PC Gamer: WoWS "the most thoughtful Wargaming game so far, but... expensive [and] exploitative...."

The problem with the current "free-to-play" mechanics so prevalent now isn't that free players can't do x or y. Free players are great because they allow people to try the game and see if they like it with no cost, but no company actually cares much about them beyond a certain point because they're not the customer - the customers are people who spend money.

The real problem is that there isn't a maximum that people can spend - rather than having a premium account be the only thing you can buy, they add all sorts of expensive features and ways to waste gold/dubloons/funbucks/whatever, so that the "whales" can always spend more. The problem is, it hurts the game - there can never be an equal playing ground when you can always spend more for an advantage, however small - gold shells in WoT, premium consumables and camo etc in WoWS - which are available to everyone but only sustainable to people who buy them with gold (or grind in their premium vehicles which, you guessed it, costs more money).

Imagine WoT or WoWS if there were no gold/dubloons - gold ammo can only be bought for credits, premium ships are available as a bonus once you've reached the required point in the tech tree as a "bonus" ship (only if you have a premium account, of course), and the only thing to buy is a premium account. I'd vastly rather play that game, even if the premium account was more expensive than it is now, because it'd be a level playing field. However, WG would make less immediate money, and unfortunately most of these f2p game companies care more about pure profit than making a good gaming experience, even if in the long run they'd probably do better doing the latter...

/r/WorldOfWarships Thread Parent Link - pcgamer.com