Dog fo War 2

fish[2]Because we are internet celebrities me and Hex got invites to an exclusive beta (or more likely they sent beta invites to everyone who writes anything game relate) to a new free to play third person shooter called War Inc Battlezone. First off it is the most generic name you could create, they may as well of called it Men WarIncLogoShooting Stuff.

So I go through the character creation and it tells me that i can unlock weapons and paraphernalia with in game currency gained from playing, or pay real money to unlock stuff faster. So I create a character with bog standard weapons and find a game, of which there were only 2 running (because it’s such an exclusive beta). So I load into the game and first impressions are that it is very attractive for a free game. So I run around capturing a few points and gaining the in game currency before I even see someone to shoot.

2011-07-02_00003Now this is were it all starts to go tits up. I found that the basic weapons are about as effective as using harsh language. This was confirmed when I picked up a weapon that had dropped off the other team (not killed by me) and actually managed to make a kill. So as it stands we have an attractive third person shooter that seems to be biased towards those that play a lot, or are willing to spend cash to unlock decent weapons.

2011-07-02_00002Humm this is probably not what the developers are hoping I would say, though I can still see this game doing ok purely on the looks stakes. Compared to a lot of free to play shooters, like battlefield play 4 free or Alliance of Valiant Arms it looks like a full release title.

However i kept having the same thought running through my brain. Why not just buy one of the shooters that the free to play alternatives so clearly ape. For instance badcompany2Battle Warfare Death Inc, or whatever it is called, is clearly a third person cross between Battlefield and Call of Duty. Now it makes sense to play free to play mmo’s as an alternative to the pay monthly version, because you don’t have to lay down £9 a month. However I brought Battlefield Bad Company 2 at launch for £24.99  in March 2010 and paid an extra tenner for the Vietnam expansion. To date I have played some 115 hours of the multiplayer. Now £35 might seem like a lot to some people, but I would rather pay that up front for a quality game, than either seemingly slog at a game until you unlock decent weapons or end up spending £35 just to be competitive in a “free” shooter that still isn’t as good  as the high quality pay once shooters, like Battlefield or Homefront or Crysis or even, shudder, COD. I dunno just doesn’t seem rational to me.