Crytek still planning retail games ahead of F2P switch
Crytek has spoken before about its hopes for free-to-play, hoping to escape the conventional retail model and solely make free-to-play games. The Crysis developer doesn't feel quite ready to make the switch yet but whether it takes two years or five, CEO Cevat Yerli has said, free-to-play will rival retail and Crytek will be there.
Crytek has spoken before about its hopes for free-to-play, hoping to escape the conventional retail model and solely make free-to-play games. The Crysis developer doesn't feel quite ready to make the switch yet but whether it takes two years or five, CEO Cevat Yerli has said, free-to-play will rival retail and Crytek will be there.
Crytek is ploughing ahead with free-to-play on PC with multiplayer FPS Warface and its F2P platform Gface. Consoles are far behind with F2P, though.
"So we have quite a few console titles in our pipeline that are [traditional retail games] while we investigate free-to-play on consoles," Yerli told VentureBeat. "But our primary goal is to make triple-A free-to-play games for the world market and transition entirely to that."
Yerli isn't sure whether that'll happen in two to three years or more like five, VB says.
Crytek also considered turning the multiplayer sides of Crysis 2 and 3 free-to-play, but ultimately didn't. Yerli has also idly pondered the possibility of a TimeSplitters on Gface too.
Gface is a social media platform for free-to-play games, with cloud gaming, video chat, and other shiny web 2.0 features meant to encourage sharing and discovery. It's a bit weird, designed for a market which doesn't seem to exist quite yet, but Crytek believes in it.
"If we could launch our games on a platform that already exists today, and we could get the same results, then we wouldn't build our own platform," Yerli said. "But we're convinced that our platform does some particularly new things that makes our games behave better. That's why we plan to offer this service to third parties."
A free-to-play Crytek, then: coming to a video gaming device near you at some point.
-
Shacknews
replyAlice O'Connor posted a new article, Crytek still planning retail games ahead of F2P switch.
Crytek has spoken before about its hopes for free-to-play, hoping to escape the conventional retail model and solely make free-to-play games. The Crysis developer doesn't feel quite ready to make the switch yet but whether it takes two years or five, CEO Cevat Yerli has said, free-to-play will rival retail and Crytek will be there.-
For some reason I would rather pay $59.99 for a game and know I got the entire core experience than to download a game for free and not know how much it might end up costing me if I like it and pay for all the little micro transactions. I have yet to pay for a micro transaction in a F2P game, but I realize that eventuality is inevitable as more and more games move to this model.
-
If I had to even pay 79.99 for much/all of it I would. The only F2P game I have enjoyed and bought from was LOTRO, but I honestly hope that good F2P games stay the exception and not the rule and the focus stays AAA-retail games.
-
-
F2P seems to scare a lot of people, who ironically pay far more with the current retail model.
This is irrational.
Just to take World of Tanks for example, it offers so much stuff for free and I've gotten by with spending just $15 since Sept. to make my experience "nicer." Premium time during a discount and more tank garage slots (on top of the 6 free ones) mostly. Most people in WoT don't pay anything, very few people pay alot.
It's always funny to hear people speak out of non-experience of F2P. It's free, go try it for a few months and then come back and speak from knowledge.
-
Speaking from knowledge, usually in F2P people end up paying way more than the normal price of a full game (50-70), if gaining things that you can buy is really slow, or theres a lot of cool stuff beeing released; even if people say to theirshelf "i wont buy anything" or "i wont spend much".
But thats if the game is really good and not capped to the point that its nearly unplayable for free users.
If its too capped or the game is not really good, people wont play it or play for a very short ammount of time before uninstalling.
That applies to nearly all the FP2 games, if you say World of tanks isnt like that, it then is one of the very few exceptions, but i cant say if its true or not in that game because i havent played it.-
I think we're also talking about the actual play experience here. Nothing worse then to be moving along and then get brick walled. 'If you want this, you can buy it now.' Door to door salesmen just bypassed your front door and came right on in. :(
-
Haven't paid a cent in League of Legends or Path of Exile.
-
-
[deleted]
-
Free to play scares me because I don't want to pay for convenience; I want to pay for a complete experience. I'm a Mechwarrior fan, and I've spent some money on the new F2P game, but I find it really irritating that I have spend much more than 60 dollars to be able to play with all the Mechs. I like RPG elements, but I dislike how slow the grind for them is in these games because they want me to pay for a more appropriate rate.
F2P can be done well, and I like the League of Legends implementation, but it definitely has its downsides.
-
-
Just as long as there aren't any unbalanced mutants or aliens in them. I feel like Crytek squandered their potential by sticking with mutants or aliens in their previous games.
-
