It's smoke and mirrors. F2P games are always designed so that players will want to put 100s of hours into them in hope of getting enough people addicted to bring in revenue through microtransactions.

The worst part about a lot of F2P games is there are so many that aren't, they are just hiding behind a trial or demo that is integrated into the actual games so they get away with calling it F2P. Essentially they are Free to Pay games. It's free at first but you have to pay later, which is fine if they advertise it as a trial but some don't. That's false advertisement, my friend. Then there are the types that charge for everything to the extent that the game's entirety costs $xxxxx.xx if you actually want what's in the game. Why is it some games are fine charging $60 but free games charge $10,000. Even subscription games are a bargain comparatively and you are bound to get better support while not having your immersion broken by a damn line of marketplace booths charging you $2.99 for a piece of code that is slightly better than the piece of code you can get for the in game currency.

- lower quality
- multiplayer centric
- buying items to win

Haven't played a single good F2P game and most likely never will.