Having avoided F2P for the most part I have lately come to play quite a few. From my perspective they all share the same symptom. They attract some sorts of players that are, while nice for numbers, bad for the game, especially in a community driven game. For one, cheaters have a completely zero risk and zero cost environment. This makes games likes this their ultimate playground. PS2 has a server-client architecture that couldn't be more open to cheats than it is. And no active admins... Secondly it attracts players that get joy out of playing something for free. They do not even care that much for the game, but hey it's free. These players are not really invested in the game at all, which leads to all sorts of problems. Their limited investment means they do not bother to learn or understand the game. This game however, and Higby appears to be mightily proud of it too, is completely playerdriven. These low investment players appear to make up a significant portion of the playerbase, and in some ways they ruin the game. Their low investment and therefore understanding of the game leads them to do extremely stupid stuff all the time. This leads to bad gameplay for themselves (but they do not know better) but terrible and frustrating gameplay for more invested players. It is painful to watch Level 30 players shoot generators until their rockets are empty but downright annoying to lose a base because the guy tried to repair a compromised generator with his repair tool (please, these are just examples). Planetside 2 is awful at explaining itself and getting people more invested, this is obvious. I do no think that people at SOE realise just how crucial a flaw that is, and I am astounded by that. So, what am I trying to say with all these fancy words? Screw F2P. I hate it with a passion. Only in F2P games does the game balance hinge on the developers greed/desire to make money. We all know the procedure in F2P games. Sell an OP weapon > give it a few weeks > nerf the OP weapon > sell a new OP weapon. Well, screw that. I play some games despite them being F2P, it has become an actual deterrent by now. TLDR: F2P attracts "dumb" players, attracts cheaters, game balance chief and financial chief sit in the same office most often.
So basically, to you most of the people who don't put money into the game are just brainless monkeys that can't learn to play properly?
The fact that there are more companies than ever making games and especially MMOs and more competition overall and many other factors in the gaming industry dynamic means that free to play is the way to go. I would not have started playing PS2 if it wasn't free to begin with, to get the foot in the door so to speak, and now I'm on everyday and have been playing since mid beta and have dropped $40 bucks so far and willing to spend more. The only thing I agree with you is the irritating back and forth on nerfs & buffs, bring out new weapons to replace nerfed weapons, etc etc etc.
This isn't caused by a F2P model, it's because people suck, and always have. It's more noticeable because it's far easier to get online then it was 10-15 years ago.
No, not most people. and it is not about them being brainless monkeys. They only appear that way because they know so little about the game. And there are enough of them to dumb down the experience for everyone.
Any newbie will do that, doesn't matter if they put a zillion $ in the game or not. That's also the case for games with subscriptions.
Surely there is a correlation between the perceived value of things and the personal investment towards these things. A free game does not have the same value that a bought game has, therefore people have an easier time not getting invested. I agree with your second sentence.
