The game's monetization is neither overbearing nor obnoxious, and it is indeed possible to play through the entire campaign without having to pay a single cent. I will say that the apologetic but positive reviews for Plants vs. See the "machine gun" pea-shooter there? Pay enough money and you can make all of them do that. Perhaps my worries were unfounded perhaps PopCap had indeed found that magic sweet spot for the free-to-play model perhaps this would be the game to finally convince me that free-to-play is actually as good for consumers as it is for publishers. Something didn't sit right with me about all this, so I downloaded the game and actually gave it a shot once it became available worldwide. At the same time, though, I noticed a curiously apologetic tone present in almost every review, blog post and tweet regarding the game - a sense of "Well, it's good, but."
Zombies 2, though, particularly once reviews started emerging praising it as a solid sequel. I felt I may have been being a bit unfair to Plants vs. Zombies' publisher EA is one of the companies leading the charge in this direction, particularly on mobile.
I've seen too many games utterly ruin their balance and overall "fun factor" - there's a term that takes me back to the '90s publishing industry - by following the fashionable free-to-play model. Zombies 2 was announced as a free-to-play title, I made the argument Freemium Makes Good Games Suffer. You may recall that, shortly after Plants vs. This is largely thanks to it being mechanically almost identical, but we can't criticize it too much for that - it's pretty much what fans wanted. Zombies 2 is a reasonably decent game, particularly if you liked the first one. I'll say one thing up front before we get started on this: Plants vs.
0 kommentar(er)
